CC SR 20211019 05 - Draft Housing Element
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 10/19/2021
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Regular Business
AGENDA TITLE:
Consideration and possible action to review the draft 6th Cycle Housing Element.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Review and provide comments and/or direction on the City’s draft 6th Cycle
Housing Element.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: Octavio Silva, Deputy Director of Community Development
REVIEWED BY: Ken Rukavina PE, Director of Community Development
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element (page A-1)
B. Public Comments (page B-1)
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
This City Council meeting is the third of three public meetings intended to engage the
public as the City works toward updating the Housing Element to meet the existing and
projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community pursuant to the
City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation.
Topics to be presented and considered during this meeting will include:
• Summary of the Housing Element Community Survey results;
• Update on the in-person and virtual Housing Element Open House;
• Presentation of the Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element;
• Review of the potential housing sites inventory;
• Review of Housing Element Goals and Programs;
• Recommended City Council action; and
1
• Review next steps in the Housing Element Update process.
On August 24, 2021, the first of the three public meetings was completed as part of the
City Council and Planning Commission Joint Study Session on the Housing Element
Update. At this meeting, the City Council and Planning Commission considered and/or
authorized the following (complete staff report available for review):
• Housing Element overview including state housing laws and associated
requirements;
• Regulations and strategies to accommodate the RHNA in all income categories;
and,
• Authorized the issuance of the Housing Element Community Survey; and,
• Identify certain residential neighborhoods throughout the City that can
accommodate more than one housing unit per lot so that Western Avenue does
not become the panacea for the City’s housing requirements.
On October 12, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a meeting to review and
provide comments on the draft Housing Element. As the agenda for this City Council
meeting will be made available to the public on the same date of the Planning Commission
meeting, all comments received will be forwarded to the City Council as late
correspondence for consideration. As part of the public release of the draft Housing
Element, Staff submitted a draft copy to the California Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD) for informal review.
A public notice was issued on September 30, 2021, in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News
informing the public of the City Council’s review of the Draft Housing Element as part of
this meeting, as well as posted on the City’s various social medial platforms.
Housing Element Community Survey Results
On August 26, 2021, the Community Development Department issued the Housing
Element Community Survey in order to collect input from the public and interested parties
on a wide range of housing issues in the City, including housing challenges, deficiencies,
and priorities. The survey was available in a digital and downloadable format , and hard
copies were available for pickup at the City Hall. The survey was initially available through
September 24, but the deadline was extended through October 3 to coincide with an in -
person and virtual Housing Element Update open house.
The Community Development Department received 695 survey responses from the
community. The summary report provides additional information regarding the survey
process and responses. The survey is also available online at the following link:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-YRL6T6PY9/
Highlights of the survey responses are noted below:
2
• Of the 695 unique online community survey responses obtained, 681 live in the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
o 492 of these respondents have lived in the City for more than 16 years, and
658 own their current home.
o 68.2% of the respondents were 55 or older.
o 56.7% of respondents identified as Caucasian, while 8.6% identified as
multiracial and 7.8% identified as East Asian.
• 12.8% of respondents stated that their housing costs represent more than 30% of
their household income.
• When asked if the City has an adequate supp ly of multifamily housing, 87.8% of
respondents selected yes, there is an adequate supply of multifamily housing in
the City.
• Only 10.4% of respondents own more than one residential property in the City.
• When asked what the City’s focus as part of the Housing Element Update process
should be, individuals selected:
o 83.2% selected Maintain existing housing.
o 18.9% selected Increase availability of housing options for seniors.
o 16.3% selected Redevelop underutilized parcels in commercial areas to
include higher density.
o 15.5% selected Incentivize and encourage the development of vertical,
mixed-use units in Commercial Zones
• When asked what areas in the City are appropriate for new housing, 48.1%
selected commercial areas (as part of a new mixed -use developments), 36.90%
selected vacant lots, and 22.6% selected commercial areas (as new
developments).
• Respondents were asked to rank the biggest challenges to increased housing in
the City. The high cost of land was selected most frequently, followed by public
opposition and a low supply of vacant land. In addition, 22.4% of respondents
selected that home prices in the City are preventing them from becoming a first -
time homeowner.
• When respondents were asked if they would support residential density increases,
25.25% selected yes, in or near commercial areas, or in multifamily residential
zones. Conversely, 3% selected yes, anywhere within the City, and 71.7%
selected no, I would not support any density increases.
• 91.6% of respondents selected no to indicate tha t they do not support allowing
properties currently zoned for single-family residences to de developed with
multiple dwelling units.
In-Person and Virtual Housing Element Update Open House
In an effort to collect additional public input on the Housing Element Update, an in-person
open house was conducted on September 25 at Fred Hesse Jr. Community Park (6
members of the public attended). The in-person open house included various
informational tables such as an interactive station that allowed members of the public an
opportunity to review and provide input on the potential housing sites inventory for the
Housing Element Update. The open house also provided informational handouts about
3
the update process and hard copies of the Housing Element Update Survey. A summary
report of the in-person open house is available for review, including all public notifications
and social media postings announcing the event.
In addition to the in-person open house, a virtual event was available for members of the
community that were not able to attend the in-person event. The weeklong virtual event
began on September 27 and ended on October 3. The event was accessible via the City’s
Housing Element Update homepage and provided an opportunity for the community t o
visit various informational stations to learn more about the Housing Element, RHNA
allocation requirements, what the update means for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,
review an inventory of the potential housing sites and to leave comments. The Virtual
Open House included 1,025 participants, and a summary report of the virtual open house
is available for review. The report includes all public comments received on the potential
housing sites inventory.
Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element
The draft Housing Element consists of various sections that can be summarized into five
general topics, as outlined below ( a copy of the draft Housing Element is attached to this
report as Attachment A):
• Introduction and Background: The draft Housing Element provides a guide to
acronyms used throughout the document, an overview of the public input process,
and an analysis of the existing 5th Cycle Housing Element.
• Housing Needs Assessment: These sections of the draft document provide an
assessment of existing conditions in the City, including:
o Population, employment, and household characteristics;
o Housing stock characteristics;
o Overcrowding and overpayment;
o Special needs populations; and
o Fair housing.
• Constraints Analysis: This section of the draft Housing Element describes and
analyzes governmental (i.e., local processing and permitting procedures) and non -
governmental (i.e., cost of land and finance availability) constraints on the
development and maintenance of housing in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
• RHNA and Housing Sites Inventory: These sections outline state law RHNA
requirements, including the City’s 6th Cycle RHNA allocation of 647 housing units
(including an 8-unit carry-over from the 5th Cycle RHNA) in various income
categories. State law requires the City to document its capacity to accommodate
its RHNA for the 6th Housing Element planning period in the form of a housing sites
inventory.
• Housing Element Action Items: These sections of the draft Housing Element
outline a number of implementation actions, which include:
o Quantified Objectives - represents the City’s anticipated new housing
construction, rehabilitation, and preservation accomplishments during the
2021-2029 Housing Element period.
4
o Housing Element Goals and Programs - presents the City’s goals for the
2021-2029 Housing Element planning period as well as an implementation
program to support these goals and policies.
o General Plan Consistency - requires the City’s General Plan and updated
Housing Element to be internally consistent, which the City intends to
complete over the next housing cycle.
Review of Potential Housing Sites Inventory
A key component of the draft Housing Element is the preparation of the potential housing
sites inventory to accommodate the City’s 6th Cycle RHNA allocation of 647 (includes an
8-unit carry over from the 5th Cycle RHNA). Given the large increase in the City’s RHNA
from the 5th to 6th Cycles, it was a challenging process to identify housing sites sufficient
to fully accommodate the required housing units. Staff and the consultant team utilized a
geographical information system (GIS) tool developed by the Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) to identify potential sites along with local land -use
knowledge of the area. Additional sites were identified using a study of potential
redevelopment opportunities along the Western Avenue commercial corridor prepared by
Piasky Solutions that the City Council commissioned. The number of potential housing
sites totaled 50 and included, but is not limited to, a combination of developed properties
along commercial corridors and vacant residential sites citywide. The list of potential
housing sites also outlined potential density, which considered site constraints and
availability of infrastructure. The list also identifies zoning modifications for the identified
sites along with preliminary housing unit yields.
As further outlined in the draft Housing Element, the potential housing site inventory could
accommodate 631 housing units on sites that could potentially b e rezoned to
accommodate housing development at 30 dwelling units per acre and above 1. At the
assumed densities, these sites could accommodate the combined 2021 -2029 very low-
and low-income RHNA and provide additional capacity that can accommodate the City’s
125-unit RHNA for moderate-income households, with a 106-unit capacity surplus.
Potential housing sites that could be zoned for housing development at densities below
30 dwelling units per acre are suitable to accommodate the City’s above moderate-
income RHNA. These sites have the potential to accommodate just over 1,000 new
residential units if developed at the assumed densities, which is more than sufficient to
accommodate the above moderate-income RHNA of 122 units. This data is summarized
in Table No. 1 on the next page.
It should be noted that as part of state housing law, the Housing Element Update process
requires the City to identify potential housing sites and accommodate for the development
of the sites, but the City is not required to build the housing units. Any proposed density
and land-use modifications will require public hearings before the City’s Planning
Commission and City Council, along with environmental review assessments. The draft
1 The RHNA for very low- and low-income units must be accommodated on sites zoned for residential
development at 30 dwelling units per acre or more.
5
Housing Element contains a program that calls for these actions to be completed after
the adoption of the Housing Element update.
The City recently received correspondence from the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land
Conservancy and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Attachment B) expressing concerns
that Sites 41, 48, 49, and 50 on the Site Inventory Lists may conflict with the requirements,
such as the 40-acre live-in wildlife corridor and fuel modification buffer zone, cited in the
Council-adopted Natural Communities Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan
(NCCP/HCP) and the federally issued permit, thereby making these sites potentially
infeasible for housing. They are requesting that the Planning Commission, in its
recommendation to the City Council, and the City Council reconsider listing these sites in
the final Site Inventory List.
Table No. 1- Summary of Housing Inventory Capacity
Notes:
• (a) The Very Low-Income and Low-Income categories each include four carryover units from the 5th Housing Element Update
Cycle.
• (b) 30 dwelling units per acre is the default minimum density provided in state law for zoning to accommodate very low-income
and low-income housing in Rancho Palos Verdes.
• (c) A limited number of additional housing units at the very low-, low-, moderate-, and above moderate-income levels can be
accommodated with construction of Secondary Dwelling Units on lots with existing housing units.
• (d) Moderate-income housing will require below-market rents or sales prices. Moderate-income units can be accommodated on
excess sites suitable for lower-income housing development. A limited number of additional moderate-income units could be
accommodated as Secondary Dwelling Units on lots with existing homes.
Above
Very Low-Low-Moderate-Moderate-
Income Income Income Income
6th Cycle RHNA (New Housing Units) (a)257 143 125 122
Default Minimum Density for Lower-Income RHNA Sites (b)30 d.u./ac.30 d.u./ac.n.a.n.a.
Preliminary RHNA Housing Sites Inventory Capacity
Accommodation of Lower-Income RHNA
Potential
Zoning at
30 d.u./ac.+
Potential New Units on Preliimary Sites (c)631
Total Lower-Income RHNA 400
Surplus Lower-Income Site Capacity 231
Accommodation of Moderate-Income RHNA
Potential New Units on Excess Lower-Income Sites (d)231
Moderate-Income RHNA 125
Surplus Moderate-Income Site Capacity 106
Accommodation of Above Moderate-Income RHNA
Potential
Zoning at
<30 d.u./ac.
Potential New Units on Preliimary Sites (c)1,003
Above Moderate-Income RHNA 122
Surplus Above Moderate Income Site Capacity 881
6
Sources: City of Rancho Palos Verdes, BAE, 2021
Review of Draft Housing Element Goals and Programs
The draft document includes a listing of proposed Housing Element Goals and Programs
for the 2021-2029 housing period. The programs outline a strategy for addressing state
Housing Element requirements and advancing the City’s housing objectives while
remaining tailored to be achievable within the Housing Element planning period, given
the City’s financial and staffing resources. The list includes a total of five overarching
goals, which are supported by 15 programs that focus on the implementation of the stated
goals. The proposed goals and programs are identified below along with descriptions:
1. Housing Supply - Provide an adequate supply of housing for people of all ages,
incomes, lifestyles, and housing preferences, and types of households, including
for households with special housing needs.
o Zoning Amendments to Increase Housing Development Potential
(modification of existing Program #1)
o General Plan Amendment to Include a High-Density Residential Land Use
Category (new)
o Accessory Dwelling Unit Production (modify existing)
o No Net Loss (continue existing)
2. Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity - Affirmatively further fair housing and protect
existing residents from displacement.
o Section 8 Rental Assistance (modify existing to ensure outreach to minority
groups that experience disproportionate housing problems)
o Citywide Affordable Housing Requirement/Housing Impact Fee (continue
existing)
o First-time Homebuyer Assistance (modify existing to ensure outreach to
minority groups that experience disproportionate housing problems)
o Outreach for Persons with Disabilities (modify existing to ensure outreach
to minority groups that experience disproportionate housing problems)
o Extremely Low-income Housing (modify existing to ensure outreach to
minority groups that experience disproportionate housing problems)
o Fair Housing Services (modify existing to ensure outreach to minority
groups that experience disproportionate housing problems)
o Fair Housing Information (modify existing to ensure outreach to minority
groups that experience disproportionate housing problems)
3. Addressing Governmental Constraints - Address City policies and practices that
constrain the City’s ability to provide housing for households at all income levels
and households with special housing needs and bring City policies in line with
recent changes in state law.
o Zoning Ordinance Amendments to Remove Governmental Constraints
(modify existing)
o Transparency in Housing Standards and Fees (new)
4. Maintenance of the Housing Stock - Maintain and improve the condition of Rancho
Palos Verdes’ housing stock.
7
o Housing Code Enforcement
5. Energy Conservation - Promote energy conservation in residential buildings.
o Energy conservation program
The proposed housing programs include a combination of new initiatives and some
carryover programs from the City’s 5th Cycle Housing Element. The proposed programs
also assign responsibility to specific City departments and establish timeline for
completion of the programs within the 2021-2029 housing planning cycle.
Recommended City Council Action
As part of the draft Housing Element presentation, Staff requests the City Council review
and provide input on the draft document, including, but not limited to, the potential housing
sites inventory and the Housing Element goals and programs. Staff will prepare a revised
draft document based on City Council comments and/or direction before submitting it to
HCD for formal review.
Next Steps in the Housing Element Update Process
Next steps in the Housing Element Update process include:
• Accept public comments on the draft Housing Element (through November 4,
2021)
• Prepare revised draft Housing Element based on Planning Commission and City
Council direction from October meetings and feedback from HCD’s informal review
• Submit revised draft Housing Element to HCD for formal review
• Complete environmental assessment and issue corresponding Notice of Intent
• Receive HCD comments on the draft document (60 days after submitting the first
draft)
• Staff reviews/incorporates HCD’s comments and prepares final draft
• Planning Commission hearing to recommend adoption of the final draft
• City Council hearing to formally adopt final draft before the February 11, 2022
deadline (due to timing constraints, there may be a need for a special City Council
meeting in early February 2022 solely on this item )
• Submit Adopted Draft to HCD
8
Public Review Draft
2021-2029 Rancho Palos Verdes
Housing Element Update
October 7, 2021
A-1
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GUIDE TO ACRONYMS USED ................................................................................................... viii
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
PUBLIC INPUT ............................................................................................................................ 2
EFFECTIVENESS OF THE EXISTING HOUSING ELEMENT ........................................................... 3
HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................ 8
Population, Employment, and Household Characteristics ........................................................ 8
Population and Household Trends ........................................................................................... 8
Race and Ethnicity ..................................................................................................................... 9
Population by Age ................................................................................................................... 10
Resident Employment by Industry ......................................................................................... 11
Unemployment Rate ............................................................................................................... 12
Housing Tenure ....................................................................................................................... 13
Housing Tenure Trends .......................................................................................................... 14
Housing Tenure by Year Moved to Current Residence ......................................................... 15
Household Income Level by Tenure ...................................................................................... 16
Housing Tenure by Housing Type .......................................................................................... 17
Household Type ...................................................................................................................... 18
Housing Stock Characteristics ................................................................................................. 19
Housing Type Trends .............................................................................................................. 19
Vacant Units by Vacancy Status ............................................................................................ 20
Housing Units by Year Structure Built ................................................................................... 22
Substandard Housing Issues ................................................................................................. 23
Home Values of Owner-Occupied Units ................................................................................. 24
Contract Rents for Renter-Occupied Units ............................................................................ 25
Permitted Housing by Income Level ...................................................................................... 27
Assisted Housing Developments at Risk of Conversion ......................................................... 28
Cost of Replacement or Preservation of At-Risk Units ......................................................... 29
Overcrowding and Overpayment .............................................................................................. 29
Overcrowding Severity ............................................................................................................ 29
Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity ................................................................................... 30
Overcrowding by Income Level .............................................................................................. 31
Cost Burden Severity .............................................................................................................. 32
Cost Burden by Tenure and Income Level ............................................................................ 33
Cost Burden by Race .............................................................................................................. 35
Cost Burden by Household Size ............................................................................................. 36
Special Needs Populations ....................................................................................................... 36
A-2
ii
Farmworkers ........................................................................................................................... 37
Large Families and Female-Headed Households ................................................................. 39
Seniors .................................................................................................................................... 42
People with Disabilities, Including Developmental Disabilities ........................................... 44
People Experiencing Homelessness...................................................................................... 47
Extremely Low-Income Housing Needs ................................................................................. 49
Opportunities for Energy Conservation .................................................................................... 51
ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING ............................................................................................ 52
Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach ................................................................................ 52
City of Rancho Palos Verdes Fair Housing Services ............................................................. 54
Integration and Segregation Patterns and Trends .................................................................. 56
Race and Ethnicity .................................................................................................................. 56
Historic Patterns of Racial Discrimination ............................................................................ 56
Dissimilarity Index................................................................................................................... 57
Isolation Index ......................................................................................................................... 59
Geographic Distribution of Residents by Race and Ethnicity .............................................. 59
Persons with a Disability ........................................................................................................... 71
Familial Status ........................................................................................................................... 74
Income ....................................................................................................................................... 79
Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty .......................................................... 87
Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence ....................................................... 89
Disparities in Access to Opportunity ........................................................................................ 92
Access to Education ............................................................................................................... 95
Access to Employment ........................................................................................................... 98
Transportation ...................................................................................................................... 101
Access to a Clean Environment ........................................................................................... 105
Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk ................................................... 107
Minority Homeownership Rates ........................................................................................... 107
Mortgage Loan Approvals by Race/Ethnicity and Income ................................................. 107
Geography of Mortgage Lending ......................................................................................... 109
Prevalence of Housing Problems ......................................................................................... 112
Housing Cost Burden ............................................................................................................ 113
Overcrowded Households .................................................................................................... 118
Resident Displacement ........................................................................................................ 121
Fair Housing Issues and Contributing Factors ...................................................................... 121
Contributing Factors ............................................................................................................. 121
Disproportionate Housing Needs Among Racial/Ethnic Groups ....................................... 126
Fair Housing Priorities, Goal, and Actions ............................................................................. 126
A-3
iii
CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 127
Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 127
Governmental Constraints ...................................................................................................... 127
Land Use Controls ................................................................................................................ 127
Development Standards, Local Processing, and Permit Procedures ................................ 129
Local Processing and Permit Procedures ........................................................................... 136
Building Codes and Enforcement ........................................................................................ 139
On- and Off-Site Improvements Requirements ................................................................... 139
Fees and Exactions............................................................................................................... 142
Housing for Persons with Disabilities .................................................................................. 144
Locally Adopted Ordinances that Directly Impact Housing Supply .................................... 145
Efforts to Remove and Reduce Governmental Constraints ............................................... 148
Non-Governmental Constraints .............................................................................................. 148
Availability of Financing ........................................................................................................ 148
Cost of Land .......................................................................................................................... 148
Cost of Construction ............................................................................................................. 149
Requests for Housing Developments at Reduced Densities ............................................. 149
Length of Time between Project Approval and Applications for Building Permits ............ 149
Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types ................................................................................. 150
REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION ............................................................................ 153
HOUSING SITES INVENTORY ................................................................................................. 155
Accessory Dwelling Unit Production ....................................................................................... 155
Remaining RHNA After Accounting for ADU Production Potential ........................................ 156
Housing Sites ........................................................................................................................... 156
Analysis for Non-Vacant Sites ................................................................................................. 163
QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................... 165
New Construction .................................................................................................................... 165
Rehabilitation .......................................................................................................................... 166
Preservation ............................................................................................................................ 166
HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND PROGRAMS ....................................................................... 168
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY.............................................................................................. 173
APPENDIX A: SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES .................................. 174
APPENDIX B: MASTER FEE SCHEDULE ................................................................................. 175
A-4
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Progress-to-Date on 5th Cycle RHNA 3
Table 2: Status of 5th Cycle Programs (Page 1 of 2) 5
Table 3: Population and Households, 2010 and 2020 9
Table 4: Race and Ethnicity, 2010 and 2014-2018 10
Table 5: Population by Age, 2010 and 2014-2018 11
Table 6: Employed Residents by Industry, Rancho Palos Verdes and Los Angeles County,
2014-2018 12
Table 7: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Assisted Units at Risk of Conversion 29
Table 8: Housing Cost Burden by Income & Tenure for Rancho Palos Verdes 34
Table 9: Number of Farmworkers by Occupation 38
Table 10: Employment in the Agricultural Industry 38
Table 11: Migrant Worker Student Population 39
Table 12: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Senior Households by Income and Tenure 43
Table 13: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Cost Burden by Tenure for Elderly Households
with Incomes Below the Area Median 44
Table 14: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Age 47
Table 15: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Type of Residence for Persons with Developmental
Disabilities 47
Table 16: Persons Experiencing Homelessness 48
Table 17: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Extremely Low-Income Households by Race and
Ethnicity 50
Table 18: Poverty by Race and Ethnicity, City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 2014-2018 51
Table 19: FHEO Fair Housing Complaints by Resolution Type, 2013 to 2020 53
Table 20: DFEH Fair Housing Complaints in Rancho Palos Verdes by Class, Practice and
Resolution Type, 2018-2021 54
Table 21: Housing Rights Center Inquiries, Rancho Palos Verdes, 7/1/2018- 6/30/2021 55
Table 22: Rancho Palos Verdes Race by Ethnicity, 1980 to 2014-2018 57
Table 23: Dissimilarity Index, City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 2010 and 2014-2018 58
Table 24: Isolation Index, City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 2010 and 2014-2018 59
Table 25: Household Income Distribution and Median Income, 2014-2018 79
Table 26: Distribution of Homeowners by Race/Ethnicity, City of Rancho Palos Verdes 107
Table 27: Housing Problems Rate by Race/Ethnicity, City of Rancho Palos Verdes 112
Table 28: Severe Housing Problems Rate by Race/Ethnicity, City of Rancho Palos Verdes 113
Table 29: Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan Residential Density Ranges 127
Table 30: Overlay Control Districts 129
Table 31: Density Bonuses for Affordable Housing 146
Table 32: 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation for Rancho Palos Verdes 154
Table 33: Housing Sites Inventory List 158
Table 34: Summary of Housing Inventory Capacity 163
Table 35: 2021-2019 Quantified Objectives by Income Level 167
Table 36: 2021-2029 Housing Element Programs (page 1 of 2) 171
A-5
v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Unemployment Rate Trends 13
Figure 2: Housing Tenure 14
Figure 3: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Tenure, 2000-2018 15
Figure 4: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Tenure by Year Moved to Current Residence 16
Figure 5: Rancho Palos Verdes Household Income Level by Tenure, 2013-2017 17
Figure 6: Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Tenure by Housing Type 18
Figure 7: Household Type 19
Figure 8: Rancho Palos Verdes Housing by Units in Structure, 2010-2020 20
Figure 9: Housing Unit Occupancy Status, 2020 21
Figure 10: Vacant Units by Type, 2014-2018 22
Figure 11: Housing Units by Year Built, Rancho Palos Verdes & SCAG Region 23
Figure 12: Substandard Housing Characteristics, Rancho Palos Verdes & SCAG Region 24
Figure 13: Median Home Sales Price for Existing Homes, Rancho Palos Verdes & SCAG Region
25
Figure 14: Median Monthly Contract Rent, 2010-2018 26
Figure 15: Monthly Contract Rents for Renter-Occupied Units 27
Figure 16: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Permits by Income Level 28
Figure 17: Occupants per Room 30
Figure 18: Overcrowding by Extent and Tenure 31
Figure 19: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Overcrowding by HUD Income Category 32
Figure 20: Percent of Household Income to Housing Costs 33
Figure 21: Cost Burden by Race and Ethnicity, Rancho Palos Verdes 35
Figure 22: Cost Burden by Household Size/Type, Rancho Palos Verdes 36
Figure 23: Hired Farm Labor in Los Angeles County 37
Figure 24: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Households by Tenure by Household Size 40
Figure 25: Household Size by Household Income Level 41
Figure 26: Female-Headed Households by Poverty Status 42
Figure 27: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Resident Disability by Type 45
Figure 28: Population by Disability Status 46
Figure 29: Households by Household Income Level 49
Figure 30: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-White, Rancho Palos Verdes 61
Figure 31: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-White, Los Angeles County 62
Figure 32: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic White, Rancho Palos Verdes 63
Figure 33: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic White, Los Angeles County 64
Figure 34: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic Asian, Rancho Palos Verdes 65
Figure 35: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic Asian, Los Angeles County 66
Figure 36: Census Block Groups by Percent Hispanic or Latino, Rancho Palos Verdes 67
Figure 37: Census Block Groups by Percent Hispanic or Latino, Los Angeles County 68
Figure 38: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic Persons of Two or More Races,
Rancho Palos Verdes 69
A-6
vi
Figure 39: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic Persons of Two or More Races, Los
Angeles County 70
Figure 40: Population with a Disability by Census Tract, Rancho Palos Verdes 72
Figure 41: Population with a Disability by Census Tract, Los Angeles County 73
Figure 42: Percent of Children in Married-Couple Households, 2015-2019, Rancho Palos
Verdes 75
Figure 43: Percent of Children in Married-Couple Households, 2015-2019, Los Angeles
County 76
Figure 44: Percent of Children in Single-Female Headed Households, Rancho Palos Verdes 77
Figure 45: Percent of Children in Single-Female Headed Households, Los Angeles County 78
Figure 46: Distribution of Median Income by Block Group, Rancho Palos Verdes 81
Figure 47: Distribution of Median Income by Block Group, Los Angeles County 82
Figure 48: Percent of Low to Moderate Income Households by Census Tract, Rancho Palos
Verdes 83
Figure 49: Percent of Low to Moderate Income Households by Census Tract, Los Angeles
County 84
Figure 50: Poverty Status, Rancho Palos Verdes 85
Figure 51: Poverty Status, Los Angeles County 86
Figure 52: Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty, Los Angeles County 88
Figure 53: Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence, Rancho Palos Verdes 90
Figure 54: Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence, Los Angeles County 91
Figure 55: 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map by Census Tract, Rancho Palos Verdes 93
Figure 56: 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map by Census Tract, Los Angeles County 94
Figure 57: TCAC Education Domain Score, Rancho Palos Verdes 96
Figure 58: TCAC Education Domain Score, Los Angeles County 97
Figure 59: Jobs Proximity Index Score, Rancho Palos Verdes 99
Figure 60: Jobs Proximity Index Score, Los Angeles County 100
Figure 61: PV Transit Route Map 101
Figure 62: Percent of Income to Housing + Transportation for a Typical Moderate-Income
Household in Rancho Palos Verdes 103
Figure 63: Percent of Income to Housing + Transportation for a Typical Moderate-Income
Household in Los Angeles County 104
Figure 64: Areas of High Pollution in Los Angeles County 106
Figure 65: Disposition of Conventional Home Loans by Race/Ethnicity, 2018 108
Figure 66: Number of Loans Originated Per 1,000 Housing Units in Rancho Palos Verdes by
Census Tract, 2019 110
Figure 67: Number of Loans Originated Per 1,000 Housing Units in Los Angeles County by
Census Tract, 2019 111
Figure 68: Overpayment by Renters, Rancho Palos Verdes 114
Figure 69: Overpayment by Homeowners, Rancho Palos Verdes 115
Figure 70: Overpayment by Renters, Los Angeles County 116
Figure 71: Overpayment by Homeowners, Los Angeles County 117
Figure 72: Overcrowded Households, Rancho Palos Verdes 119
A-7
vii
Figure 73: Overcrowded Households, Los Angeles County 120
Figure 74: Single-Family Residential Development Standards 130
Figure 75: Multi-family Residential Development Standards 131
Figure 76a: Housing Sites Inventory Map, West 160
A-8
viii
GUIDE TO ACRONYMS USED
ACS U.S. Census American Community Survey
AFFH Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
CBSA Core-Based Statistical Area
CHAS Comprehensive Affordability Strategy
CNT Center for Neighborhood Technology
DFEH California Department of Fair Employment and Housing
DOF California Department of Finance (DOF
ECAP Ethnically Concentrated Area of Poverty
EDD California Employment Development Department (EDD)
FFIEC Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council
FHA Federal Housing Administration
FHEO Federal Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
FSA/RHS Federal Farm Service Agency/Rural Housing Service
HCD California Department of Housing and Community Development
HMDA Home Mortgage Disclosure Act
HUD Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development
RCAA Racially Concentrated Area of Affluence
RCAP Racially Concentrated Area of Poverty
R/ECAP Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Area of Poverty
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
TCAC California Tax Credit Allocation Committee
VA United States Department of Veterans Affairs
A-9
1
INTRODUCTION
This document constitutes the Housing Element of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes General
Plan. It provides a roadmap for the City to address current and projected housing needs
during the 2021-2029 Housing Element planning period. With a high quality of life, excellent
schools, strong internal and external housing demand drivers, a constrained land supply, and
a high-cost environment to construct new housing, Rancho Palos Verdes faces a number of
challenges to satisfying local housing demand. These factors create changes to creating
sufficient housing to meet needs of households across the socio-economic spectrum and
ensuring equitable outcomes. Most cities and counties, including Rancho Palos Verdes, are
required by State law to update their Housing Element every eight years. This Housing Element
Update will cover the 2021-2029 period (6th Housing Element Update Cycle). The 5th Cycle
Housing Element covered the period from 2013 to 2021.
The purpose of the Housing Element is to provide a plan to meet the existing and projected
housing needs of all segments of the population, including lower-income households and
households and individuals with special housing needs. To achieve this objective, the
Housing Element must evaluate the progress and effectiveness of the existing housing
element, analyze housing needs, evaluate factors that could potentially constrain housing
production, identify sites for new residential development, establish quantified objectives for
preservation of existing housing and production of new housing, and establish programs to
achieve those objectives. Each city and county in the State must submit its Housing Element to
the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review to ensure
that it meets the minimum requirements under State Housing Element law.
A-10
2
PUBLIC INPUT
The preparation of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes 2021-2029 Housing Element Update
included an extensive community engagement process to educate community members and
decision makers on Housing Element requirements and objectives and to solicit feedback on
housing needs and strategies to address the City’s housing goals. The City worked with MBI
Media, who devised a community engagement plan that targeted participation from as wide a
swath of the public as possible, with consideration given to ensuring that outreach included
traditionally under-represented groups, such as minorities, people with limited English
proficiency, disabled, and individuals experiencing homelessness. Further, the engagement
process aimed to give people as many different options to participate as possible. In addition
to traditional public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council where
interested parties also had the option to participate remotely via Zoom, the engagement
process included in-person workshops, a virtual workshop, a community survey, and
stakeholder interviews. These input opportunities were publicized through multiple channels,
including traditional public noticing, e-mail blasts and social media posts, and a dedicated
homepage on the City’s website. Appendix A contains a summary of outreach activities,
including how the outreach opportunities were publicized and summaries of input received.
[Note: additional details to be added once public input process is completed.]
A-11
3
EFFECTIVENESS OF THE EXISTING HOUSING ELEMENT
This chapter documents the City of Rancho Palos Verdes’ achievements during the 5th Housing
Element Cycle (2013-2021) and the City’s progress toward implementing the programs
identified in the 5th Cycle Housing Element. Based in part on the City’s progress toward
implementing the programs from the prior Housing Element Update, this chapter also includes
an assessment of whether each program from the prior Housing Element should be removed,
continued, or continued with modifications during the 6th Cycle (2021-2029) Housing Element
planning period.
Summary of Accomplishments
As of the end of 2020, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes had permitted a net of 134 residential
units during the 2013-2021 Housing Element cycle, after accounting for demolition and
replacement of ten units in 2018, five units in 2019, four units in 2020, and two units in
2021. As summarized in Table 1, the net new units permitted through 2020 include five very
low-income units, nine moderate-income units, and 120 above moderate-income units1. This
unit production exceeds the City’s RHNA for the 2013-2021 period for moderate-income units
by five units and exceeds the RHNA for above moderate-income units by a substantial 107
units but falls short of the City’s RHNA for very low-income and low-income units during this
period by three units and four units, respectively.
Table 1: Progress-to-Date on 5th Cycle RHNA
Income Level 5th Cycle RHNA Units Permitted to Date Surplus/(Shortfall)
Very Low 8 5 (3)
Low 4 (4)
Moderate 4 9 5
Above Moderate 13 120 107
Total 31 134
Note:
This represents net new construction after accounting for demolition and replacement of two single-family residential units.
Source: City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 2021.
Overall, the production achievements indicate that the 5th Cycle Housing Element was effective
in facilitating moderate—income housing units and very effective in facilitating production of
units affordable to above-moderate income households but has much more limited
effectiveness in facilitating production of new low- or very low-income housing units. This
1Very low-income is up to 50 percent of area median income (AMI). Low-income is up to 80 percent of AMI.
Moderate-Income is up to 120 percent of AMI, and Above moderate-income is above 120 percent of AMI. AMI is
adjusted for household size, and increases as household size increases. AMI is based on the Los Angeles County
median household income. For example, the Los Angeles County median household income for 2021 is $80,000
per year. For a three-person household, the low-income limit is $53,200; the low-income limit is $85,150, and the
moderate-income limit is $86,400.
A-12
4
information suggests that the 6th Cycle Housing Element must place more emphasis on
encouraging and removing barriers to production of lower-income units while ensuring that
there are no new impediments to production of new moderate- or above moderate-income
units.
Further, evaluation of the full range of Housing Element programs summarized in Table 2
indicates that the 5th Cycle Housing Element programs for the most part remain relevant and
should be continued for the 6th Cycle, with some modifications. Following are highlights of the
evaluation of the City’s existing Housing Element programs and accomplishments:
• The City was not able to complete Program 1, to provide zoning to accommodate eight
lower-income housing units. Because the re-zoning was needed to accommodate the
City’s 5th Cycle RHNA for eight lower-income units, the City will incorporate these as
carryover units into its 6th Cycle RHNA. Further, in compliance with Government Code
Section 65584.09, the City will work to complete rezoning for at least eight lower-
income units within one year of the end of the 5th Cycle.
• Construction of accessory dwelling units (ADU) is seen as an important means to
incorporate affordable housing units in communities where land costs are high.
Recognizing this, the City included Program 2 in the 5th Cycle Housing Element to
encourage development of housing units affordable at the moderate-income level and
below via the development of ADUs. The City is starting to see an uptick in interest in
ADU construction and, in 2020 alone, the Planning Division approved 11 ADUs, while a
total of 11 building permits were issued for ADUs during the 5th Cycle Housing
Element. According to the Southern California Association of Governments’ survey of
the affordability of ADUs, approximately 60 percent of ADUs are affordable at the low-
income level and below, six percent are affordable at the moderate-income level, and
34 percent are affordable at the above moderate-income level.
• Per Program 3, the City monitors the development of its Housing Element Sites
Inventory properties. City staff reported that the City did not see development of any of
its 5th Cycle Housing Element sites at densities below, or with less affordability, than
assumed in the sites inventory analysis.
• Program 4 recognizes that Section 8 rental assistance provided through the Los
Angeles County Development Authority (LACDA) is a key method to support extremely
low-income households in being able to afford housing. The City does not have
information on how many households in Rancho Palos Verdes may have received
housing assistance from the Section 8 program during the 5th Cycle but will seek to
obtain information about the number of local households receiving assistance during
the 6th Cycle.
A-13
5
Table 2: Status of 5th Cycle Programs (Page 1 of 2)
Name of Program Objective
Timeframe
in
H.E Status of Program Implementation Recommendation for 6th Cycle
Western Avenue Vision
Plan/Adequate Sites Program
(Program No. 1)
Minimum 8 Housing Units for
Lower Income Households
Mar-17 • Modification of land use and zoning designation
at 29619 S. Western Avenue to allow residential
use to a minimum of 20 dwelling units per acre
was noted to be accomplished no later than
March 2017. The housing program would allow
multifamily uses by-right, without a CUP, planned
unit development or other discretionary action.
While the housing program has not been
implemented, City staff met with the property
owners at 29619 and 29601 S. Western Avenue
to discuss development proposals related to this
housing program in 2018.
• In 2020, City staff coordinated a meeting with
property owners along 29019 S. Western Ave
Replace with Mixed-Use Overlay
Zone Program for Commercial
Corridors; accommodate 8 lower
income units carried over from 5th
Cycle plus additional lower-income
units to accommodate 6th Cycle
RHNA. City received SB-2 and
LEAP Grant to established mixed-
use overlay zone along Western
Ave. and other commercial
corridors, which might further this
program including other properties.
Moderate Income Second Unit
Development Program
(Program No. 2)
10 Second Dwelling Units
Constructed
2013-2021 • City continues to track and monitor the number
of second dwelling units, also known as
Accessory Dwelling Units(ADU) that are created
in the City.
• City continues to distribute and promote the
development of second dwelling units when
accessory structures are proposed.
• In 2020, the Planning Division granted
entitlements to develop 5 second dwelling units
of which one has been issued a building permit.
Continue program the program with
modifications to try and achieve
housing goals through ADU and
JADU development.
No Net Loss Program (Program
No. 3)
Establish the Evaluation
Procedure to Monitor Housing
Capacity
July_ 2014 • The City will annually track and monitor the
amount, type and size of vacant and
underutilized parcels for housing opportunities.
None of the City's 5th Cycle housing sites were
developed at densities and affordability levels
below those assumed in the 5th Cycle Housing
Element.
Continue the program with more
direction and use of City’s GIS.
Section 8 Rental Assistance for
Cost Burdended Lower Income
Households (Program No. 4)
4 Units for Extremely Low
and Low Income Renter
Households
2013-2021 • The City continues to assist the Housing
Authority staff by conducting a Landlord
Outreach Program, informing the Housing
Authority of the City's status on providing
affordable housing through the existing housing
stock and providing an Apartment Rental Survey
to the Housing Authority.
Continue program, with a greater
emphasis to establish relationships
with LACDA to obtain reports on the
number of local households
receiving Section 8 assistance and
ensure outreach to minority groups
that experience disproportionate
housing problems.
Citywide Affordable Housing
Requirement / Housing Impact
Fee (Program No. 5)
7 Housing Units for Lower
Income Households
2013-2021 • To date there are 5 very-low income housing
units (2 within Highridge Condo and 3 at Sol y
Mar) and City staff continues to assess
opportunities to work with property owners and
developers in providing additional units under this
Housing Program.
Continue program; add a component
to issue a Notice of Funding
Availability to invite proposal from
developers to leverage the funds to
construct affordable housing in
Rancho Palos Verdes.
First Time Home Buyer
Assistance (Program No. 6)
First Time Home Buyer
Assistance (Program No. 6)
2013-2021 • The following non-City programs that provide
financial assistance to homebuyers is provided
on the City's website: County Homeownership
Program, Morgage Credit Certificate Program, and
So Cal Home Financing Authority First Home
Mortgage Program.
Continue program; modify to ensure
outreach to minority groups that
experience disproportionate
housing problems.
Outreach Program for Persons
with Disabilities (Program No. 7)
Coordinate with Harbor
Regional Center
July_2015 • City continues to work with the Harbor Regional
Center to implement an outreach program that
informs families within Rancho Palos Verdes
about housing and services available for
persons with developmental disabilities.
• Program information is avaliable on the City's
website.
Continue program as-is.
Extremely Low Income Housing
Program (Program No. 8)
Assist 4 Extremely Low
Income Households
2013-2021 • Continue to implement Program Nos. 4, 5 and 11 Continue program; modify to ensure
outreach to minority groups that
experience disproportionate
housing problems.
A-14
6
Table 2: Status of 5th Cycle Programs (Page 2 of 2)
• Program 5 involves implementation of the City’s inclusionary housing program and
affordable housing impact fee program. The City’s affordable housing production via
Program 5 partially achieved its goal for affordable housing production, as it yielded
five new very low-income units in two different projects. As of the end of fiscal year
2019-2020, the City’s affordable housing fee fund had a balance of $856,128
available to support affordable housing projects, of which approximately $220,000
was contributed during the 5th Cycle as an affordable housing in-lieu fee for the
Highridge Condo development project.
Name of Program Objective
Timeframe
in
H.E Status of Program Implementation Recommendation for 6th Cycle
Zoning Ordinance Amendments
to Remove Governmental
Constraints (Program No. 9)
Adopt Amendment July_2014 • The City has initiated the process of undergoing
a comprehensive Zoning Code update and
creation of a mixed-use overlay zone to faciliate
housing production by utilzing the Senate Bill No.
32 planning grant awarded in April, 2020.
Continue program with modifications
to address requirements of new
state laws enacted since adoption
of the 5th Cycle element and also
with consideration of employee
housing dedicated to teachers.
Housing Code Enforcement
Program (Program No. 10)
10 New Cases Per Month 2013-2021 • The City continued to manage the housing code
enforcement on a complaint basis and continues
to strive for voluntary compliance through the
Code Enforcement Division.
• The City averaged 26 code enforcement cases
per month in 2020.
• The City continues to manage property
maintenance and illegal construction.
Continue program as-is.
Home Improvement Program
(Program No. 11)
5 Housing Units 2013-2021 • In December 2012, the City Council decided to
discontinue the Home Improvement Program.
During the planning period, the City may revive
the program if it is allocated a greater amount of
CDBG funds and/or another funding source
becomes available
Discontinue.
Fair Housing Services Program
(Program No. 12)
65 Lower Income
Households
2013-2021 • The City, in cooperation with the County and
the Housing Rights Center, continues to make
available fair housing services to its residents.
Continue program; modify to ensure
outreach to minority groups that
experience disproportionate
housing problems.
Fair Housing Information
Program (Program No. 13)
Information Disseminated
(Information on Website by
July 2014 & Brochures
Disseminated by January
2015)
July 2014 &
January 2015
• The City established and implemented the First
Time Homebuyer Assistance Program,and Fair
Housing Information Program by providing the
following: Fair Housing brochure that describes
fair housing laws and rights; links to the Housing
Rights Center website, State Department of Fair
Employment and Housing, and U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development, which were
completed in September 2015.
• Fair Housing Services and Program information
continues to be made available on the City's
website.
Continue program; modify to ensure
outreach to minority groups that
experience disproportionate
housing problems. as-is. Consider
hosting or jointly hosting
housing/land-lord discrimination
workshop.
Energy Conservation Program
(Program No. 14)
Implement Voluntary Green
Building Construction
Program
2013-2021 • Continue to encourage voluntary participation
in the City's Green Building Construction Program
by offering permit streamlining as well as up to a
50% rebate for Planning and Building fees
Continue program. Consider
integrating this program with the
City’s Emissions Reduction Action
Plan (ERAP), which was approved
by the City Council in 2018 and
outlines a number of residential
conservation goals.
A-15
7
• Program 9 was included in the 5th Cycle Housing Element to remove governmental
constraints to housing. The City has initiated a comprehensive Zoning Code update as
well as the implementation of the Western Avenue mixed-use overlay zone. The City
will complete these actions pursuant to a program to be included in the 6th Cycle
Housing Element Update.
• The City anticipated responding to approximately ten code enforcement cases per
month during the 5th Cycle Housing Element planning period as part of Program 10.
More recently, the City averaged 26 code enforcement cases per month in 2020.
During the planning period, code enforcement cases have typically involved complaints
about property maintenance or about unpermitted construction activities. City staff
reported that the code enforcement activity does not typically involve complaints of
substandard or unsafe housing conditions, and that code enforcement activity has not
resulted in displacement of any households.
• The City anticipated assisting five housing units in need of rehabilitation during the 5th
Cycle through Program 11, which was the Home Improvement Program. The City
discontinued the program due to a lack of funding. The City will seek to re-instate the
program if additional CDBG funding becomes available in the 6th Cycle.
• The City anticipated assisting approximately 65 lower-income households through
Program 12, its Fair Housing Services Program, which is implemented in partnership
with the Housing Rights Center (HRC). According to the HRC, the organization assisted
with 33 housing inquiries from the City of Rancho Palos Verdes between July 1, 2018,
and June 30, 2021. Of these, three were for housing discrimination complaints and
the rest were for other housing assistance inquiries. Of the housing discrimination
complaints, they were resolved through counseling and provision of information.
• In conjunction with Program 12, the City also distributes fair housing information via
Program 13. This information is available via the City’s website and via brochures that
are available at City Hall. In addition, to educate tenants and landlords about their fair
housing rights and responsibilities, the City, through its contract with HRC, HRC also
conducts tenant and landlord workshops, takes/makes referrals, participates in
resource fairs or community events, and otherwise collaborates with organizations
including the South Bay Literacy Council, St. Margaret’s Center, the South Bay Center
for Dispute Resolution, Harbor Community Health Centers, and more.
• Program 14 is the City’s Energy Conservation Program, which involves implementing a
voluntary Green Building Construction Program, through which the City offers permit
streamlining and up to a 50 percent rebate for Planning and Building application fees.
During the 5th Cycle, one residential project took advantage of this program. The City
will continue this program for the 6th Cycle.
A-16
8
HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
California Housing Element law requires local governments to adequately plan for the existing
and projected future housing needs of their residents, including the jurisdiction’s fair share of
the regional housing needs, also known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). A
complete and thorough analysis must include both a quantification and a descriptive analysis
of the specific needs that currently exist and those that are reasonably anticipated within the
community during the planning period, as well as the resources available to address those
needs. The following section of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes 2021-2029 Housing Element
summarizes information regarding existing and projected housing needs and is divided into
subsections pertaining to:
• Population, Employment, and Household Characteristics
• Housing Stock Characteristics
• Assisted Housing Development at Risk of Conversion
• Overcrowding and Overpayment
• Special Needs Populations
• Assessment of Fair Housing
• Regional Housing Needs Allocation
Data sources used in this section include but are not limited to the 2010 U.S. Census; 2014-
2018 and 2015-2019 U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS); the U.S. Department of
Housing and Community Development (HUD) 2012-2016 and 2013-2017 Comprehensive
Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data set; the California Department of Finance (DOF); the
California Employment Development Department (EDD); and Esri, a private data vendor.
Population, Employment, and Household Characteristics
P opulation and Household Trends
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is the 106th largest City by population within the six-county
region represented by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the
203rd largest City in California. The California Department of Finance estimates that Rancho
Palos Verdes had a 2020 population of approximately 42,000 residents and approximately
16,000 households2, as reported in Table 3. Between 2010 and 2020, the City showed very
little change in the number of persons or households, with population increasing by only 0.2
percent and the number of households declining by 0.2 percent. In contrast, Los Angeles
County experienced a population growth of 3.6 percent and household growth of 4.1 percent
over the decade, while the SCAG region had population and household growth of 5.4 percent
and 5.1 percent, respectively.
2 A household is a housing unit occupied by one or more persons.
A-17
9
The average household size in Rancho Palos Verdes, at 2.67 persons per household in 2020,
is smaller than for Los Angeles County or the SCAG Region. Household size in the City, County
and SCAG region is relatively unchanged for the 2010 through 2020 decade.
Table 3: Population and Households, 2010 and 2020
Note:
(a) The six-county SCAG Region includes Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura c ounties.
Sources: California Department of Finance, E-5, 2020; BAE, 2020.
Race and Ethni c ity
Table 4 shows residents of Rancho Palos Verdes and Los Angeles County by race and
ethnicity. Rancho Palos Verdes shows a race and ethnicity mix quite different than the County
overall. For the City, over half of the 2014-2018 population is White Non-Hispanic, nearly
one-third is Asian Non-Hispanic, and nine percent is Hispanic, while countywide the largest
group is the Hispanic population at nearly half (48.5 percent) of the total, with slightly over
one-quarter White Non-Hispanic, 14 percent Asian Non-Hispanic, and eight percent Black Non-
Hispanic. The Assessment of Fair Housing section of this Housing Needs Assessment provides
additional information regarding patterns of segregation and housing needs among racial and
ethnic minority populations.
% Change
Population 2010 2020 2010-2020
City of Rancho Palos Verdes 41,643 41,731 0.2%
Los Angeles County 9,818,605 10,172,951 3.6%
6-County SCAG Region (a)18,051,534 19,021,787 5.4%
% Change
Households 2010 2020 2010-2020
City of Rancho Palos Verdes 15,561 15,533 -0.2%
Los Angeles County 3,239,280 3,370,663 4.1%
6-County SCAG Region (a)5,843,223 6,143,538 5.1%
Average Household Size 2010 2020
City of Rancho Palos Verdes 2.65 2.67
Los Angeles County 2.98 2.96
6-County SCAG Region (a)3.03 3.04
A-18
10
Table 4: Race and Ethnicity, 2010 and 2014-2018
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Decennial Census, Table P9; American Community Survey, 2014-2018 five-year
sample data, B03002, BAE, 2020.
Population by Age
Table 5 shows the age distribution for Rancho Palos Verdes as reported during the 2014 to
2018 period from the ACS. For this period, slightly more than one-fifth of the City’s population
was children under 18. The next largest cohort was the 45 to 54 age group, followed by the 55
to 64 age group and the 65 to 74 age group. The overall age distribution shows limited change
between 2010 and 2014-2018, especially given the statistical margin of error for the 2014-
2018 ACS data. Overall, the median age increased from 47.8 to 49.7 between 2010 and the
2014 to 2018 period.
Rancho Palos Verdes
% Change
Not Hispanic nor Latino by Race Number Percent Number Percent 2010 to 2014-18
White 23,323 56.0%22,121 52.3%-5.2%
Black or African American 988 2.4%754 1.8%-23.7%
American Indian and Alaska Native 54 0.1%65 0.2%20.4%
Asian 11,998 28.8%12,979 30.7%8.2%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 39 0.1%317 0.7%712.8%
Some other race alone 92 0.2%39 0.1%-57.6%
Two or more races 1,593 3.8%2,203 5.2%38.3%
Total, Not Hispanic nor Latino 38,087 91.5%38,478 91.0%1.0%
Hispanic or Latino 3,556 8.5%3,793 9.0%6.7%
Total, All Races 41,643 100.0%42,271 100.0%1.5%
Los Angeles County
% Change
Not Hispanic nor Latino by Race Number Percent Number Percent 2010 to 2014-18
White 2,728,321 27.8%2,659,052 26.3%-2.5%
Black or African American 815,086 8.3%795,505 7.9%-2.4%
American Indian and Alaska Native 18,886 0.2%20,307 0.2%7.5%
Asian 1,325,671 13.5%1,451,560 14.4%9.5%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 22,464 0.2%24,821 0.2%10.5%
Some other race alone 25,367 0.3%29,924 0.3%18.0%
Two or more races 194,921 2.0%223,280 2.2%14.5%
Total, Not Hispanic nor Latino 5,130,716 52.3%5,204,449 51.5%1.4%
Hispanic or Latino 4,687,889 47.7%4,893,603 48.5%4.4%
Total, All Races 9,818,605 100.0%10,098,052 100.0%2.8%
2010 2014-2018
2010 2014-2018
A-19
11
Table 5: Population by Age, 2010 and 2014-2018
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Decennial Census, Table P12; American Community Survey, 2014-2018 five-year
sample data, Table B01001; BAE, 2020.
Resident Employment by Industry
Rancho Palos Verdes has approximately 18,000 employed civilian residents age 16 or older,
as shown in Table 6. Approximately 28 percent of those employed residents work in financial
and professional services. Resident employment in these sectors is more common in Rancho
Palos Verdes than in Los Angeles County, where these sectors comprise only 19 percent of
employed residents. Only two other major sectoral groupings in the City account for over
20 percent of employed residents; health and educational services at 24 percent, and
manufacturing, wholesale trade, and transportation at 23 percent. These sectors also make
up a smaller proportion of resident employment in Los Angeles County overall. No other
sectoral group in Rancho Palos Verdes makes up more than ten percent of the resident
workforce.
% Change
2010 to
Age Range Number Percent Number Percent 2014-18
Under 18 9,248 22.2%9,237 21.9%-0.1%
18-24 2,352 5.6%2,202 5.2%-6.4%
25-34 2,182 5.2%2,352 5.6%7.8%
35-44 4,863 11.7%4,310 10.2%-11.4%
45-54 7,640 18.3%7,372 17.4%-3.5%
55-64 5,704 13.7%6,016 14.2%5.5%
65-74 4,816 11.6%5,108 12.1%6.1%
75-84 3,453 8.3%3,822 9.0%10.7%
85 & older 1,385 3.3%1,852 4.4%33.7%
Total, All Ages 41,643 100.0%42,271 100.0%1.5%
Median Age 47.8
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
2010 2014-2018
49.7
A-20
12
Table 6: Employed Residents by Industry, Rancho Palos Verdes and Los Angeles
County, 2014-2018
Note:
This table reflects the civilian employed population age 16 and older only.
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2014-2018 five-year sample data, S2403; BAE, 2020.
Unemployment Rate
The unemployment rate for workers living in Rancho Palos Verdes is consistently below the
rate for Los Angeles County and the SCAG Region, while following the same trends overall, as
shown in Figure 1. In January 2010, the unemployment rate for the City was 6.5 percent, even
as the County and the Region saw much higher rates of 13.0 percent and 12.4 percent,
respectively, reflecting the effects of the Great Recession. Up until 2016, rates for all three
geographies generally declined, and then converged at around five percent until the pandemic
generated a spike in May 2020 to 12.3 percent for Rancho Palos Verdes, 18.8 percent for Los
Angeles County, and 16.5 percent for the SCAG Region. Since then, rates have begun to fall
rapidly, but as of February 2021 are still well above the five percent level, especially for the
County and the Region.
Industry Number Percent Number Percent
Agriculture & Natural Resources 65 0.4%22,589 0.5%
Construction 443 2.4%284,152 5.8%
Financial & Professional Services 5,208 28.3%924,128 19.0%
Health & Educational Services 4,403 24.0%1,003,878 20.6%
Information 511 2.8%216,025 4.4%
Manufacturing, Wholesale & Transportation 4,144 22.6%916,935 18.8%
Retail 1,432 7.8%506,432 10.4%
Arts, Entertainmnt, Recreation, Accomm & Food Services 735 4.0%549,162 11.3%
Other 1,435 7.8%446,357 9.2%
Total 18,376 100.0%4,869,658 100.0%
City of Rancho
Palos Verdes Los Angeles County
A-21
13
Figure 1: Unemployment Rate Trends
Notes:
Monthly estimates of employment and unemployment for cities and Census Designated Places are calculated by using the
share of county-level employment and unemployment in the area at the time of the most current five-year American
Community Survey (ACS) estimates, which are updated annually. The cities employment and unemployment estimates are
then added to determine the total labor force and unemployment rate.
This method assumes that the rates of change in employment and unemployment are exactly the same in each sub-county
area as at the county level (the same process is used for unemployment). If this assumption is not true for a specific sub-
county area, then the estimates for that area may not be representative of the current economic conditions. Since this
assumption is untested, caution should be employed when using these data.
Source: California Employment Development Department, Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS), Sub-county areas
monthly updates, 2010-2021.
Hous ing Tenure
As shown in Figure 2 below, Rancho Palos Verdes has a much higher proportion of
homeowners than Los Angeles County. In the City, over three-fourths of households own their
residence, in contrast to less than 50 percent countywide.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Percent of Labor Force that is UnemployedRancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles County SCAG Region
A-22
14
Figure 2: Housing Tenure
Note: Universe is all occupied housing units.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2014-2018), Table B25003
Housing Tenure Trends
Since 2000, there has been almost no change in the total number of owner-occupied units in
Rancho Palos Verdes, which was slightly more than 12,000 units. However, there has been a
gradual increase in the number of renter-occupied units, from 2,800 in 2000 to 3,425 for the
2014 to 2018 period (see Figure 3). As a result, the local homeownership rate declined from
82 percent to a still relatively high proportion of 78 percent for the 2014-2018 time period.
78%
46%
22%
54%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles CountyPercent of HouseholdsOwner Occupied Renter Occupied
A-23
15
Figure 3: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Tenure, 2000-2018
Note: Universe is all occupied housing units.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 SF1, Table H004; U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 SF1, Table H004; U.S.
Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003
Housing Tenure by Year Moved to Current Residence
Renters tend to move more frequently than homeowners. This is reflected in Figure 4, which
shows that the majority of households in Rancho Palos Verdes who have moved in the last few
years were renters, while households who have been in their homes for longer periods are
owners, especially for those who have lived in their current housing units for well over a
decade.
12,456
2,800
12,485
3,076
12,148
3,425
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
Owner Occupied Renter OccupiedHouseholds
2000 2010 2014-2018
A-24
16
Figure 4: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Tenure by Year Moved to Current
Residence
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2014-2018), Table B25038
Household Income Level by Tenure
Most owner households, and thus most households overall in Rancho Palos Verdes, have
incomes above the HUD Area Median Income, which is set at the County level. While there are
higher proportions of renters with incomes below the area median in the City, and some are
even in the extremely low-income category, slightly more than half of the City’s renters also
have incomes above the HUD Median. Some of the lower income households, especially
among the owners, may be seniors who are retired with assets available (and possibly no
mortgage) such that housing remains affordable even with modest or lower incomes.
11.1%
22.5%23.6%
15.1%
27.7%
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
2015 or later 2010-2014 2000-2009 1990-1999 1989 or earlier
Renter 1,028 1,664 546 96 91
Owner 703 1,836 3,125 2,259 4,225Households (% of total)Owner Renter
A-25
17
Figure 5: Rancho Palos Verdes Household Income Level by Tenure, 2013-2017
Note: Totals may not equal the sum of individual figures due to independent rounding.
Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2013-2017 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
(CHAS) data; BAE, 2020.
Housing Tenure by Housing Type
Rancho Palos Verdes is predominantly owner-occupied single-family detached houses, with
more than three fourths of the City’s occupied housing units being detached single-family
homes, and 90 percent of that unit type is occupied by owners. Attached single-family homes
are also largely owner-occupied. Occupied multi-family housing is a substantial part of the
City’s housing inventory, accounting for 17 percent of all units, and slightly more than three-
fourths of the multi-family units are renter-occupied.
760 645
990 940
9,220
405 325 515 305
1,679
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
0%-30% of
AMI
31%-50% of
AMI
51%-80% of
AMI
81%-100% of
AMI
Greater than
100% of AMIHouseholds
Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
A-26
18
Figure 6: Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Tenure by Housing Type
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25032
Household Type
Figure 7 below indicates that Rancho Palos Verdes is largely either married-couple family
households (68 percent of the total) or single-person households (21 percent). This is a larger
proportion of married-couple households and a smaller proportion of single-person households
than in Los Angeles County or the SCAG Region. Only three percent of the City’s households of
more than one person are female householders with no spouse present, and only two percent
are male households with no spouse present. Both the County and the Region have more than
twice those proportions of these two household types.
90%
76%
23%
100%
10%
24%
77%
100%
12,030 935 2,589 13 6
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Detached
Single-Family
Homes
Attached
Single-Family
Homes
Multi-Family
Housing
Mobile
Homes
Boat, RV,
Van, or OtherPercent of HouseholdsOwner Occupied Renter Occupied
A-27
19
Figure 7: Household Type
Notes:
Female-Headed Family Households are family households with a female householder with no husband present. Male-
Headed Family Households are family households with a male householder with no wife present. Family households are
households containing two or more related persons. Other Non-Family Households are households of no related persons
with more than one person in the household.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B11001
Housing Stock Characteristics
To estimate the need for more housing, it is necessary to assess the existing housing stock in
a locale. The following section provides insight into the current housing inventory in Rancho
Palos Verdes.
Hou sing Type T rends
The vast majority of housing in Rancho Palos Verdes is single-family detached homes. As of
2020, the California Department of Finance estimates that of the 16,334 housing units in the
City, 12,561 (77 percent) are single-family detached houses. An additional 1,043 homes are
single-family attached units; multi-family units in structures of five or more units make up
2,381 units, and the remainder are in smaller multi-family buildings (e.g., duplexes). The
6%
15%14%2%
7%6%
68%45%49%
3%
8%7%
21%26%23%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles County SCAG RegionPercent of HouseholdsFemale-Headed Family Households Male-Headed Family Households
Married-Couple Family Households Other Non-Family Households
Single-Person Households
A-28
20
housing stock of the City changed little between 2010 and 2020, with only 155 units added,
so the unit mix in the City was relatively unchanged over the decade. However, of the limited
units added, the most growth in units was in multi-family structures of five or more units; at 40
percent of the total housing added, this is a much higher proportion of the new housing stock
than of the overall housing stock.
Figure 8: Rancho Palos Verdes Housing by Units in Structure, 2010-2020
Sources: California Department of Finance, E-5, 2020; BAE, 2020.
Vacant Units by Vacancy Status
According to the State Department of Finance, the residential vacancy rate among the total
16,334 housing units in Rancho Palos Verdes in early 2020 was 4.8 percent, lower than the
6.4 percent for Los Angeles County and 7.6 percent for the SCAG region (see Figure 9).
12,5101,0243012,3192512,5611,0433242,381250
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
Single Family
Detached
Single Family
Attached
Multifamily 2-
4 Units
Multifamily
5+
Mobile
HomesUnits
2010 2020
A-29
21
Figure 9: Housing Unit Occupancy Status, 2020
Note: Estimates are for January 1, 2020 (pre Covid-19 shutdowns).
Source: CA Department of Finance E-5 Report, 2021.
As shown in Figure 10, a review of detailed vacancy data as provided by the ACS indicates that
only 18 percent of the vacant housing units were actually available for rent and that only 7.2
percent were available for sale. Slightly more than one-third of vacant units in the City were
classified as seasonal units, defined as units only occupied for parts of the year by households
with a different usual place of residence, and slightly more than one-fifth were classified as
“other” vacant units, which includes vacancies not in any of the other categories, for example
units held for occupancy of a caretaker, held for settlement of an estate, or held for personal
reasons of the owner. Generally, the proportions of vacancies by type for Rancho Palos Verdes
were similar to those found overall in the SCAG Region.
95.2%93.6%92.4%
4.8%6.4%7.6%
16,334 3,590,574 6,634,514
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles County SCAG RegionPercent of Housing UnitsOccupied Housing Units Vacant Housing Units
A-30
22
Figure 10: Vacant Units by Type, 2014-2018
Sources: American Community Survey, 2014-2018 five-year sample data, Table B25004; BAE, 2020.
Housing Units by Year Structure Built
ACS data indicate that the peak period for development of the housing stock in Rancho Palos
Verdes was between 1950 and 1980, accounting for 85 percent of housing units in the City. In
comparison, housing construction in the region is spread out over a longer period with less
than half of the region’s housing constructed between 1950 and 1980. However, the growth
in new housing units has tailed off since 1980 for both the City and the Region. It should be
noted that the ACS data do not capture more recent residential construction activity or any
pending residential projects in the City’s development pipeline. 17.7%11.0%7.2%7.7%35.5%0.0%20.8%20.7%5.4%7.9%4.5%33.5%0.3%27.7%0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
For Rent Rented For Sale Sold Seasonal Migrant OtherPercent of Total Vacant UnitsRancho Palos Verdes SCAG
A-31
23
Figure 11: Housing Units by Year Built, Rancho Palos Verdes & SCAG Region
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2014-2018), Table B25034.
Subst andard Housing Issues
The ACS provides estimates of substandard units with no telephone service available
(including cell phones), units lacking complete plumbing (e.g., no hot water or no toilet), or
units lacking complete kitchen facilities (e.g., no refrigerator). By these criteria, Rancho Palos
Verdes has very few substandard units; less than one percent of the approximately 15,600
housing units in Rancho Palos Verdes meet any one of these criteria as summarized below, in
Figure 12. Regionally, the proportions are higher but still limited, at less than two percent for
any of the three criteria.
Additionally, the Code Enforcement Division of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes keeps records
and logs of problems with the City’s existing housing stock. The City does not have any areas
that have concentrations of housing problems.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
2014 &
Later
2010-
2013
2000-
2009
1990-
1999
1980-
1989
1970-
1979
1960-
1969
1950-
1959
1940-
1949
1939 &
Earlier
Rancho Palos Verdes (%)0.1%0.3%1.5%2.7%6.9%22.8%38.0%24.2%1.8%1.6%
SCAG (%)1.0%1.5%10.1%9.5%15.0%16.3%14.5%15.9%6.9%9.3%Percent of Total UnitsRancho Palos Verdes (%)SCAG (%)
A-32
24
Figure 12: Substandard Housing Characteristics, Rancho Palos Verdes & SCAG
Region
Source:
U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2014-2018), Table B25053, Table B25043, Table B25049.
Home Values of Owner -Occupied Units
Typical home prices in Rancho Palos Verdes are well above those for the SCAG Region. The
median home sales price in Rancho Palos Verdes increased 127 percent between 2000 and
2018 while the median price in the SCAG region increased 151 percent, but the City’s median
home price was still much higher than for the region overall in 2018, at $1.25 million versus
only $560,977 for the region. These medians were the highest for any point during the 2000
to 2018 period. Prices in Rancho Palos Verdes have ranged between a low of 176.7% of the
SCAG region median in 2007 and a high of 285.2% in 2009.
0.60%0.50%
0.97%
1.95%
0.39%
1.29%
0%
1%
1%
2%
2%
3%
No Telephone Service Available Lacking Plumbing Facilities Lacking Complete Kitchen
FacilitiesPercent of Total UnitsRancho Palos Verdes SCAG
A-33
25
Figure 13: Median Home Sales Price for Existing Homes, Rancho Palos Verdes &
SCAG Region
Sources: SCAG Local Profiles, Core Logic/Data Quick. SCAG median home sales price calculated as household-weighted
average of county medians
Contract Rents for Renter -Occupied Units
As shown in Figure 14, median contract rents in Rancho Palos Verdes trend well above those
for the SCAG Region. According to the ACS, the median monthly contract rent for the 2014
through 2018 period3 was $1,288 for the region, and nearly twice that in Rancho Palos Verdes
at $2,505.
3 The American Community Survey for Rancho Palos Verdes is based on data gathered over a five-year period, e.g.,
the data shown for 2018 was collected from 2014 through 2018. Single-year data is not available for the City due
to the population threshold set by the US Census Bureau.
0.0%
50.0%
100.0%
150.0%
200.0%
250.0%
300.0%
$-
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
$1,400,000
Rancho Palos Verdes SCAG Rancho Palos Verdes Percentage of SCAG Price
A-34
26
Figure 14: Median Monthly Contract Rent, 2010-2018
Notes:
Median not available for Rancho Palos Verdes from 2011 through 2014.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data releases, from 2006-2010 through 2014-2018,
B25058,
Confirming the high rents in the City, based on the 2018 ACS data, over one-third of the
Rancho Palos Verdes occupied rental units had monthly contract rents of $3,000 or more; in
sharp contrast, only 3.2 percent of Los Angeles County and 3.0 percent of SCAG Region rents
were at this level. For Los Angeles County and the SCAG Region, over one-third of occupied
rental units had monthly contract rents in the $1,000 to $1,499 category.
$1,951
$2,148 $2,210
$2,297
$2,505
$1,017 $1,066 $1,098 $1,110 $1,129 $1,139 $1,167 $1,210
$1,288
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
$2,000
$2,200
$2,400
$2,600
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018Dollars
Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles County
A-35
27
Figure 15: Monthly Contract Rents for Renter-Occupied Units
Universe: Renter-occupied housing units paying cash rent.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2014-2018), Table B25056
Permitted Housing by Income Level
As shown in Figure 16, between 2013 and 2020 (i.e., from the beginning of the last housing
element cycle), the City of Rancho Palos Verdes issued residential building permits for only
130 housing units. Almost all of these (118 units) were for above moderate-income units, with
five issued for very low-income units and seven for moderate-income units. 0.8%5.6%5.6%4.7%23.0%22.3%5.7%35.8%34.2%21.7%19.9%21.2%16.9%8.8%9.6%14.1%3.8%4.1%36.1%3.2%3.0%0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles County SCAG RegionPercent of Rental UnitsRent less than $500 Rent $500-$999 Rent $1000-$1499
Rent $1500-$1999 Rent $2000-$2499 Rent $2500-$2999
Rent $3000 or more
A-36
28
Figure 16: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Permits by Income Level
Notes:
Universe: Housing permits issued between 2013 and 2020.
HCD uses the following definitions for the four income categories:
--Very Low Income: units affordable to households making less than 50% of the Area Median Income for the county in which
the jurisdiction is located.
--Low Income: units affordable to households making between 50% and 80% of the Area Median Income for the county in
which the jurisdiction is located.
--Moderate Income: units affordable to households making between 80% and 120% of the Area Median Income for the
county in which the jurisdiction is located.
--Above Moderate Income: units affordable to households making above 120% of the Area Median Income for the county in
which the jurisdiction is located.
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), 5th Cycle Annual Progress Report Permit
Summary (2020)
Assisted Housing Developments at Risk of Conversion
California Government Code Section 65583 requires that housing elements identify all
assisted rental housing units (i.e., regulated below-market rate housing units) within the
jurisdiction that are at risk of converting to market rate within ten years of the beginning of the
Housing Element Planning period. Typically, assisted units are potentially considered to be at
risk of converting to market rate if they are subject to local affordability requirements that will
soon expire, or if the affordable units were financed using sources that required affordability
for a set period that will soon expire. However, units that are potentially at risk for these
reasons may not actually be at risk of conversion, particularly in cases where the units are
owned by a non-profit or other entity that is dedicated to preserving the units as affordable
housing. The California Housing Partnership (CHP) provides data on assisted housing units
and assesses the level of risk to converting to market rate. These data identify homes without
a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability beyond the indicated timeframe
and unless otherwise noted are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven
developer.
5 0 7 1180
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Very Low Income
Permits
Low Income
Permits
Moderate
Income Permits
Above
Moderate
Income PermitsUnits
A-37
29
Table 7 shows that Rancho Palos Verdes has a limited number of assisted units, and they are
at low risk of conversion. These 33 units are all in Mirandela Senior Apartments and have a
reported overall affordability end date of 2065.
Table 7: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Assisted Units at Risk of Conversion
Source: California Housing Partnership, July 2020. Includes HUD, Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), USDA, and
CalHFA projects. Subsidized or assisted developments that do not have one of the aforementioned financing sources may
not be included.
Cost of Replacement or Preserva tion of At -Risk Units
California Government Code Section 65583 also requires that the Housing Element estimate
the cost to replace any affordable units that are at risk of conversion within ten years as well
as the cost to preserve these units. No costs are provided here since no units in Rancho Palos
Verdes are at-risk of conversion within the specified time period.
Overcrowding and Overpayment
O vercrowding Severity
Housing analysts consider overcrowding in residential units to be a key indicator that
households are experiencing economic hardship and are struggling to afford suitable housing,
making household size relative to the size of occupied housing units an important metric for
assessing economic stress and housing insecurity. One of the common tradeoffs that
households make when experiencing economic hardship is to live in housing units that are
smaller than would otherwise be ideal, or to band together with extended family or other
individuals or households in order to better offset housing costs. The ACS provides data on
overcrowding, reporting estimates of households by the number of persons per room, which
includes bedrooms, as well as other rooms, like living rooms, but excludes kitchens and
bathrooms. The ACS definition of overcrowding is one person or more per room, and severe
overcrowding is defined as greater than 1.5 persons per room.
Rancho Palos Verdes has extremely low rates of overcrowding (see Figure 17). For the 2014
through 2018 period, the ACS reports that only two percent of households in Rancho Palos
Verdes were overcrowded with 1.01 to 1.50 persons per room, and only one percent were
Risk Level Definition:Number Percent
Very High At-risk of converting to market rate within the next year 0 0%
High At-risk of converting to market rate in the next 1-5 years 0 0%
Moderate At-risk of converting to market rate in the next 5-10 years 0 0%
Low At-risk of converting to market rate in the next 10 or more
years and/or are owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-
driven developer.
33 100%
TOTAL 33 100%
At Risk Low-income units in
jurisdiction
A-38
30
severely overcrowded, with 1.51 persons or more per room. In comparison, seven percent of
Los Angeles County households were overcrowded with 1.0 to 1.50 persons per room, and five
percent were severely overcrowded with 1.51 persons or more per room. Six percent of the
SCAG Region’s households were classified as overcrowded and four percent as severely
overcrowded.
Figure 17: Occupants per Room
Notes:
The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by more than 1.0 persons per room (excluding
bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data releases, 2014-2018, B25014.
Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity
Overcrowding tends to be higher in renter-occupied housing than in owner-occupied housing.
In Rancho Palos Verdes, 102 owner-occupied and 276 renter-occupied households had more
than 1.0 occupants per room (0.8 percent and 8.1 percent, respectively, of the occupied
housing stock by tenure), meeting the Census definition for overcrowding, while 57 owner
households and 64 renter households had more than 1.5 occupants per room, (0.5 percent
and 1.9 percent, respectively, of the occupied housing stock by tenure) meeting the ACS
definition for severe overcrowding.
98%
89%90%
2%7%6%
1%5%4%
15,573 3,306,109 6,002,747
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles County SCAG Region
1.00 occupants per room or less 1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room
1.51 occupants per room or more
A-39
31
Figure 18: Overcrowding by Extent and Tenure
Source: American Community Survey 2014-2018 5-year estimates.
Overcrowding by Income Level
In Rancho Palos Verdes, very few households at any income level suffer from overcrowded
conditions, as shown in Figure 19. Interestingly, there is no strong correlation between
household income level and overcrowding. Some of the lowest levels of overcrowding were
among extremely low-income households. The highest proportions of overcrowding and severe
overcrowding are found among moderate-income households (between 80 percent and 100
percent AMI), yet even in this category, only 0.7 percent of households were overcrowded and
only 0.1 percent were severely overcrowded.
0.8%0.5%
8.1%
1.9%
4.9%
1.3%
15.6%
6.4%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
18.0%
1.0+/room 1.5+/room 1.0+/room 1.5+/room
Owner Owner Renter RenterPercent of Total HouseholdsRancho Palos Verdes SCAG
A-40
32
Figure 19: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Overcrowding by HUD Income Category
Notes:
The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms
and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. Income groups are
based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area
where this jurisdiction is located.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
(CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
Cost Burden Severity
Housing cost burden is most commonly measured as the percentage of gross income spent on
housing. A household is considered to have a moderate housing cost burden if housing
expenses are between 30 percent and 50 percent of income, and to have a severe cost
burden when housing expenses exceed 50 percent of income.
Reflecting the City’s higher income levels and high ownership rates, Rancho Palos Verdes has
a smaller proportion of cost-burdened households than Los Angeles County or the SCAG
Region. Sixty-two percent of City households reported paying less than 30 percent of income
on housing, compared to only 52 percent for the county and 54 percent for the region (see
Figure 20). As a result, the proportions of households with either moderate and severe cost
burdens is lower for the City than for the county and the region. Nevertheless, a substantial
number of Rancho Palos Verdes households show possible problems with housing
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.7%
0.4%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%0.1%
0.3%
0.0%
0.2%
0.4%
0.6%
0.8%
1.0%
0%-30% of
AMI
31%-50% of
AMI
51%-80% of
AMI
81%-100% of
AMI
Greater than
100% of AMIPercent of Households1.01 to 1.5 Occupants per Room More than 1.5 Occupants per Room
A-41
33
affordability, with the proportion of moderate and severe housing cost burdens among the
City’s households at 19 percent and 17 percent, respectively.
Figure 20: Percent of Household Income to Housing Costs
Notes:
Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus
utilities). For owners, housing cost is "select monthly owner costs", which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association
fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs
exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed
50% of monthly income.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25070, B25091
Cost Burden by Tenure and Income Level
The following table shows that renters in Rancho Palos Verdes tend to have higher housing
cost burdens than owners and, not surprisingly, lower income households also tend to have
higher housing cost burdens. Overall, 27 percent of renters have severe cost burdens and 22
percent have moderate cost burdens, while only 15 percent of owners have severe cost
burdens and 17 percent have moderate cost burdens. Nearly 75 percent of extremely low-
income households have severe cost burdens, decreasing to 50 percent for very low-income
62%
52%54%
19%
22%22%
17%
23%21%
2%3%3%
15,488 3,308,907 6,042,332
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles County SCAG Region
0%-30% of Income Used for Housing 30%-50% of Income Used for Housing
50%+ of Income Used for Housing Not Computed
A-42
34
households, and then to only 25 percent for low-income households, illustrating the link
between higher housing cost burdens and lower incomes.
Table 8: Housing Cost Burden by Income & Tenure for Rancho Palos Verdes
Notes:
(a) “HAMFI” is the HUD Area Median Family Income for Los Angeles County.
(b) Totals do not equal the sum of individual figures due to independent rounding.
(c) Households with minimal housing cost burden spend up to 30 percent of their gross household income on housing
expenses.
(d) Households with moderate housing cost burden spend more than 30 percent but less than or equal to 50 percent of their
gross household income on housing expenses.
(e) Households with severe housing cost burden spend more than 50 percent of their gross household income on housing
expenses.
Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2013-2017 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
(CHAS) data; BAE, 2020.
Housing Cost Burden by Income Level # % # % # %
Household Income ≤30% HAMFI (a) (b)405 100.0%760 100.0%1,165 100.0%
Minimal Cost Burden (c)55 13.4%40 5.2%95 8.1%
Moderate Cost Burden (d)0 0.0%30 3.9%30 2.6%
Severe Cost Burden (e)265 64.6%615 80.4%880 74.9%
Zero/Negative Income 90 22.0%80 10.5%170 14.5%
Household Income >30% to ≤50% HAMFI (b)325 100.0%645 100.0%970 100.0%
Minimal Cost Burden (c)75 23.1%190 29.5%265 27.3%
Moderate Cost Burden (d)0 0.0%220 34.1%220 22.7%
Severe Cost Burden (e)250 76.9%235 36.4%485 50.0%
Household Income >50% to ≤80% HAMFI (b)515 100.0%990 100.0%1,505 100.0%
Minimal Cost Burden (c)140 27.5%550 55.6%690 46.0%
Moderate Cost Burden (d)215 42.2%215 21.7%430 28.7%
Severe Cost Burden (e)155 30.4%225 22.7%380 25.3%
Household Income >80% to ≤100% HAMFI (b)305 100.0%940 100.0%1,245 100.0%
Minimal Cost Burden (c)85 27.9%595 63.6%680 54.8%
Moderate Cost Burden (d)140 45.9%180 19.3%320 25.8%
Severe Cost Burden (e)80 26.2%160 17.1%240 19.4%
Household Income >100% to ≤120% HAMFI (b)395 100.0%770 100.0%1,165 100.0%
Minimal Cost Burden (c)115 29.9%360 46.5%475 40.9%
Moderate Cost Burden (d)165 42.9%195 25.2%360 31.0%
Severe Cost Burden (e)105 27.3%220 28.4%325 28.0%
Household Income >120% HAMFI (b)1,284 100.0%8,450 100.0%9,734 100.0%
Minimal Cost Burden (c)1,095 85.3%6,740 79.7%7,835 80.4%
Moderate Cost Burden (d)189 14.7%1,315 15.6%1,504 15.4%
Severe Cost Burden (e)0 0.0%400 4.7%400 4.1%
Total Households (b)3,225 100.0%12,555 100.0%15,780 100.0%
Minimal Cost Burden (c)1,565 48.6%8,475 67.4%10,040 63.6%
Moderate Cost Burden (d)709 22.0%2,155 17.2%2,864 18.1%
Severe Cost Burden (e)855 26.6%1,855 14.8%2,710 17.2%
Zero/Negative Income 90 2.8%80 0.6%170 1.1%
Renter
Households
Owner
Households All Households
A-43
35
Cost Burden by Race
By race/ethnicity, the lowest proportions of moderate and severe housing cost burdens in
Rancho Palos Verdes are among White Non-Hispanic households, with the highest burdens
among Black Non-Hispanic households, as shown in Figure 21. Black Non-Hispanic
households are the only category where over half of the households show either a moderate or
severe housing cost burden. For the other major categories in the City, between 55 percent
and 60 percent of households have housing cost burdens below 30 percent of household
income.
Figure 21: Cost Burden by Race and Ethnicity, Rancho Palos Verdes
Notes:
Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus
utilities). For owners, housing cost is "select monthly owner costs", which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association
fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs
exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed
50% of monthly income. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who
identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this
graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
(CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release.
100%
55%
43%
69%
58%55%
25%
15%
15%
20%26%
18%
42%
16%22%18%
15 3,984 300 9,795 525 1,150
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
American
Indian or
Alaska Native,
Non-Hispanic
Asian / API,
Non-Hispanic
Black or
African
American,
Non-Hispanic
White, Non-
Hispanic
Other Race or
Multiple
Races, Non-
Hispanic
Hispanic or
LatinxPercent of Households0%-30% of Income Used for Housing 30%-50% of Income Used for Housing
50%+ of Income Used for Housing Cost Burden Not computed
A-44
36
Cost Burden by Household Size
Larger families may spend a larger proportion of their income on housing, in order to
adequately house all family members. This appears to be true to some degree in Rancho Palos
Verdes, where slightly less than 40 percent of large family households (as defined in Figure
22) face moderate or severe housing cost burdens. However, across all other household types,
35 percent had a moderate or severe housing cost burden, indicating that high housing costs
are also impacting other household types.
Figure 22: Cost Burden by Household Size/Type, Rancho Palos Verdes
Notes:
Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus
utilities). For owners, housing cost is "select monthly owner costs", which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association
fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs
exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed
50% of monthly income. Does not include households for which cost burden is not computed.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
(CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release.
Special Needs Populations
California Government Code Section 65583 specifically requires an analysis of “any special
housing needs, such as those of the elderly, persons with disabilities, large families,
farmworkers, families with female heads of households, and families and persons in need of
60%68%
21%17%
19%14%
1,284 14,335
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Large Family 5+ persons All other household typesPercent of Households0%-30% of Income Used for Housing
31%-50% of Income Used for Housing
51%+ of Income Used for Housing
A-45
37
emergency shelter.” The following section provides an assessment of their general housing
needs.
Farmworkers
Farmworkers tend to earn relatively low wages and therefore often need affordable housing.
Farmworker housing has traditionally included temporary accommodations that provide beds
in group living quarters, but farmworkers may also require affordable permanent housing. This
is consistent with trends in many communities with large agricultural industries, in which
farmworkers are increasingly establishing permanent homes that are suitable for themselves
and their families in these communities, with a decrease in migrant workers that tend to live
alone while traveling for work. As a result, farmworkers often seek out the same type of
affordable housing as other lower-income households in these communities, including a
preference for housing that is close to schools and other amenities in more urban areas.
Farm Operations and Farm Labor
Statewide, farmworker housing is of unique concern and importance. While only a small share
of SCAG region jurisdictions has farmworkers living in them, they are essential to the region's
economy and food supply.
Los Angeles County has relatively small and declining farmworker employment; in 2017, the
County reported a total of 3,266 hired farmworkers, down from 7,393 in 2002. In contrast,
Ventura County reported 22,694 hired farmworkers in 2017.
Figure 23: Hired Farm Labor in Los Angeles County
Notes:
Universe: Hired farm workers (including direct hires and agricultural service workers who are often hired through labor
contractors)
4,777
2,616
3,627
1,5061,875 1,9501,749 1,517
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
Permanent SeasonalFarm Workers2002 2007 2012 2017
A-46
38
-Farm workers are considered seasonal if they work on a farm less than 150 days in a year, while farm workers who work
on a farm more than 150 days are considered to be permanent workers for that farm.
Source:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Census of Farmworkers (2002, 2007, 2012, 2017), Table 7: Hired Farm Labor
Rancho Palos Verdes reports no residents employed in farming, fishing, and forestry
occupations, reflecting the urbanized nature of land use in the City and surrounding
communities. There are a very small number of residents working in agriculture, forestry,
fishing, and hunting industries, but these workers are in non-agricultural occupations (e.g.,
managers).
Table 9: Number of Farmworkers by Occupation
Notes: Table is by worker place of residence, not by place of employment.
(a) Universe: Civilian employed population 16 years and over.
(b) Universe: Full-time, year-Round civilian employed population 16 years and over.
Sources: American Community Survey 2014-2018 5-year estimates, Tables S2401 and S2402; SCAG; BAE.
Table 10: Employment in the Agricultural Industry
Notes: Table is by worker place of residence, not by place of employment.
(a) Universe: Civilian employed population 16 years and over.
(b) Universe: Full-time, year-round civilian employed population 16 years and over.
Sources: American Community Survey 2014-2018 5-year estimates, Tables S2403 and S2404; SCAG; BAE.
Farmworker families also may bring students to a City who enroll, at least for a time, in local
schools, and the California Department of Education tracks their numbers. However, the Palos
Verdes Peninsula Unified School District, which covers Rancho Palos Verdes and nearby cities,
reports no migrant worker students in Rancho Palos Verdes or elsewhere in its district.
Farming, fishing, and forestry
occupations
Rancho
Palos
Verdes
% of Rancho Palos
Verdes Workers in
All Occupations
SCAG
Region
Total Workers (a)- 0%57,741
Full-time, Year-Round Workers (b)- 0%31,521
Workers in Agriculture, Forestry,
Fishing, and Hunting
Rancho
Palos
Verdes
% of Rancho Palos
Verdes Workers in
All Industries
SCAG
Region
Total Workers (a)7 0.04%73,778
Full-time, Year-Round Workers (b)7 0.53%43,442
A-47
39
Table 11: Migrant Worker Student Population
Notes:
Universe: Total number of unduplicated primary and short-term enrollments within the academic year (July 1 to June 30),
public schools
Rancho Palos Verdes is served by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District which serves all or part of three other
cities.
The data used for this table was obtained at the district level for Rancho Palos Verdes, and the county level for Los Angeles
County and the other counties making up the SCAG Region. The Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District reported
no children of migrant workers enrolled anywhere in the district. For the counties, data may exclude some areas due to
confidentiality restrictions applied to districts with 10 or less children in the category.
Source: California Department of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS),
Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020)
These findings show that affordable housing for farmworkers or farmworker families is not a
significant issue for Rancho Palos Verdes. The lack of resident farmworkers is linked to the
lack of agriculture rather than resulting from a lack of suitable affordable housing.
Large Families and Female -Headed Househ olds
Household Size by Tenure
Housing preferences are dictated in part by household size; single-person households will have
different housing preferences than large family households. Figure 24 illustrates the range of
household sizes in Rancho Palos Verdes for owners, renters, and overall. The most commonly
occurring household size is two people (36.8 percent) and the second-most commonly
occurring household is one person living alone (20.9 percent). Rancho Palos Verdes has a
lower share of single-person households than the SCAG region overall (20.9 percent vs. 23.4
percent) and a lower share of 7+ person households than the SCAG region overall (one
percent vs. 3.1 percent).
Geography 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
Rancho Palos Verdes 0 0 0 0
Los Angeles 3,792 3,641 3,658 3,903
SCAG Region 13,081 12,010 11,723 11,575
A-48
40
Figure 24: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Households by Tenure by Household Size
Sources: American Community Survey 2014-2018 5-year estimates, Table B25009; SCAG; BAE.
Household Size by Household Income Level
Large family households often require larger units to accommodate a larger number of family
members without experiencing overcrowding. Families with sufficient incomes are generally
able to find housing that meets their particular needs in the Rancho Palos Verdes market,
recognizing that most for-sale properties in the City are larger units with multiple bedrooms.
Approximately one-fifth of the City’s large family households have income below 100 percent
of AMI (see Figure 25). Given home values in Rancho Palos Verdes, these households with
more limited financial means can be expected to struggle to locate and secure adequate
rental housing due to the small number of larger rental units, or are in a position to overpay for
housing due to the need to secure a for-sale home that is large enough to suit their needs,
often at a significant expense.
Other types of households, which are generally smaller than the large-family households,
generally prefer or require smaller housing units. Approximately one-third of the households
that are non-large family households have incomes below 100 percent of AMI (note that AMI
levels are adjusted for household size). These households, often supported by a single worker,
may face limited financial resources for housing costs, and as a result, could face higher
housing cost burdens. Similarly, the for-sale housing stock is largely dominated by larger multi-
bedroom housing units, which often results in smaller households overconsuming housing
(i.e., occupying housing units which are larger than needed) at a comparatively higher cost. 76299768866828030024904740198519886361481613,2525,7372,6732,6569161781610.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7+Households (% by size category)Number of People per Household
Renter Owner Total
A-49
41
Figure 25: Household Size by Household Income Level
Female-Headed Households by Poverty Status
As reflected in Figure 26, only 2.2 percent of Rancho Palos Verdes households are
experiencing poverty, compared to 7.9 percent of households in the SCAG region. Poverty
thresholds, as defined by the ACS, vary by household type and size. In 2018, a single
individual under 65 was considered in poverty with a money income below $13,064 per year
while the threshold for a family consisting of 2 adults and 2 children was $25,465 per year.
Female--headed households are family households with a female householder without a
husband present. While the numbers are small, Rancho Palos Verdes does have female-
headed households living in poverty, and thus likely to be struggling with housing costs.
Figure 26 shows estimates of the number of female-headed households by poverty status in
2014-2018 for Rancho Palos Verdes. According to these data, there were approximately 900
female-headed households living in Rancho Palos Verdes, and about 375 had a child present.
2%8%6%
6%3%
10%9%
8%
81%
68%
1,279 14,494
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Large Families of 5+ Persons All other household typesPercent of Households0%-30% of AMI 31%-50% of AMI
51%-80% of AMI 81%-100% of AMI
Greater than 100% of AMI
A-50
42
While most of these households were above the poverty level, slightly more than 40 were
below the poverty level. For those without a child present in the household, 25 were estimated
to be below the poverty level.
Figure 26: Female-Headed Households by Poverty Status
Notes:
The Census Bureau uses a federally defined poverty threshold that remains constant throughout the country and does not
correspond to Area Median Income.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2014-2018), Table B17012
Seniors
Senior Households by Income and Tenure
According to Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data from 2013 to 2017
shown in Table 12, there were approximately 6,400 households in Rancho Palos Verdes with a
householder who is 62 years of age or older (“senior households”). The vast majority (88
percent) were owners, well above the already high overall ownership rate in the City. Senior
renters were more likely than owners to have below-median incomes; 56 percent of elderly
renter households had incomes below the area median, compared to only 41 percent of
renters. Senior households for both renters and owners had a higher proportion with lower
incomes than for all households in Rancho Palos Verdes (see Figure 5 above). Additionally,
seniors account for a disproportionate share of lower income households in the City; 41
percent of the City’s households have a householder 62 or older, but 57 percent of
households with incomes below 100 percent of AMI have a householder 62 or older.
378
488
42 25
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
with Children with No ChildrenHouseholds
Above Poverty Level Below Poverty Level
A-51
43
These findings show that elderly households make up a large percentage of Rancho Palos
Verdes households and an even larger percentage of lower income households, but it should
be noted that senior households, especially those that are owners, sometimes have
accumulated assets such that they do not rely solely on income to support all of their housing
costs. They may also have reduced housing costs if they no longer have a mortgage may have
a higher proportion of income available for rent due to lower expenditures for other needs
(e.g., lower medical expenditures due to Medicare coverage, no commute costs for work, no
childcare costs). In the Market Study Guidelines from the California Tax Credit Allocation
Committee and the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee,4 demand estimates for senior
affordable housing rental projects may assume demand based on the expenditure of up to 50
percent of income on gross rent.
Table 12: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Senior Households by Income and Tenure
Notes:
For the purposes of this table, senior households are those with a householder who is aged 62 or older.
-Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). The AMI levels in this chart are based on
the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
(CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2012-2016 release
Cost-Burdened Senior Households by Income Level
Table 13 indicates that overall, elderly households with income at or below area median in
Rancho Palos Verdes experience moderate and severe housing cost burdens similar to
households overall in the City. However, elderly renters at or below the 100 percent of AMI
level, while a small proportion of the income-limited senior households, appear to be much
more likely to experience severe housing cost burdens, with approximately 70 percent paying
more than 50 percent of their income for gross rent. This indicates that even allowing for a
higher proportion of income spent on rent, elderly renters on limited incomes in Rancho Palos
Verdes may face difficulty with housing affordability. In addition, over one-third of elderly
homeowner households in the City with incomes at or below 100 percent of AMI have severe
housing cost burdens.
4 2019 & 2020 Joint Market Study Guidelines, California Tax Credit Allocation Committee &California Debt Limit
Allocation Committee, https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/2021/market-study-guidelines.pdf, accessed May 11,
2021.
Income Category Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
< 30% HAMFI 535 9.5%140 17.7%675 10.5%
30-50% HAMFI 420 7.4%175 22.2%595 9.2%
50-80% HAMFI 690 12.2%75 9.5%765 11.9%
80-100% HAMFI 685 12.1%55 7.0%740 11.5%
> 100% HAMFI 3,315 58.7%345 43.7%3,660 56.9%
Total 5,645 100.0%790 100.0%6,435 100.0%
Owner Renter Total
A-52
44
Table 13: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Cost Burden by Tenure for Elderly
Households with Incomes Below the Area Median
Notes:
(a) “HAMFI” is the HUD Area Median Family Income for Los Angeles County.
(b) Households with minimal housing cost burden spend up to 30 percent of their gross household income on housing
expenses.
(c) Households with moderate housing cost burden spend more than 30 percent but less than or equal to 50 percent of their
gross household income on housing expenses.
(d) Households with severe housing cost burden spend more than 50 percent of their gross household income on h ousing
expenses.
(e) Totals do not equal the sum of individual figures due to independent rounding.
Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2013-2017 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
(CHAS) data; BAE, 2020.
People with Dis abilities, Including Developmental Disabilities
Disability data provide valuable context for assessing current and future need for accessible
housing units. People with disabilities face additional housing challenges. Encompassing a
broad group of individuals living with a variety of physical, cognitive, and sensory impairments,
many people with disabilities live on fixed incomes and need specialized care, yet often rely on
family members for assistance due to the high cost of care.
When it comes to housing, people with disabilities are not only in need of affordable housing
but also may need accessibly designed housing, which offers greater mobility and opportunity
for independence. Unfortunately, the need may outweigh what is available, particularly in a
housing market with high demand. People with disabilities are at a high risk for housing
insecurity, homelessness, and institutionalization, particularly when they lose aging caregivers.
Disability by Type
Figure 27 shows the estimated number of persons in Rancho Palos Verdes with various
disabilities that may impact their housing needs. Note that these disabilities are counted
separately and are not mutually exclusive (i.e., a resident may be counted in more than one
category, and some disability types are not recorded for children below a certain age), so
calculating disability as a percentage of total population may not be accurate. Except for
difficulties with vision, each of the other categories includes between 1,000 and 2,000
residents of the City.
Housing Cost Burden Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Minimal Cost Burden (b)79 17.1%1,115 49.7%1,194 44.1%
Moderate Cost Burden (c)55 11.9%330 14.7%385 14.2%
Severe Cost Burden (d)324 70.1%800 35.6%1,124 41.5%
Zero/Negative Income 4 0.9%0 0.0%4 0.1%
Total Households (e)470 100.0%2,270 100.0%2,740 100.0%
Renter Households Owner Households All Households
Elderly Households with Incomes ≤ 100% HAMFI (a)
A-53
45
Figure 27: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Resident Disability by Type
Notes:
These disabilities are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one
disability. These counts should not be summed.
The Census Bureau provides the following definitions for these disability types:
--Hearing difficulty: deaf or has serious difficulty hearing. Universe: Civilian noninstitutionalized population.
--Vision difficulty: blind or has serious difficulty seeing even with glasses. Universe: Civilian noninstitutionalized population.
--Cognitive difficulty: has serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions. Universe: Civilian
noninstitutionalized population 5 and older.
--Ambulatory difficulty: has serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs. Universe: Civilian noninstitutionalized population 5
and older.
--Self-care difficulty: has difficulty dressing or bathing. Universe: Civilian noninstitutionalized population 5 and older.
--Independent living difficulty: has difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor’s office or shopping. Universe:
Civilian noninstitutionalized population 18 and older.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2014-2018), Table B18102, Table B18103, Table
B18104, Table B18105, Table B18106, Table B18107.
Population by Disability Status
For Rancho Palos Verdes, approximately 4,100 of the City’s civilian noninstitutionalized
population (9.7 percent) are estimated to have one or more of the six disability types specified
above. As shown in Figure 28, this proportion is similar to the proportions for Los Angeles
County and the SCAG Region.
1,482
587
1,387
1,926
1,159
1,788
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500
Hearing
Vision
Cognitive
Ambulatory
Self-care
Independent Living
A-54
46
Figure 28: Population by Disability Status
Notes:
Universe: Civilian noninstitutionalized population
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2014-2018), Table B18101.
Developmental Disabilities by Age
State law also requires Housing Elements to examine the housing needs of people with
developmental disabilities. Developmental disabilities are defined as severe, chronic, and
attributed to a mental or physical impairment that begins before a person turns 18 years old.
This can include Down’s Syndrome, autism, epilepsy, cerebral palsy, and mild to severe
intellectual disabilities. Some people with developmental disabilities are unable to work, rely
on Supplemental Security Income, and live with family members. In Rancho Palos Verdes,
children under the age of 18 make up 48 percent and adults make up 52 percent of the
population with a developmental disability, as shown in Table 14.
90.3%90.1%89.9%
9.7%9.9%10.1%
42,201 10,030,450 18,636,402
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles County SCAG RegionPercent of Non-institutionalized populationNo disability With a disability
A-55
47
Table 14: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Age
Notes:
The California Department of Developmental Services provides data on developmental disabilities by age and type of
residence. These data are collected at the ZIP-code level and were joined to the jurisdiction-level by SCAG. Totals may
not match as counts below 11 individuals are unavailable and some entries were not matched to a ZIP code necessitating
approximation.
Source: CA DDS consumer count by CA ZIP, age group and residence type for the end of June 2019.
Population with Developmental Disabilities by Residence
In addition to their specific housing needs, persons with developmental disabilities are at
increased risk of housing insecurity if an aging parent or other family member is no longer able
to care for them. As shown in Table 15, the vast majority of persons in Rancho Palos Verdes
with developmental disabilities live in the homes of parents, other relatives, or legal guardians,
indicating this as an area of concern with respect to housing needs in the City.
Table 15: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Type of Residence for Persons with
Developmental Disabilities
Notes:
The California Department of Developmental Services provides data on developmental disabilities by age and type of
residence. These data are collected at the ZIP-code level and were joined to the jurisdiction-level by SCAG. Totals may
not match as counts below 11 individuals are unavailable and some entries were not matched to a ZIP code necessitating
approximation.
Source: CA DDS consumer count by CA ZIP, age group and residence type for the end of June 2019.
People Experiencing Homelessness
One of the biggest challenges facing the SCAG region is homelessness. SCAG evaluated data
from various city and county departments responsible for conducting 2019 homeless
population point-in-time counts.
According to HUD, a person is considered homeless only when he/she resides in one of the
places described below at the point-in-time of the count:
• An unsheltered homeless person resides in a place not meant for human habitation,
such as cars, parks, sidewalks, abandoned buildings, or on the street.
Age Number Percent
0 - 17 Years 196 48%
18+ Years 212 52%
Total 408 100%
Age Number Percent
Home of Parent/Family/Guardian 391 93%
Independent/Supported Living 5 1%
Community Care Facility 10 2%
Intermediate Care Facility - 0%
Foster/Family Home 10 2%
Other 5 1%
Total 421 100%
A-56
48
• A sheltered homeless person resides in an emergency shelter or transitional housing
for homeless persons who originally came from the streets or emergency shelters.
Homelessness by Shelter Status
According to the Housing Needs Assessment for the 5th Cycle Housing Element,
City staff and the County Sheriff’s Department occasionally see homeless persons as
they drive through the City. An average of twelve homeless persons are seen every
year. There are neither encampments nor homeless sleeping in the City parks or cars.
Consequently, there are no recurring long-term homeless persons in the City.
Emergency shelters are a permitted use in the Commercial Gen eral (CG) district. When
combined, the CG district totals 36.53 acres in size, all of which are currently
developed with no vacant properties. Emergency shelters are defined as follows:
Housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to
occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person. No individual or household may
be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay.
According to more current data provided by SCAG and summarized in Table 16, only one
unsheltered homeless person was located by the point-in-time count for Rancho Palos Verdes
in 2019, with no sheltered persons in the City.
Regionally, SCAG’s homeless compilation for 2019 showed more than 53,000 unsheltered
homeless persons and approximately 14,000 sheltered homeless persons in the SCAG region.
Based on the demographic profile of Rancho Palos Verdes, it is likely that few persons
currently living in the City are at risk of homelessness.
Table 16: Persons Experiencing Homelessness
Source: 2019 City and county homelessness point-in-time counts processed by SCAG. Jurisdiction-level counts were not
available in Imperial County and sheltered population (and thus total) counts were not available in Riverside County. As a
result, SCAG region totals from this compilation of data sources likely undercount true t otals.
Housing Preferences
The circumstances surrounding homelessness vary widely by household, but often include
economic hardship, alcohol or substance abuse, mental illness, and domestic violence, among
other potential contributing factors. Housing solutions naturally differ depending on cause and
the unique needs of the persons involved. Individuals with substance abuse problems may be
averse to rules and regulations that often accompany some transitional housing options.
Persons and families escaping domestic violence may seek more confidential transitional
housing.
Sheltered Unsheltered
Rancho Palos Verdes 0 1
SCAG Region 13,587 53,231
A-57
49
Extremely Low -Income Housing Needs
Households by Household Income Level
Rancho Palos Verdes has high household incomes relative to the County and the SCAG Region.
As shown in Figure 29, nearly 70 percent of the households have incomes greater than 100
percent of AMI levels, in contrast to only 39 percent in Los Angeles County and 43 percent for
the SCAG Region. However, there are still between 4,000 and 5,000 households below 100
percent AMI levels based on this analysis. While some of these may be asset-rich elderly
households, those without assets may have difficulty affording their current housing given
relatively high rents and house prices in Rancho Palos Verdes.
Figure 29: Households by Household Income Level
Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2013-2017 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
(CHAS) data; BAE, 2020.
Household Income Distribution by Race
Housing the extremely low-income population (below 30% of area median income) can be
especially challenging. HUD's CHAS dataset provides a wealth of information on such
7%
19%17%6%
15%13%10%
18%17%
8%
9%10%
69%
39%43%
15,780 3,295,200 5,970,780
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles County SCAGPercent of Households0%-30% of AMI 31%-50% of AMI
51%-80% of AMI 81%-100% of AMI
Greater than 100% of AMI
A-58
50
households in Rancho Palos Verdes. Table 17 below provides a breakdown of extremely low-
income households by race and ethnicity. The race/ethnicity with the highest share of
extremely low-income households in Rancho Palos Verdes is Hispanic (12.1 percent compared
to 7.1 percent of total population). In the SCAG region, the highest share of extremely low-
income households is Black, non-Hispanic (27.1 percent compared to 17.7 percent of total
households).
Table 17: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Extremely Low-Income Households by
Race and Ethnicity
Source: HUD CHAS, 2012-2016. HAMFI refers to Housing Urban Development Area Median Family Income.
Poverty Status by Race
Table 18 reports the prevalence of poverty by race and ethnicity in the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes between 2014 and 2018. Overall, poverty in Rancho Palos Verdes is low, at an overall
rate of 4.2 percent of the population; it is also low for most race/ethnicity categories in the
City, with most rates below five percent. The exception is for the Black population, who make
up 6.7 percent of the overall population in poverty, with a poverty rate of 15.9 percent. This is
still not above the overall level of 16.0 percent for Los Angeles County.
Race/Ethnicity
Total
Households
Households
below 30%
HAMFI
Share below
30% HAMFI
White, non-Hispanic 9,950 670 6.7%
Black, non-Hispanic 350 30 8.6%
Asian and other, non-Hispanic 4,406 289 6.6%
Hispanic 1,075 130 12.1%
Total 15,781 1,119 7.1%
A-59
51
Table 18: Poverty by Race and Ethnicity, City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 2014-2018
Notes:
(a) Includes only those residents for whom poverty status was determined.
(b) Non-Hispanic population by race not separated out except for Whites.
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2018 five-year sample period, Table S1701; BAE, 2020.
Opportunities for Energy Conservation
State law requires that the Housing Element evaluate opportunities for energy conservation.
At the community level, by planning to accommodate the City’s RHNA for new housing
development, identifying and removing governmental and non-governmental constraints to
housing production, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes can contribute to State goals for energy
conservation while also maintaining community quality of life. These actions, which will help to
provide an adequate supply of housing, will help to reduce long commutes in search of
affordable housing, while reducing traffic, energy use, and emissions. At the individual housing
unit level, the City can encourage energy conservation through administration of the building
code to ensure that new construction and renovation projects comply with State energy
efficiency requirements. With continuation of the 2013-2021 Housing Element’s Green
Building incentive program, the City can encourage residential development projects to exceed
standard energy efficiency requirements. Lower-income households can be affected by
residential energy costs, because they often live in older, less efficient housing units and the
increased energy usage translates to a need to spend a disproportionate amount of their
limited incomes on energy bills. The City can help to mitigate these effects if it is able to
identify new funding for a program to assist in retrofitting housing units occupied by lower-
income people to improve energy conservation.
Below Poverty Line (a)
Poverty % of All Races Total Population (a)
Race (b)Number Rate in Poverty Number Percent
White 1,011 4.2%57.2%24,310 57.8%
White Non-Hispanic 921 4.2%52.2%22,030 52.4%
Black or African American 118 15.9%6.7%740 1.8%
American Indian and Alaska Native 0 0.0%0.0%96 0.2%
Asian 493 3.8%27.9%13,017 31.0%
Native Hawaiian & Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0%0.0%317 0.8%
Some other race alone 35 3.4%2.0%1,016 2.4%
Two or more races 109 4.3%6.2%2,543 6.0%
Total, All Races 1,766 4.2%100.0%42,039 100.0%
Hispanic or Latino 125 3.3%7.1%3,759 8.9%
Not Hispanic or Latino 1,641 4.3%92.9%38,280 91.1%
Total, Hispanic & Non-Hispanic 1,766 4.2%100.0%42,039 100.0%
A-60
52
ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
With the adoption of AB 686, all Housing Elements completed January 1, 2019 or later must
include a program that promotes and affirmatively furthers fair housing throughout the
community for all persons, regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national
origin, color, familial status, disability, or any other characteristics that are protected by the
California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Government code Section 65008, and all
other applicable State and federal fair housing and planning laws. Under State law,
affirmatively furthering 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.”5
The law also requires that all Housing Elements completed as of January 1, 2021 or later
include an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) that is consistent with the core elements of the
federal Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Final Rule from July 2015. The following
subsection summarizes key findings from the Assessment of Fair Housing, which was
completed in accordance with current HCD guidance regarding the application of the new
AB686 requirements, as well as a detailed reading of the California Government Code.6
The main sources of information for the following analysis are the U.S. Census Decennial
Census and ACS, the HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Resources Tool, the California Department
of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), HUD Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
(FHEO), the State Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC), and the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes.
Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach
Fair housing complaints can be used as an indicator of the overall magnitude of housing
complaints, and to identify characteristics of households experiencing discrimination in
housing. Pursuant to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act [Government Code
Section 12921 (a)], the opportunity to seek, obtain, and hold housing cannot be determined
by an individual’s “race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual
orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income,
disability, veteran or military status, genetic information, or any other basis prohibited by
Section 51 of the Civil Code.” Federal Law also prohibits many kinds of housing
discrimination.
5 California Government Code § 8899.5 (a)(1)
6 Olmstead, Z. (April 23, 2020). AB 686 Summary of Requirements in Housing Element Law Government Code
Section 8899.50, 65583(c)(5), 65583(c)(10), 65583.2(a).
A-61
53
Housing discrimination complaints can be directed to either HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and
Equal Opportunity (FHEO) or the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing
(DFEH).
Fair housing issues that may arise in any jurisdiction include but are not limited to:
• housing design that makes a dwelling unit inaccessible to an individual with a
disability;
• discrimination against an individual based on race, national origin, familial status,
disability, religion, sex, or other characteristic when renting or selling a housing unit;
• and, disproportionate housing needs including cost burden, overcrowding,
substandard housing, and risk of displacement.
Very few complaints have been filed with FHEO over housing discrimination in Rancho Palos
Verdes in recent years. From 2013 through 2020, only three complaints were recorded, as
shown below; one of these complaints was dismissed for lack of cause. For all of Los Angeles
County, approximately 2,000 complaints were filed; 1,177 were dismissed for lack of cause.
Table 19: FHEO Fair Housing Complaints by Resolution Type, 2013 to 2020
Sources: HUD, Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, 2020; BAE, 2020.
In addition to data from the FHEO, this analysis also reviewed data from the California
Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH). As reported in Table 20, there were only
four fair housing complaints filed with the DFEH between 2018 and 2021 to date (as of
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Total,Percent
Resolution 2013-2020 of Total
Conciliated/Settled 2 66.7%
No Cause 1 33.3%
Withdrawal Without Resolution 0 0.0%
FHAP Judicial Consent Order 0 0.0%
Failed to Cooperate 0 0.0%
Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction 0 0.0%
Subtotal, All Complaints 3 100.0%
Los Angeles County
Total,Percent
Resolution 2013-2020 of Total
Conciliated/Settled 647 31.8%
No Cause 1,177 57.8%
Withdrawal Without Resolution 150 7.4%
FHAP Judicial Consent Order 2 0.1%
Failed to Cooperate 60 2.9%
Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction 0 0.0%
Subtotal, All Complaints 2,036 100.0%
A-62
54
August 2021) in Rancho Palos Verdes. Of those, three were related to disabilities and one
regarding family status. One complaint was withdrawn by the complainant without resolution,
one resulted in conciliation and a successful settlement, and two were determined to be
without cause and dismissed.
Table 20: DFEH Fair Housing Complaints in Rancho Palos Verdes by Class,
Practice and Resolution Type, 2018-2021
Note:
(a) Each complaint may involve more than one basis type or discriminatory practices, but there is only one resolution per
complaint.
Sources: California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, 2021; BAE, 2021.
Cit y of Rancho Palos Verdes Fair Housing Services
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes contracts with the Housing Rights Center (HRC) for fair
housing services. The HRC provides assistance with monitoring and enforcing fair housing
rights for residents of all of Los Angeles County including Rancho Palos Verdes, as well as all of
Ventura County. Services provided include landlord tenant counseling, outreach and
education, and discrimination investigation. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes publicizes fair
housing services on its website (http://www.rpvca.gov/899/Housing-Programs-Services) and
also provides hard copy brochures regarding available fair housing services in the Community
Development Department lobby.
HRC does direct outreach and works with partners to ensure an active presence in Rancho
Palos Verdes and surrounding communities. The agency distributes educational literature,
conducts tenant and landlord workshops, takes/makes referrals, participates in resource fairs
or community events, and otherwise collaborates with organizations including the South Bay
Literacy Council, St. Margaret’s Center, the South Bay Center for Dispute Resolution, Harbor
Community Health Centers, and more. HRC staff attend SPA 8 meetings to maintain and
Total,Percent
Basis Type (a)All Years of Total
Disability 3 75.0%
Familial Status 1 25.0%
Total, All Complaints 4 100.0%
Discriminatory Practice (a)
Denied rental/lease/sale 1 25.0%
Denied reasonable accommodation 1 25.0%
Denied equal terms and conditions 2 50.0%
Total, All Practices 4 100.0%
Resolution
Complaint Withdrawn by Complainant Without
Resolution 1 25.0%
Conciliation/Settlement Successful 1 25.0%
No Cause Determination 2 50.0%
Total, All Resolutions 4 100%
A-63
55
develop these relationships, and they run regionally targeted multilingual advertisements in
news media such as El Clasificado. Since March 2020, HRC has had to shift to remote
services. HRC currently offers four free online workshops per week on fair housing, COVID-19
tenant protections and resources, and other important topics in English and Spanish. These
workshops cover local Los Angeles County information and are watched on social media by
anywhere from 30 to several hundred people.
If the City receives a fair housing complaint from an existing or prospective resident, the City
will direct the involved party to HRC for further consideration and analysis. According to HRC,
the organization received 33 inquiries about housing issues in the City of Ranch Palos Verdes
over the 7-1-2018 to 6-30-2021 time period. Table 21 is a summary of the number of
complaints during this time, and the nature of the complaints.
Table 21: Housing Rights Center Inquiries, Rancho Palos Verdes, 7/1/2018-
6/30/2021
Source: Housing Rights Center, 2021
These data indicate that fair housing issues are not a widespread problem in Rancho Palos
Verdes. According to staff from HRC, most of the inquiries are from people seeking information
and general assistance, and only three of these inquiries resulted in discrimination
investigations. The agency was able to resolve the three discrimination investigations by
providing counseling and information.
According to the agency, complaints from Rancho Palos Verdes to HRC increased in the first
half of the last decade but have remained fairly steady for the second half. All discrimination
cases during this time were on the basis of mental or physical disability, particularly the refusal
to grant reasonable accommodations, which is consistently a top issue regionally and
nationally as well. While the inquiries originate from a fairly distributed area, there was a slight
cluster in the area bounded by Golden Meadow Dr. to the west and Highridge Blvd. to the east.
Complaint/Inquiry Type Number
Eviction 2
Harassment 1
Illegal Entry 1
L/T General Information 5
Lease Terms 2
Mental Disability 1
Notices 5
Other Issue 1
Physical Disability 2
Rent Increase 1
Repairs 2
Seeking Housing 4
Substandard Conditions 6
Total 33
A-64
56
This is an area that includes a significant number of single-family homes and is also a location
where a portion of Rancho Palos Verdes’ multifamily-housing is located.
Integration and Segregation Patterns and Trends
Race and Ethni c ity
As noted above, Rancho Palos Verdes shows a race and ethnicity mix quite different than the
County overall. Slightly more than half of the 2014-2018 population was White Non-Hispanic,
nearly one-third was Asian Non-Hispanic, and nine percent was Hispanic, while countywide the
largest group was the Hispanic population at nearly half (48.5 percent) of the total, with
slightly over one-quarter White Non-Hispanic, 14 percent Asian Non-Hispanic, and eight
percent Black Non-Hispanic. Non-Hispanic Whites, Non-Hispanic Asians, persons of two or
more races, and of Hispanic persons of all races, are the only groups that make up more than
two percent of the population of Rancho Palos Verdes.
Historic Patterns of Racial Discrim ination
As shown above in Figure 11, virtually all of the housing in Rancho Palos Verdes was built after
1950. This was after racially restrictive housing covenants were struck down by the US
Supreme Court in 1948. The City was not incorporated until 1973.
In 1980 following incorporation, the City was nearly three-fourths White non-Hispanic (see
Table 22), with non-Hispanic Asian and Pacific Islanders making up the largest minority
population with 20 percent of the City’s population. Since 1980, the White non-Hispanic
population has been in decline, with the non-Hispanic Asian Pacific Islander population and
the Hispanic population showing strong growth. The non-Hispanic Black population has not
changed substantially, at between 1.8 and 2.4 percent over the 1980 to 2018 period. The
non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native population has declined but has been a very
small portion of the City’s overall population since 1980 (less than 0.5 percent). In summary,
while the population of the City was still majority non-Hispanic White as of the 2014-2018 ACS
period, the City has grown more diverse over time.
One ethnic group present on the Palos Verdes Peninsula well before the City was incorporated
was a community of Japanese farmers, who established numerous farms in the area
beginning in the early 1900s, with the farms concentrated in the Portuguese Bend area. In
what has come to be seen as a racist act, these families were removed from their community
to internment camps at the beginning of World War II, and only a few returned after the war.
Over time, housing and other uses replaced the farms, with the last small farm plots reportedly
shut down in 2012 after the last remaining farmer died. 7
7 For more on the Japanese farm community, see https://maureenmegowan.com/last-palos-verdes-peninsula-
japanese-farmer/, https://patch.com/california/palosverdes/palos-verdes-and-south-bay-japanese-farmers, and
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-jan-01-la-me-photo-story1-2010jan01-story.html.
A-65
57
Table 22: Rancho Palos Verdes Race by Ethnicity, 1980 to 2014-2018
Note: The Census Bureau has changed how it gathers race and Hispanic origin data over time, so findings about trends
should be noted with caution. Especially significant was the addition in 2000 of the respondents’ ability to specify more than
one race; this change is evidenced by the sharp increase in the "other" category, between 1990 and 2000, as it incl udes
persons of two or more races starting in 2000.
(a) For 1980 and 1990, this category consists of persons of some other race alone. Beginning in 2000, it also includes
persons of two or more races.
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 1980, 1990, and 2000 Decennial Census; American Community Survey, 2014-2018 five-
year sample data, B03002, BAE, 2020.
Dissimilarity Index
One of two key metrics recommended for use in fair housing analysis as part of the federal
AFFH rule is the dissimilarity index. This index measures the evenness with which two groups
are distributed across the geographic units that make up a larger area, such as Census block
groups within a City. The index can range from zero to 100, with zero meaning no segregation,
or spatial disparity, and 100 indicating complete segregation between the two groups. The
index score can be interpreted as the percentage of one of the two groups that would have to
Number
1980 1990 2000 2010 Change 1980
Not Hispanic nor Latino by Race Number Number Number Number Number to 2014-18
White 30,910 30,063 25,979 23,323 22,121 -8,789
Black or African American 705 771 803 988 754 49
American Indian and Alaska Native 102 92 40 54 65 -37
Asian/Pacific Islander 3,678 8,478 10,682 12,037 13,296 9,618
Other (a)87 40 1,302 1,685 2,242 2,155
Total, Not Hispanic nor Latino 35,482 39,444 38,806 38,087 38,478 2,996
Hispanic or Latino 1,095 2,215 2,339 3,556 3,793 2,698
Total, All Races 36,577 41,659 41,145 41,643 42,271 5,694
Percent
1980 1990 2000 2010 Change 1980
Not Hispanic nor Latino by Race Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent to 2014-18
White 84.5%72.2%63.1%56.0%52.3%-28.4%
Black or African American 1.9%1.9%2.0%2.4%1.8%7.0%
American Indian and Alaska Native 0.3%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.2%-36.3%
Asian/Pacific Islander 10.1%20.4%26.0%28.9%31.5%261.5%
Other (a)0.2%0.1%3.2%4.0%5.3%2477.0%
Total, Not Hispanic nor Latino 97.0%94.7%94.3%91.5%91.0%8.4%
Hispanic or Latino 3.0%5.3%5.7%8.5%9.0%246.4%
Total, All Races 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%15.6%
2014-2018
2014-2018
A-66
58
move to produce an even distribution. An index score above 55 is considered high, while 40 to
55 is considered moderate, and below 40 is considered low.8
The sub-city analysis, including the calculation of both the dissimilarity and isolation indexes,
relies on the use of block group and Census tract level data from the U.S. Census Bureau.
While the block groups and Census tracts selected cover all of Rancho Palos Verdes, the block
groups and tracts selected also include small areas of Rolling Hills Estates and Lomita. The
calculations summarized below necessarily reflect the characteristics of entire block groups
and tracts, including the portions of those block groups and tracts that extend beyond the City
limits. Note that the City maps only highlight the portions of the block groups and tracts within
Ranch Palos Verdes.
Rancho Palos Verdes shows high variability between index scores by race/ethnicity (see Table
23). For the 2014 through 2018 period, the scores range from 28.0 for non-Hispanic persons
of two or more races to 96.9 for non-Hispanic persons of some other race alone. It should be
noted that, as discussed above, several minority groups make up a very small proportion of
the City’s population; their higher dissimilarity index scores in part may reflect segregation
resulting from their limited numbers. Most of the groups show an increase in the dissimilarity
index between 2010 and the 2014 through 2018 period, due in part to a decline in the non-
Hispanic White population, but the index is particularly sensitive to the changes for the
minorities with very small populations in the City.
Table 23: Dissimilarity Index, City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 2010 and 2014-2018
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Decennial Census, Table P9, ACS 2014-2018 five-year sample data, Table B03002;
BAE, 2020.
8 Cloud Nine Technologies and Brent Mast, (2017). Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool
(AFFH-T) Data Documentation. HUD Office of Policy Development and Research, and Massey, D.S. and N.A. Denton.
(1993). American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Dissimilarity Index Score
Not Hispanic nor Latino by Race 2010 2014-2018
Black or African American alone 23.9 41.9
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 35.7 88.2
Asian alone 25.6 28.9
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 47.7 74.4
Some other race alone 26.7 96.9
Two or more races 11.0 28.0
Hispanic or Latino 19.3 30.6
A-67
59
Isolation Index
The other key metric recommended under the federal AFFH rule is the Isolation Index, which
compares a group’s share of the overall population to the average share within a given block
group. Ranging from 0 to 1, the isolation index represents the percentage of residents of a
given race or ethnicity in a block group where the average resident of that group lives,
correcting for the fact that this number increases mechanically with that group’s share of the
overall Citywide population. Using Hispanic or Latino residents as an example, an aggregate
isolation index of 0.16 indicates that the average Hispanic or Latino resident lives in a block
group where the Hispanic or Latino share of the population exceeds the overall Citywide
average by roughly 16 percent. Isolation index values that equal close to zero indicate that
members of that minority group live in relatively integrated neighborhoods. 9 10
Table 24 summarizes isolation index scores by racial and ethnic minority affiliation. The data
indicate that most racial and ethnic subpopulations live in areas with relatively high degrees of
racial and ethnic integration, with the exception of non-Hispanic White and Asian residents.
Non-Hispanic Whites, the majority single race/ethnic group in Rancho Palos Verdes, also have
the highest isolation index score. Asian non-Hispanics make up the second largest race/ethnic
group in the City, and also show the second highest isolation index score. The isolation indexes
showed very limited change over the 2010 to 2014-2018 period; thus, the metric does not
indicate increasing isolation over time by race/ethnicity in Rancho Palos Verdes.
Table 24: Isolation Index, City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 2010 and 2014-2018
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Decennial Census, Table P9, ACS 2014-2018 five-year sample data, Table B03002;
BAE, 2021.
Geographic Distribution of Residents by Race and Ethni c ity
Figure 30 through Figure 38 below illustrate the geographic concentrations of the overall non-
White population and the populations of non-Hispanic White, Asian, non-Hispanic persons of
9 HUD. (2013). AFFH Data Documentation. Available at: http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/pdf/FR-
5173-P-01_AFFH_data_documentation.pdf
10 Glaeser, E. and Vigdor, J. (2001). Racial Segregation in the 2000 Census: Promising News. Washington, DC:
The Brookings Institution, Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. Available at:
http://www.brookings.edu/es/urban/census/glaeser.pdf
Isolation Index
Racial and/or Ethnic Group 2010 2014-2018
Non-Hispanic White 0.58 0.55
Black or African American alone 0.04 0.04
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0.00 0.01
Asian alone 0.34 0.38
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0.00 0.03
Some other race alone 0.00 0.03
Two or more races 0.04 0.07
Hispanic or Latino 0.11 0.16
A-68
60
two or more races, and Hispanic or Latino residents by Census block group, for both Rancho
Palos Verdes and the entirety of Los Angeles County. As shown above in Table 4, no other race
category makes up more than five percent of the City’s population. Countywide, the
distribution is somewhat different, with the Hispanic/Latino population making up nearly half
the total, with the non-Hispanic White population at about only one-fourth of the total
population. The Asian population is a smaller proportion than in the City, and Black persons
constitutes slightly less than eight percent of the County total.
While approximately half of the City population overall is White Non-Hispanic, the proportion of
the total population of other race/ethnic groups varies considerably by Census block group, as
shown in Figure 30, ranging from 28 percent to 68 percent. Correspondingly, the percentage
of White non-Hispanic persons ranges from 32 percent to 72 percent (see Figure 32).
Countywide, the proportion of White non-Hispanic persons by block group varies from zero to
100 percent, and as a result, the percentage of other race/ethnic groups also varies from zero
to 100 percent (see Figure 31 and Figure 33). The lowest concentrations of the White non-
Hispanic population tend to be in the City of Los Angeles and other urbanized areas of the
County.
Non-Hispanic Asians make up the second-largest race/ethnic group in Rancho Palos Verdes
and the third-largest group in Los Angeles County, at approximately 30 percent of the total
population in the City and 14 percent in the County. By block group in Rancho Palos Verdes,
the concentration of this group ranges from 11 percent to slightly more than 50 percent (see
Figure 34). In the County, the concentration ranges from zero percent to slightly above 90
percent (see Figure 35). The highest concentrations are in the San Gabriel Valley.
The next largest minority population in the City is the Hispanic or Latino population, at slightly
below ten percent of the City total, as shown in Figure 36. This group is most concentrated in
the northeast corner of the City, where four block groups have populations that are 15 percent
or more of Hispanic origin. Countywide, there are areas with a much higher concentration of
the Hispanic of Latino population, with the proportions at 90 percent or greater in over eight
percent of the county’s block groups. The highest concentrations are generally in eastern Los
Angeles County and to the east in the upper San Gabriel Valley (see Figure 37).
The final maps presented in this section (Figure 38 and Figure 39) are for the non-Hispanic
population of two or more races; this is the only other race category with a substantial
population in Rancho Palos Verdes. This group is scattered throughout the City, with the
proportion by block group only ranging from 3.2 percent to 6.6 percent. For Los Angeles
County, the concentrations by block group are 10 percent or less except for a few block groups
with almost no population. The highest concentrations tend to be in the less urban portions of
the County.
A-69
61
Figure 30: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-White, Rancho Palos Verdes
Note: Includes all categories except non-White non-Hispanic persons.
Source: Esri 2018.
A-70
62
Figure 31: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-White, Los Angeles County
Note: Includes all categories except non-White non-Hispanic persons.
Source: Esri 2018.
A-71
63
Figure 32: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic White, Rancho Palos Verdes
Source: Esri 2018.
A-72
64
Figure 33: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic White, Los Angeles County
Source: Esri 2018.
A-73
65
Figure 34: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic Asian, Rancho Palos Verdes
Source: Esri 2018.
A-74
66
Figure 35: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic Asian, Los Angeles County
Source: Esri 2018.
A-75
67
Figure 36: Census Block Groups by Percent Hispanic or Latino, Rancho Palos Verdes
Source: Esri 2018.
A-76
68
Figure 37: Census Block Groups by Percent Hispanic or Latino, Los Angeles County
Source: Esri 2018.
A-77
69
Figure 38: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic Persons of Two or More Races, Rancho Palos Verdes
Source: Esri 2018.
A-78
70
Figure 39: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-Hispanic Persons of Two or More Races, Los Angeles County
Source: Esri 2018.
A-79
71
Persons with a Disability
As shown in Figure 28 and discussed previously, approximately 4,100 persons in the civilian
noninstitutionalized population (9.7 percent) in Rancho Palos Verdes are estimated to have
one or more of the six disability types specified in Figure 27. This proportion is similar to the
proportions for Los Angeles County and the SCAG Region.
Figure 40 shows the percent of persons with a disability by Census tract in the City using ACS
data from 2015-2019. The one tract with the highest proportion of persons with a disability
contains two senior living developments that likely account for this higher proportion of
persons with a disability.
As shown in Figure 41, Census tracts with high proportions of disabled persons are scattered
throughout Los Angeles County. Less than 1.4 percent of tracts show 20 percent or more of
the population with one or more disability.
While disabled persons may face difficulty finding suitable housing in the City and elsewhere,
these findings do not indicate any geographic pattern of housing discrimination for disabled
persons in Rancho Palos Verdes.
A-80
72
Figure 40: Population with a Disability by Census Tract, Rancho Palos Verdes
Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-81
73
Figure 41: Population with a Disability by Census Tract, Los Angeles County
Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-82
74
Familial Status
Rancho Palos Verdes has a high proportion of married-couple households compared to Los
Angeles County and the SCAG Region, with over two-thirds of households reporting as married-
couple families compared to less than half for the County and the Region (see Figure 7 above).
Most children in Rancho Palos Verdes live in married-couple households. By Census tract,
between 80 percent and 100 percent of children reside in married-couple households (as
shown in Figure 42), indicating no areas within the City with a concentration of children in
single-parent or other non-married couple households. For Los Angeles County overall, there
are numerous tracts with less than 50 percent of children living in a married-couple
household; these tracts are most prevalent in the City of Los Angeles (see Figure 43).
Figure 44 shows the local distribution by tract of the percent of children in female-headed
households with no spouse or partner present, with the proportion of children in this type of
households ranging from none to 17 percent. The highest concentration is found in a single
tract and three other tracts show concentrations between 10 and 14 percent. Some of the Los
Angeles County tracts with an extremely high proportion of children in single-parent
households with a female householder are in areas just to the east of Rancho Palos Verdes
(as shown in Figure 45).
The high proportions of married-couple households with children in Rancho Palos Verdes in
large part reflects the predominance of single-family detached houses in the City. Although the
low proportion of single-parent households does not indicate a distinct fair housing issue, the
small number of female-headed households is likely the result of the limited supply of housing
in Rancho Palos Verdes that is affordable for single-headed, single-income households with
children.
A-83
75
Figure 42: Percent of Children in Married-Couple Households, 2015-2019, Rancho Palos Verdes
Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-84
76
Figure 43: Percent of Children in Married-Couple Households, 2015-2019, Los Angeles County
Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-85
77
Figure 44: Percent of Children in Single-Female Headed Households, Rancho Palos Verdes
Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-86
78
Figure 45: Percent of Children in Single-Female Headed Households, Los Angeles County
Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-87
79
Income
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes shows high household incomes relative to Los Angeles County
overall. As shown in Table 25, for the 2014-2018 ACS survey period the median annual
household income in Rancho Palos Verdes, at $133,286 was over twice that of the County.
Only 8.6 percent of the City’s households reported incomes below $25,000, in contrast to
19.9 percent for the County. For the upper end of the income scale, 44.5 percent of the City’s
households had incomes of $150,000 or more, while only 16.6 percent of Los Angeles
County’s households had income in that range.
Table 25: Household Income Distribution and Median Income, 2014-2018
Notes:
Incomes are in 2018 dollars.
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2014-2018 five-year sample period, B19001 and S1903; BAE,
2021.
Figure 46 below shows the geographic distribution of households by median annual household
income by block group in Rancho Palos Verdes. The lowest median income by block group is
slightly more than $75,000, and the highest is over $250,000. The highest medians are
clustered in three block groups in the eastern part of the City, but the whole City has relatively
high median incomes. Countywide, median annual household incomes fall across a much
Rancho Palos Verdes
Household Income Number Percent
Less than $14,999 667 4.3%
$15,000 to $24,999 673 4.3%
$25,000 to $34,999 711 4.6%
$35,000 to $49,999 686 4.4%
$50,000 to $74,999 1,661 10.7%
$75,000 to $99,999 1,471 9.4%
$100,000 to $149,999 2,777 17.8%
$150,000 and above 6,927 44.5%
Total Households 15,573 100.0%
Median Household Income
Los Angeles County
Household Income Number Percent
Less than $14,999 361,072 10.9%
$15,000 to $24,999 296,864 9.0%
$25,000 to $34,999 282,438 8.5%
$35,000 to $49,999 386,040 11.7%
$50,000 to $74,999 534,611 16.2%
$75,000 to $99,999 396,793 12.0%
$100,000 to $149,999 500,603 15.1%
$150,000 and above 547,688 16.6%
Total Households 3,306,109 100.0%
Median Household Income
2014-2018
$133,286
2014-2018
$64,251
A-88
80
broader range, from less than $10,000 to more than $200,000. As shown in Figure 47, the
lower incomes were concentrated in City of Los Angeles, with the higher incomes along the
coast and in peripheral areas of the County.
Figure 48 displays additional information regarding income levels in Rancho Palos Verdes by
showing the percentage of low- to moderate-income households by Census tract. The
percentage by tract ranges from 13 percent to 28 percent, with the higher percentages in the
Census tracts associated with the lower median income areas of the City shown in Figure 46.
Los Angeles County shows a broader range, with the percentage of low- to moderate-income
households by tract ranging from zero to 100 percent. As shown in Figure 49, the largest
cluster of tracts where 75 percent or more of the households fall in this category are found in
City of Los Angeles and nearby urbanized areas.
As shown in Figure 50, which displays poverty status by Census tract in the City, the
percentage of population in poverty ranges from 1.8 percent to 7.6 percent, indicating that
while the population in poverty is limited, there are persons living in poverty in Rancho Palos
Verdes. The highest concentrations are in the tracts bordering the Pacific Ocean. It should be
noted that some of these persons may be elderly who are income-poor but asset rich. As might
be expected, the County contains substantial areas with a higher proportion of the population
in poverty, ranging up to almost 80 percent for those tracts with a population of 500 or more
persons. The higher-poverty tracts tended to be found in City of Los Angeles and nearby
urbanized areas, mirroring the distribution of low- and moderate-income tracts.
.
A-89
81
Figure 46: Distribution of Median Income by Block Group, Rancho Palos Verdes
Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-90
82
Figure 47: Distribution of Median Income by Block Group, Los Angeles County
Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-91
83
Figure 48: Percent of Low to Moderate Income Households by Census Tract, Rancho Palos Verdes
Sources: HUD; U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2011-2015 data.
A-92
84
Figure 49: Percent of Low to Moderate Income Households by Census Tract, Los Angeles County
Sources: HUD; U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2011-2015 data.
A-93
85
Figure 50: Poverty Status, Rancho Palos Verdes
Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-94
86
Figure 51: Poverty Status, Los Angeles County
Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-95
87
Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty
The overall poverty rates by race for Rancho Palos Verdes are discussed above and are shown
in Table 18. To assist communities in identifying racially and ethnically concentrated areas of
poverty (also known as RCAPs and ECAPs), HUD developed a definition that relies on a racial
and ethnic concentration threshold, as well as a poverty test. The racial and ethnic
concentration threshold requires that an RCAP or ECAP have a non-White population of 50
percent or more. The poverty test defines areas of “extreme poverty” as those where 40
percent or more of the population lives at or below the federal poverty line, or those where the
poverty rate is three times the average poverty rate in the metropolitan area, whichever is less.
Based on these criteria, there are no R/ECAP areas in Rancho Palos Verdes.
Echoing the distributions by poverty status and low- and moderate-income households, the
R/ECAP Census tracts countywide are for the most part concentrated in the City of Los
Angeles, with a few other nodes scattered throughout the County (see Figure 52).
A-96
88
Figure 52: Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty, Los Angeles County
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2014-2018 five-year sample data; HUD; BAE, 2020
A-97
89
Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence
R/ECAPs show one side of concentrations by race and wealth. On the other side are “areas of
affluence” where non-minority affluent populations are concentrated. HCD devised a measure
which calls out Census tracts with relatively high concentrations of both White population and
higher household incomes, as detailed in the HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool. These areas
are designated as “Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence,” or RCAAs.
As shown in Figure 53, there is one Census tract that is partially in Rancho Palos Verdes and
several others nearby that are categorized as RCAAs, due to high household incomes and
relatively high concentrations of White persons. Not surprisingly, this tract includes much of
the area of the City with high concentrations of non-Hispanic Whites as shown in Figure 30,
and the highest median incomes as shown in Figure 46.
Elsewhere in the County, the largest concentration of RCAAs is in populated areas in the west
and near the coast, including parts of Malibu, Santa Monica, City of Los Angeles, and some
nearby unincorporated areas, as shown in Figure 54.
A-98
90
Figure 53: Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence, Rancho Palos Verdes
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data; HCD; HUD.
A-99
91
Figure 54: Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence, Los Angeles County
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data; HCD; HUD.
A-100
92
Disparities in Access to Opportunity
AB 686 requires the needs assessment to include an analysis of access to opportunities. To
facilitate this assessment, HCD and the State Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC)
convened an independent group of organizations and research institutions under the umbrella
of the California Fair Housing Task Force, which produces an annual set of Opportunity Maps.
The maps identify areas within every region of the state “whose characteristics have been
shown by research to support positive economic, educational, and health outcomes for low-
income families – particularly long-term [positive] outcomes for children.”11
TCAC and HCD created these “Opportunity Maps,” using reliable and publicly available data
sources to derive 21 indicators to calculate opportunity index scores for Census tracts in each
region in California. The TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map categorizes Census tracts into five groups
based on the opportunity index scores:
• Highest Resource
• High Resource
• Moderate Resource/Moderate Resource (Rapidly Changing)
• Low Resource
• High Segregation & Poverty
Before an area receives an opportunity index score, Census tracts are filtered into the High
Segregation & Poverty category. The filter identifies Census tracts where at least 30 percent of
population is below the federal poverty line and there is a disproportionate share of
households of color. After filtering out High Segregation and Poverty areas, the TCAC/HCD
Opportunity Map allocates the 20 percent of tracts in each region with the highest relative
opportunity index scores to the Highest Resource designation and the next 20 percent to the
High Resource designation. The remaining non-filtered tracts are then evenly divided into Low
Resource and Moderate Resource categories.
As illustrated in Figure 55, all tracts within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are identified as
being at the Highest Resource level. This indicates that these Census tracts are among the top
20 percent in the Los Angeles Region for access to resources and indicates no disparities in
opportunity within the City. Relative to Los Angeles County overall, Rancho Palos Verdes has
higher opportunity and greater access to resources for its residents. The County’s highest
resource tracts tend to be in communities extending north and west from Rancho Palos
Verdes, with the low resource areas concentrated in City of Los Angeles and urbanized areas
near that city (see Figure 56).
11 California Fair Housing Task Force. December 2020. Methodology for the 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map.
Available at: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity/2021-hcd-methodology.pdf
A-101
93
Figure 55: 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map by Census Tract, Rancho Palos Verdes
Sources: California Tax Credit Allocation Committee; HCD; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2014-2018 five-year sample data; BAE, 2021.
A-102
94
Figure 56: 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map by Census Tract, Los Angeles County
Sources: California Tax Credit Allocation Committee; HCD; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2014-2018 five-year sample data; BAE, 2021.
A-103
95
Access to Education
One of the factors used as part of the Opportunity Index discussed previously is education.
The Opportunity Index considers three education criteria in equal measure: math proficiency
for 4th graders, reading proficiency for 4th graders, high school graduation rates, and the
student poverty rate, to create an “Education Domain” score ranging from 0 to 1 for each
Census tract (or in some cases, rural block group), with a higher score representing better
educational opportunities.12
Figure 57 shows the Education Domain scores for subareas of Rancho Palos Verdes. Most of
Rancho Palos Verdes shows high scores, with a score above 80 percent for most of the City.
This is another measure likely associated with the City’s higher incomes, higher education
levels, and other key socioeconomic factors.
As illustrated in Figure 58, the level of the scores across the County tend to mirror the scores
of the overall Opportunity Index, with high scores along the coast and in areas to the north and
west of Rancho Palos Verdes, and low scores in the more urban core of City of Los Angeles and
associated urbanized areas.
12 The methodology for this can be found in https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity/2021-hcd-
methodology.pdf.
A-104
96
Figure 57: TCAC Education Domain Score, Rancho Palos Verdes
Sources: California Tax Credit Allocation Committee; HCD, 2021; BAE, 2021.
A-105
97
Figure 58: TCAC Education Domain Score, Los Angeles County
Sources: California Tax Credit Allocation Committee; HCD, 2021; BAE, 2021.
A-106
98
Access to Employment
For AFFH reports, HUD has developed the Jobs Proximity Index as a way to measure access to
employment. As stated by HUD:
The Jobs Proximity Index quantifies the accessibility of a given residential neighborhood
(Census Block Group) as a function of its distance to all job locations within a CBSA, with
larger employment centers weighted more heavily.
The jobs proximity index quantifies the accessibility of a given residential neighborhood as
a function of its distance to all job locations within a CBSA, with larger employment
centers weighted more heavily. Specifically, a gravity model is used, where the
accessibility (Ai) of a given residential block group is a summary description of the
distance to all job locations, with the distance from any single job location positively
weighted by the size of employment (job opportunities) at that location and inversely
weighted by the labor supply (competition) to that location. More formally, the model has
the following specification: Where i indexes a given residential block-group, and j indexes
all n block groups within a CBSA. Distance, d, is measured as “as the crow flies” between
block-groups i and j, with distances less than 1 mile set equal to 1. E represents the
number of jobs in block-group j, and L is the number of workers in block-group j. ….
Interpretation Values are percentile ranked with values ranging from 0 to 100. The higher
the index value, the better the access to employment opportunities for residents in a
neighborhood.13
Block groups covering Rancho Palos Verdes, as shown in Figure 59, have low to moderate job
proximity indexes, due to the largely residential character of the City and limited local
employment. There are numerous clusters of very high index scores (75 or higher) in the
County, indicating areas with better access to jobs for the workers living in the area (see Figure
60). The lower scores for Rancho Palos Verdes indicate that low- and moderate-income
households in the City could be faced with limited job opportunities or long commutes.
13 https://hudgis-hud.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/HUD::jobs-proximity-index/about. The index is currently based
on U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics data from 2014.
A-107
99
Figure 59: Jobs Proximity Index Score, Rancho Palos Verdes
Source: HUD, based on U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, 2014 Data.
A-108
100
Figure 60: Jobs Proximity Index Score, Los Angeles County
Source: HUD, based on U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, 2014 Data.
A-109
101
Transportation
Public Transit
Public transit in Rancho Palos Verdes and nearby surrounding areas is provided by the Palos
Verdes Peninsula Transit Authority (“PV Transit”), which runs several bus routes, as shown
below in Figure 61. Service is provided on weekdays only, and some routes only operate on
school days. Route 225 provides a connection to the Metro Silverline to access the larger
region, and also provides dial-a-ride service for seniors and persons with disabilities on the
Peninsula and to nearby medical facilities.
Figure 61: PV Transit Route Map
Source: http://www.palosverdes.com/pvtransit/pv-route-map2.cfm
Los Angeles Metro also runs several bus routes that serve Rancho Palos Verdes. Route 205
serves Western Avenue with connections to San Pedro and Harbor City on weekdays and
weekends. Route 344 has stops on Hawthorne Boulevard with connections to Palos Verdes
Estates and Rolling Hills estates, Torrance, and Gardena on weekdays and weekends.
A-110
102
Transportation Costs
The Center for Neighborhood Technology (CNT)14 has developed a metric, the H+T (Housing
and Transportation) Index that takes into account housing and transportation costs for a
typical household. By their metric, in order to remain affordable housing costs plus
transportation costs should equal 45 percent or less of total household income. They estimate
this burden at the Census block group level, so disparities in this total estimated cost can be
seen at a local or a regional level.
Based on their estimates, for the Census block groups that include Rancho Palos Verdes, for
much of the City, the costs of housing plus transportation would be greater than 100 percent
of the income of what CNT calls a typical moderate-income household, as shown in Figure 62.
This means that a household with an income in this range would, on average, be severely cost-
burdened when considering combined housing and transportation costs. However, as income
data as discussed previously indicate, Rancho Palos Verdes has predominantly higher income
households rather than moderate income households, and those households likely have high
housing costs and rely largely on automobiles for transportation rather than public transit;
these households may be able to sustain these higher housing and transportation costs.
However, the combined costs act to restrain the ability of households at moderate and low
incomes to live in Rancho Palos Verdes.
Regionally, much of the County has combined housing and transportation costs that would be
a burden on a typical moderate-income household; the highest costs for housing plus
transportation are concentrated on the Palos Verdes Peninsula and farther north along the
coast and in nearby areas. For the most part, costs below 50 percent of income for typical
moderate-income households are found in the inland areas of the City of Los Angeles and
nearby urbanized areas, as shown in Figure 63; the ability of such a household to avoid high
cost burdens is constrained in much of Los Angeles County. These findings are an indicator of
the need for additional affordable housing in Rancho Palos Verdes and much of the County.
14 https://htaindex.cnt.org/. For more on the methodology, see
https://htaindex.cnt.org/about/HTMethods_2016.pdf.
A-111
103
Figure 62: Percent of Income to Housing + Transportation for a Typical Moderate-Income Household in Rancho Palos
Verdes
Source: Housing + Transportation Index, Center for Neighborhood Technology.
A-112
104
Figure 63: Percent of Income to Housing + Transportation for a Typical Moderate-Income Household in Los Angeles
County
Source: Housing + Transportation Index, Center for Neighborhood Technology.
A-113
105
Access to a Clean Environment
CalEnviroScreen provides a methodology to assist in identifying whether a local community is
disproportionately burdened by pollution. For every Census tract in the state, CalEnviroScreen
produces a score using environmental, health, and socioeconomic information derived from
government sources, with higher scores associated with a higher pollution burden. The original
layer was developed by California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment on
behalf of the California Environmental Protection Agency and released January 30, 2017.15
The analysis here uses the draft CalEnviroScreen version 4.0, released in the first half of
2021; Figure 64 below highlights Census tracts scoring in the highest 25 percent (i.e., worst
scores for pollution) for Los Angeles County. Rancho Palos Verdes has no Census tracts above
this threshold, perhaps due in part to its location on the ocean away from major sources of
pollution. Countywide, the tracts scoring in the highest 25 percent tend to be found in the
urbanized areas inland, with the exception of some tracts to the east of Rancho Palos Verdes
near the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. The high-pollution tracts tend to also be those
with lower incomes and larger non-White populations, indicating regional disparities in access
to a clean environment.
15 For more information, go to https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen.
A-114
106
Figure 64: Areas of High Pollution in Los Angeles County
Sources: CalEnviroScreen Version 4.0 DRAFT
A-115
107
Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk
The following section assesses the extent to which protected classes, particularly members of
racial and ethnic minority groups, experience disproportionate housing needs and are at risk
for displacement.
Minority Homeownership Rates
Rates of home ownership often vary widely by race and ethnicity, both within local jurisdictions
and throughout larger regions. In Rancho Palos Verdes, 78 percent of all households are
homeowners, considerably higher than the 46 percent rate for Los Angeles County overall.
With the exception of Black householders, the rates for major race and ethnic categories as
shown in Table 26 in Rancho Palos Verdes are also higher than that of the regional average.
Black householders are homeowners at the regional average rate of 46 percent, and the Some
Other Race category is at 61 percent; other categories are all at 70 percent or above.
Table 26: Distribution of Homeowners by Race/Ethnicity, City of Rancho Palos
Verdes
Note:
(a) Includes American Indian and Alaska Native Alone, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Alone, and Some Other
Race Alone.
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2014-2018 5-year sample data, B25003A-I, BAE, 2021.
Mortgage Loan Approvals by Race/Ethni c ity and Income
The inability to obtain a mortgage can be a barrier to home ownership, and historically,
minorities have tended to have more difficulty obtaining loans, creating a significant barrier to
homeownership. An analysis of HMDA data for conventional loans in Rancho Palos Verdes in
2018 indicates that some minority groups have a notably higher rate of loan denials than for
all applicants (see Figure 65). The overall rate of conventional loan denials overall was 21.4
percent; the rate for Asian, White Non-Hispanic, and Hispanic applicants was about the same
as this overall rate. However, the denial rate for Black applicants was 33.3 percent and the
Household Tenure Total Ownership
Householder by Race Owner Renter Household Rate
White Alone 8,209 2,046 10,255 80%
Non-Hispanic White Alone 7,718 1,901 9,619 80%
Black or African American Alone 129 152 281 46%
Asian Alone 3,153 957 4,110 77%
Some other race alone (a)233 146 379 61%
Two or more races 424 124 548 77%
Total, All Races 12,148 3,425 15,573 78%
Hispanic or Latino 722 270 992 73%
A-116
108
rate for Other Minority Race16 applicants was 54.5 percent, indicating that there may be
discrimination against some minorities in loan approvals. It should be noted, though, that
these rates were based on only 53 Black applicants and 15 applicants in the Other Minority
Race category, meaning that these statistics alone may not be a reliable indicator of
discrimination.
Figure 65: Disposition of Conventional Home Loans by Race/Ethnicity, 2018
Notes:
Asian, Black, and Other Minority Race includes applicants that identify as non-Hispanic and Hispanic. Hispanic applicants
include all persons claiming Hispanic origin regardless of race. Analysis excludes refinance loans and those originated by
lenders not subject to HMDA. Excludes applications that were withdrawn and files that were closed due to incompleteness.
Includes FHA, FSA/RHS, and VA home loans on 1-4 family and manufactured dwellings by income, race, and ethnicity of
applicant.
Sources: FFIEC, Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data, 2018; BAE, 2021.
For 2018 there were very limited numbers of applications for government-insured loans, and
less than five for any minority group, so no patterns of potential discrimination could be
discerned from analysis of these loan applications.
16 This group includes American Indian or Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and persons of
two or more races. These groups were combined because of the extremely limited number of applicants in each
group (10 or less).
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
Asian Alone Black or African
American Alone
Other Minority Race White Non-Hispanic Hispanic or Latino
Approval Origination Denial
A-117
109
Geography of Mortgage Lending
Figure 66 on the following page illustrates the geographic distribution of originated home
loans by Census tract in 2019 in Rancho Palos Verdes. The easternmost and northernmost
portions of the City had the highest overall loan origination rates at 100 or more loans per
1,000 housing units. Comparison with the Census block groups with higher non-White
concentrations identified in Figure 32 indicates no clear relationship between loan origination
rates and non-White household concentrations.
Countywide, the higher loan activity was typically in the tracts covering more suburban areas,
i.e., in the areas with more affluent households (see Figure 67). This pattern may indicate that
lower income households in the County may face greater barriers to home ownership due to
greater difficulty obtaining mortgages.
A-118
110
Figure 66: Number of Loans Originated Per 1,000 Housing Units in Rancho Palos Verdes by Census Tract, 2019
Sources: HMDA; BAE, 2021
A-119
111
Figure 67: Number of Loans Originated Per 1,000 Housing Units in Los Angeles County by Census Tract, 2019
Sources: HMDA; BAE, 2021
.
A-120
112
Prevalence of Housing Problems
Table 27 and Table 28 report the relative prevalence of housing problems among households
with incomes equal to, or less than, the area median by race and ethnicity. Households of a
given racial or ethnic heritage are considered to have a disproportionately greater need for
housing assistance if they experience housing problems at a significantly greater rate (ten
percentage points or more) than do households within the same income level as a whole,
regardless of race or ethnicity. For example, 72.7 percent of all very low-income households
(i.e., incomes between 30 and 50 percent of AMI) in Rancho Palos Verdes experienced at least
one of the four housing problems between 2013 and 2017, as did 100 percent of very low-
income African American households. In this case, very low-income African American
households exhibit a disproportionately greater need for housing assistance that could help to
eliminate their current housing problems. According to these data, African American, Asian,
Hispanic, and Other Race households experienced housing problems at rates that, at one or
more income levels, exceeded the Citywide average by at least ten percentage points. The
results are similar for severe housing problems, with African American, Asian, Hispanic, and
Other Race households being disproportionately impacted. Note that the sample size is very
small in most instances where the housing problems rate for a given subgroup is greater than
the Citywide average, so these results should be considered with caution. For example, the
CHAS data report only 30 extremely low-income Black households in Rancho Palos Verdes, all
of whom experienced housing problems.
Table 27: Housing Problems Rate by Race/Ethnicity, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Notes:
Housing problems include lack of complete kitchen; lack of complete plumbing facility; more than one person per
room; cost burden greater than 30% of income. Includes all households within incomes at or below 100% of area
median income. Figures may not sum to total due to rounding. Cells highlighted in red indicate sub-groups for
which the rate of housing problems exceed the average rate of a given income group by ten percentage points or
more.
Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2013-2017 Comprehensive Housing Affordability
Strategy (CHAS) data; BAE, 2021.
Percent of AMI Total up to
Race/Ethnicity 0-30%30-50%50-80%80-100%100% AMI
White 78.0%60.2%47.6%40.4%54.6%
Black/African American 100.0%100.0%100.0%n.a.100.0%
Asian 74.4%86.1%61.8%69.1%71.4%
American Indian n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.
Pacific Islander n.a.n.a.16.7%n.a.48.7%
Hispanic 92.0%87.5%82.1%68.2%82.4%
Other (Including Multiple Races)100.0%82.4%66.7%0.0%79.5%
Subtotal, Housing Problems 80.4%72.7%54.8%49.4%63.1%
Average Rate +10%90.4%82.7%64.8%59.4%73.1%
A-121
113
Table 28: Severe Housing Problems Rate by Race/Ethnicity, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Notes:
Housing problems include lack of complete kitchen; lack of complete plumbing facility; more than 1.5 persons per
room; cost burden greater than 50% of income. Includes all households within incomes at or below 100% of area
median income. Figures may not sum to total due to rounding. Cells highlighted in red indicate sub-groups for
which the rate of housing problems exceed the average rate of a given income group by ten percentage points or
more.
Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2013-2017 Comprehensive Housing Affordability
Strategy (CHAS) data; BAE, 2021.
Housing Cost B urden
As previously described, overpayment for housing is defined as a household paying more than
30 percent of its gross income on housing related expenses, such as rent, utilities, or
mortgage payments. As shown in Figure 20, by this measure 37 percent of all households in
Rancho Palos Verdes were cost-burdened during the 2013-2017 ACS survey period. This
proportion is lower than for Los Angeles County and the SCAG Region, with the proportion of
cost burdened households at 45 percent and 43 percent, respectively, for these two areas. As
shown above in Table 8, about two-thirds of households earning less than 80 percent of the
HAMFI were cost-burdened in Rancho Palos Verdes, compared to only approximately one-
fourth of households with incomes at 80 percent of HAMFI and above.
Figure 68 shows the trends of overpayment for renters in the City and Figure 69 shows the
trends of overpayment for homeowners. The majority of renters throughout the City, and
anywhere between 40 and 80 percent of renters per Census tract, were overpaying for
housing in 2019 (see Figure 68). As shown in Figure 69, fewer homeowners are overpaying for
housing throughout the City. In areas where homeownership opportunities exist, about ten to
30 percent of homeowners were overpaying, except in the City’s northernmost neighborhoods
where 30 to 40 percent of homeowners were overpaying.
Across most Census tracts in Los Angeles County, at least 25 percent of renter and owner
households were overpaying for housing (see Figure 70 and Figure 71); scattered throughout
the county were tracts where over half of households were overpaying for housing. These
findings reflect the high cost of housing in the region.
Percent of AMI Total up to
Race/Ethnicity 0-30%30-50%50-80%80-100%100% AMI
White 78.0%44.7%22.0%25.3%39.4%
Black/African American 100.0%100.0%0.0%n.a.87.5%
Asian 70.9%50.2%44.1%50.9%53.9%
American Indian n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.
Pacific Islander n.a.n.a.0.0%n.a.38.5%
Hispanic 80.0%62.5%42.9%36.4%54.9%
Other (Including Multiple Races)100.0%35.3%0.0%0.0%48.7%
Subtotal, Severe Housing Problems 78.3%50.0%28.2%32.5%45.7%
Average Rate +10%88.3%60.0%38.2%42.5%55.7%
A-122
114
Figure 68: Overpayment by Renters, Rancho Palos Verdes
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-123
115
Figure 69: Overpayment by Homeowners, Rancho Palos Verdes
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-124
116
Figure 70: Overpayment by Renters, Los Angeles County
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-125
117
Figure 71: Overpayment by Homeowners, Los Angeles County
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-126
118
Overcrowded Households
Overcrowding of residential units, in which there is more than one person per room, can be a
potential indicator that households are experiencing economic hardship and are struggling to
afford housing. Figure 72 shows that all tracts in the City are less than or equal to the
statewide average of 8.2 percent overcrowded.
As shown in Figure 73, the County has a number of Census tracts where the percentage of
overcrowded households exceeds the statewide average of 8.2 percent. These tracts appear
to be largely in the City of Los Angeles, and extending out towards the east as far as Pomona.
Included are a number of tracts where 30 percent or more of households are overcrowded;
this is evidence that many households in the County are unable to afford suitable housing.
A-127
119
Figure 72: Overcrowded Households, Rancho Palos Verdes
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-128
120
Figure 73: Overcrowded Households, Los Angeles County
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey, 2015-2019 data.
A-129
121
Res ident Displacement
From a fair housing standpoint, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes is not aware of resident
displacement issues; however, with regard to sea level rise impacts, the City is working
collaboratively with the South Bay Council of Governments on a Climate Change Vulnerability
Assessment to assess risks associated with flooding and seal level rise impacts.
Fair Housing Issues and Contributing Factors
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is not aware of any specific existing fair housing issues
affecting the City and its residents and prospective residents. Existing patterns of tenure in the
City’s residential areas are primarily influenced by socioeconomic factors, such as the high
cost of real estate in the Southern California region in general and the coastal communities
such as Rancho Palos Verdes in particular. It is acknowledged that there is a relatively limited
supply of multi-family rental housing within the City’s housing stock, which tends to be more
affordable than single-family homes and other for-sale housing types. This likely limits the
ability of lower-income households to secure housing within the City, and this may have a
disproportionate effect on households with disabled and/or minority group members, as these
households often have lower incomes compared to the population as a whole. Having said
that, as indicated in Table 4 above, while the City of Rancho Palos Verdes’ overall population
grew by 1.5 percent between 2010 and the 2014-2018 ACS period, the population of
numerous racial and ethnic minority groups increased much more substantially, including
American Indian and Alaska Native (20.4 percent growth), Asian (8.2 percent), Native
Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander (712.8 percent), two or more races (38.3 percent), and
Hispanic or Latino (6.7%); however, Blacks declined by 23.7 percent while Whites declined by
5.2 percent.
Contributing Factors
Following is an assessment of common factors that could potentially contribute to fair housing
issues.
Land Use and Zoning Laws
Although analysis contained in the Governmental Constraints section of this Housing Element
identified certain issues that could represent undue constraints on the development of
housing, the analysis did not identify any issues in the City’s land use and zoning laws that
would create problems from a fair housing standpoint (i.e., illegal discrimination or
disproportionate impacts on protected groups). Nevertheless, the 2021-2029 Housing
Element includes programs to address the noted issues with governmental constraints.
Occupancy Restrictions
Occupancy standards sometimes can impede housing choice for fair housing protected
classes such as families with children or disabled persons. For example, some jurisdictions’
zoning regulations have attempted to limit occupancy to five related persons occupying a
A-130
122
single-family home, or to strictly establish an occupancy standard of no more than two persons
per bedroom. Such regulations can limit housing availability for some families with children or
prevent the development of group housing.
The City’s Zoning Ordinance complies with fair housing laws. For example, a “family” is defined
as an individual or two or more persons living together as a single housekeeping unit in a
dwelling unit. Additionally, group housing for disabled persons is a permitted use in residential
zones that allow single-family dwellings. In such zones, the Zoning Ordinance permits “any
other use required by State or federal law.”
The City has adopted the Uniform Housing Code, which establishes minimum occupancy limits
for all housing on the basis of square footage. According to an analysis of occupancy
standards:
The Legislature, by adopting this Uniform Housing Code standard, intends to pre-empt
local occupancy standards generally. Municipalities may deviate from the uniform
occupancy standard only if, pursuant to specific state provisions, they make express
findings that a deviation is reasonably necessary due to “climatic, geological or
topographical conditions.” Local governments should adopt the foregoing Uniform
Housing Code standard for compliance with fair housing laws and to address health and
safety concerns in the community.
Residential Real Estate Steering
Steering is infrequently an alleged act in a housing discrimination complaint. According to the
County of Los Angeles’ 2018 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, which covers the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes among other Los Angeles County jurisdictions, only ten steering
complaints were made throughout the entire County between 2008 and 2016, none of which
were in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
Patterns of Community Opposition
City Planning staff indicate that Rancho Palos Verdes does not experience patterns of
community opposition to housing that focus on any particular type of housing or housing in
specific locations. Rather, when there is opposition to a housing project it is on more of a case-
by-case basis where nearby residents express concerns about issues such as impacts on
views, aesthetics, and other factors that are specific to the lot that is proposed for
development. Projects that request discretionary approvals, such as variances from
development standards, tend to experience the most opposition. City staff notes that as a
mostly built-out city, most of the remaining lots in Rancho Palos Verdes are those that are
difficult to develop within standard development guidelines; thus, projects tend to face more
issues and controversy.
A-131
123
Economic Pressures
Factors such as increased rents or increased land and development costs for new housing
could create economic pressures that could contribute to fair housing issues, to the extent
that members of protected classes often have lower incomes, which means they are
disproportionately affected by high housing costs. As discussed in the Governmental
Constraints section, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes has limited direct impact on development
costs, with City-imposed fees representing a relatively small proportion of overall costs for
developing housing within the City. As a desirable community within Southern California’s
coastal region, the City has limited ability to control other economic pressures, such as
increasing land costs, or increasing rents that are largely driven by regional hosing supply and
demand dynamics that are beyond the City’s control. However, ensuring that the City
adequately plans to accommodate its RHNA, including providing sites that can accommodate
housing for lower-income households is a key responsibility to ensure that the City does not
contribute to economic pressures by unnecessarily constraining the local supply of land
available for housing development.
Major Private Investments
Major private investments have the potential to stimulate changes in the local housing market.
For example, major investments that stimulate local employment growth can increase local
demand for housing and if the supply of housing does not increase commensurately, this can
lead to increased competition for housing and, potentially, increased costs and consequent
displacement of lower-income households who may not be able to afford the higher housing
costs. Additionally, private investments in the form of redevelopment of existing residential
buildings could lead to displacement of existing residents. In these situations, lower-income
residents are at greatest risk, as their limited incomes mean that they will have fewer viable
choices to secure replacement housing.
The City adopted the Western Avenue Corridor Street Enhancement Strategy along Western
Avenue in the City. Western Avenue is a primary commercial corridor in the South Bay area,
Palos Verdes Peninsula and San Pedro community. The Strategy outlines the framework for
implementing complete street improvements within the public right-of-way, as well as outlines
concepts to assist the City in determining what, if any, changes to the City’s private
development standards. In total, the Strategy aims to lay out the foundation and direction for
the corridor’s development over the next 3 to 30 years. The adopted plan contains numerous
provisions that aim to preserve and enhance the quality of life for existing and future
residential uses along the corridor and does not include any provisions that preclude or
discourage residential development along the corridor.
Municipal or State Services and Amenities
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes maintains a small staff of full-time employees and part-time
employees. Most services are provided by contracting with outside agencies and vendors.
Police and fire services are provided by Los Angeles County. Vendor contracts are awarded for
A-132
124
public facility and right-of-way maintenance. The City Council contracts with an outside law firm
for City Attorney services. Solid waste, electric, water, and gas services are provided by Public
Utility Commission (PUC)-regulated private companies under City franchise agreements.
However, Community Development Department services such as Planning, Building & Safety,
Code Enforcement and View Restoration are provided by in-house staff, but supplemented by
private vendors as needed. Services are provided to residents and businesses located
throughout the City, and there are not disparities in service levels amongst the City’s various
residential areas.
The City has a land area of 13.6 square miles, and about 42,000 residents. With 7.5 miles of
Pacific coastline, an approximately 1,400-acre nature preserve, and hundreds more acres of
open space, the City has maintained a semi-rural environment. Residents and visitors enjoy
expansive views of the Pacific Ocean and ample opportunities for recreation including golfing,
hiking, beach access, and whale watching. Notable landmarks and points of interest include
the Wayfarer’s Chapel designed by Lloyd Wright, the Point Vicente Lighthouse, Point Vicente
Interpretive Center, Terranea Resort, Palos Verdes Nature Preserve, and Trump National Golf
Club. As a compact community, these amenities are relatively accessible to residents who live
throughout Rancho Palos Verdes’ residential areas.
Foreclosure Patterns
For a number of factors, lower-income and minority households are more likely to face
foreclosure than others. According to a 2009 presentation by the Federal Reserve Bank of San
Francisco17, during the housing boom leading up to the 2008 housing crisis, just over one-
fourth of California households received a “high cost” (i.e., subprime) loan, and these loans
were more prevalent among minority borrowers than for borrowers as a whole. The
presentation indicated that Rancho Palos Verdes was among the communities with the lowest
foreclosure rates (less than one percent of total loans in foreclosure or REO as of February
2009). As of June 2021, RealtyTrac reported only four properties within the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes that were in pre-foreclosure, and none that were bank-owned or subject to
auction. These data indicate that foreclosure patterns are not a significant fair housing issue
within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
Unresolved Violations of Fair Housing or Civil Rights Laws
The City has no unresolved violations of fair housing or civil rights law.
Support or Opposition from Public Officials
The City Council supports fair housing, as evidenced in the City’s participation in the County
Urban Program for HUD programs participation and maintenance of the contract with the
Housing Rights Center for fair housing services.
17 https://www.frbsf.org/community-development/files/california_0409.pdf
A-133
125
Discrimination in the Housing Market
Complaints of housing discrimination in Rancho Palos Verdes are rare. As summarized
previously in Table 19, from 2013 through 2020, only three complaints were recorded by the
HUD office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), and one of those complaints was
dismissed for lack of cause. From 2014 through 2021 to date only four complaints were filed
with DFEH, with three compliant related to disabilities and one regarding family status. One
complaint was withdrawn, two were dismissed, and one was settled successfully.
Lack of Fair Housing Education
Fair housing issues can arise when property owners and/or residents are not fully aware of
their rights and responsibilities as they pertain to fair housing. As previously mentioned, the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes contracts with the HRC for fair housing services. In terms of
education, as mentioned previously, the HRC provides a range of fair housing outreach and
educational resources for both tenants and landlords in Rancho Palos Verdes. In addition to
pro-active education, the HRC also responds to inquiries and complaints and, as indicated
previously, was able to successfully resolve the limited number of discrimination investigations
involving Rancho Palos Verdes locations that it undertook between July 2018 and June 2021
by providing counseling and information.
In addition, the County of Los Angeles Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI), in
which Rancho Palos Verdes is a participant, included a fair housing goal to “Promote
understanding and knowledge of fair housing and ADA laws.” In order to achieve this goal, the
AI describes a number of activities to be undertaken during the five-year period from 2018 to
2023, including:
• Conduct 80 outreach and educational presentations and workshops to inform special
populations of their rights;
• Staff 100 fair housing information booths at community festivals and events; and
• Distribute 80,000 pieces of fair housing literature.
The Fair Housing Education and Outreach activities will be accomplished by the HRC. HRC has
established an effective and comprehensive outreach and public education program designed
to raise awareness of the fair housing laws that protect individuals, often in traditionally
underserved communities, against housing discrimination. The Outreach Department of the
HRC develops and distributes educational literature and resources that describe ways to
prevent housing injustices and the applicable laws that protect against discrimination. The
materials are made available free to the public in various languages including English,
Spanish, Korean, Mandarin, Armenian, Cantonese, and Russian. The Outreach Department
also presents free fair housing law workshops for landlords, tenants, nonprofit organizations,
and government employees. The workshops include an overview of the state and federal fair
housing laws, as well as basic landlord-tenant rights and responsibilities. Depending on the
A-134
126
audience, the presentations can be translated by staff into Armenian, Mandarin, Spanish, or
Russian.
Lack of Resources for Fair Housing Agencies and Organizations
The City is a participating city in the County of Los Angeles Urban County Program. The
HRCHRC is the fair housing agency/organization serving the needs of the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes and all other Urban County participating cities.
Disproportionate Housing Need s Among Racial/Ethnic Groups
These needs were discussed previously under the header Disproportionate Housing Needs
and Displacement Risk. Potential issues identified included:
• Minority homeownership rates in Rancho Palos Verdes are at or above the overall
homeownership rate in Los Angeles County, but mortgage loan approval denial rates
may be higher for Black applicants and Other Minority Race Applicants. However, the
data are not reliable due to relatively small numbers of applicants.
• Black, Asian, Hispanic, and Other Race households experienced housing problems
disproportionate rates in one or more income ranges compared to other households in
the same income ranges. Again, the data are based on relatively small numbers of
households, so the results should be interpreted with caution.
Fair Housing Priorities, Goal, and Actions
Overall, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes fares quite well with respect to fair housing issues. In
most cases, where the data hint that there may be some potential for a disadvantaged group,
such as a racial or ethnic minority to be experiencing fair housing issues, the data are based
on a small enough sample of relatively small populations that the statistics may not be highly
reliable. Nevertheless, the key takeaway from the Assessment of Fair Housing is that where
the data do hint at some possibility of a fair housing issue, those who would be
disproportionately impacted are typically lower-income and/or minority populations. For this
reason, the City’s fair housing priority is to emphasize fair housing outreach, education, and
resources to minority and lower-income populations, with the goal of ensuring that these
vulnerable groups can access available resources to address housing needs and services.
The actions required to address the City’s fair housing goal is included within the City’s overall
Housing Element programs section as Goal 2: Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity and is
supported by Housing Element Programs 5 through 11, which includes carryover programs
from the 2013- 2021 Housing Element that have been refined to reflect this emphasis, as well
as new programs developed for the 2021-2029 Housing Element.
A-135
127
CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
Introduction
This chapter of the Housing Element describes and analyzes governmental and non-
governmental constraints on the development and maintenance of housing in the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes.
Governmental Constraints
City policies and regulations that affect residential development and housing affordability
include land use controls, permit processing procedures and fees, development impact fees,
on- and off-site infrastructure improvement requirements, and building codes and
enforcement. This section describes these standards and assesses whether they constrain
housing development in Rancho Palos Verdes.
Land Use Controls
The City’s General Plan, Specific Plans, and Zoning Code guide development and set land use
controls related to housing development.
General Plan Land Use Element
The General Plan is the comprehensive planning document that guides physical development
throughout a local jurisdiction. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan was adopted in
June 26, 1975 and updated on September 18, 2018. State law requires that all cities and
counties in California have a General Plan that includes a Land Use Element. The Land Use
Element designates the proposed general distribution and location of the extent of the land
uses for public and private uses, including identification of land and natural resources suitable
for designation in the General Plan’s Conservation and Open Space Element. Specific to the
Housing Element, the Land Use Element establishes residential land use designations that
allow for a mix of housing types, including single-family residences, multi-family residences,
and mobile homes. Table 29 outlines the residential land use designations and applicable
density in the General Plan
Table 29: Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan Residential Density Ranges
Source: City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 2021.
Less than or equal to 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres
Less than or equal to 1 dwelling unit per acre
1-2 dwelling units per acre
2-4 dwelling units per acre
4-6 dwelling units per acre
6-12 dwelling units per acre
12-22 dwelling units per acre
A-136
128
One issue with the General Plan land use categories is that they do not include a land use
category that allows for residential densities of more than 22 dwelling units per acre. This may
pose a constraint to residential development that can serve the needs of lower-income
households. According to state law, the default minimum density for land targeted to address
the RHNA for lower-income households, in Rancho Palos Verdes, is 30 dwelling units per acre.
The Housing Element includes a program to amend the General Plan to provide a residential
land use category that allows at least 30 dwelling units per acre, or higher if needed to ensure
General Plan consistency for sites to be zoned to accommodate the City’s RHNA for lower-
income households.
Specific Plans
A specific plan is used to coordinate, balance, and regulate development within a geographic
area such that the development plan is consistent with goals of the General Plan. As described
in the Land Use Element, the City has five Specific Plan Districts, one within the coastal region
(Coastal Specific Plan District), and four others located inland (Western Avenue Specific Plan
Districts 1, 2, and 3, and the Eastview Park Specific Plan District). The three Specific Plan
Districts along Western Avenue are consolidated into a single document (2001), although they
remain separate districts. These plans establish standards for development within the plan
areas. The plans allow residential densities consistent with the General Plan.
Zoning Code
Zoning regulations control local development by establishing requirements related to height,
density, lot area, yard setbacks, and minimum parking spaces. Site development standards
are comparable to requirements in other communities and are necessary to ensure a quality
living environment for all households and to protect the City’s historic and natural resources.
The City has six single-family residential designations, five multi-family residential
designations, and five commercial districts, which are described in the Development
Standards section below as they pertain to residential uses. Additional zoning designations
that do not allow for residential include Cemetery (cem), Institutional (i), Open Space – Hazard
(oh), Open Space – Recreational (or).
Overlay Control Districts
Overlay Control Districts provide criteria which further reduce potential impacts which could be
directly created or indirectly induced by proposed and existing developments in sensitive areas
of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. These areas are defined by the General Plan and other
studies to be sensitive areas due to unique characteristics contributing significantly to the
City's form, appearance, natural setting, and historical and cultural heritage. There are six
Overlay Control Districts in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, as provided in Table 30 below:
Natural Design (OC-1), Socio-Cultural (OC-2), Urban Design (OC-3), Automotive (OC-4), Mira
Vista (OC-5), and Equestrian (Q). The City is also (as of 2021) pursuing a Mixed-Use Overlay
Zoning District in certain institutional and commercial zoning districts in the City to facilitate
additional residential development for all income levels.
A-137
129
Table 30: Overlay Control Districts
Sources: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, 2021; BAE, 2021
Coastal Vision Plan
The Coastal Vision Plan (2008) covers coastal areas in the City that roughly coincide with the
Resource Management Districts within the General Plan. While drawing on the General Plan
and Coastal Specific Plan, the Coastal Vision Plan is not incorporated into these regulatory
documents and does not attempt to evaluate or regulate private development. The Coastal
Vision Plan establishes a vision, goals, concept designs and design guidance that seek to
cohesively link key open space properties and public lands along the coast, including the Palos
Verdes Nature Preserve (NCCP). The Vision Plan is an environmental resources access,
management, and protection plan. It provides the City guidance and a rationale for
implementing future improvements to these key areas, which might include enhanced public
spaces, public access (including wayfinding, traffic, and parking), recreational amenities, and
other facilities to improve the public’s experience of the City’s coastline.
Development Standards, Local Processi ng, and Permit Procedures
Development standards are site or construction conditions and requiremen ts established in
the Zoning Code. Development standards are pursuant to local ordinances, the General Plan
and its elements, Specific Plans, Charter Amendments, and other local policies. They include,
but are not limited to, height limits, setback requirements, floor area ratios, open space
requirements, lot coverage requirements, and parking requirements. Figure 76 summarizes
the relevant development standards for single-family residential zoning districts. Figure 77
summarizes the relevant development standards for multi-family residential zoning districts.
Overlay Control District Symbol
Natural Design OC-1
Socio-Cultural OC-2
Urban Design OC-3
Automotive Service Station OC-4
Mira Vista Park OC-5
Equestrian Q
A-138
130
Figure 74: Single-Family Residential Development Standards
Notes:
1. For an existing lot which does not meet these standards, see Chapter 17.84 (Nonconformities).
2. Lots of record, existing as of November 25, 1975 (adoption of this code), or within Eastview and existing as of January 5,
1983 (annexation), shall use these development standards for minimum setbacks.
3. For description, clarification and exceptions, see Chapter 17.48 (Lots, Setbacks, Open Space Area and Building Height).
4. For a description of height measurement methods and the height variation process, see Section 17.02.040 (View
Preservation and Restoration) of this chapter. A height variation application shall be referred directly to the planning
commission for consideration, if any of the following is proposed:
A. Any portion of a structure which exceeds 16 feet in height extends closer than 25 feet from the front or street-side
property line.
B. The area of the structure which exceeds 16 feet in height (second story footprint) exceeds 75 percent of the existing
first story footprint area (residence and garage).
C. 60 percent or more of an existing garage footprint is covered by a structure which exceeds 16 feet in height (a second
story).
D. The portion of a structure that exceeds 16 feet in height is being developed as part of a new single-family residence;
or
E. Based on an initial site visit, the director determines that any portion of a structure which is proposed to exceed 16 feet
in height may significantly impair a view as defined in this chapter.
5. For parking development standards, see Section 17.02.030(B) of this chapter.
6. A garage with direct access driveway from the street of access shall not be less than 20 feet from the front or street-side
property line, whichever is the street of access.
7. Exterior stairs to an upper story are prohibited, unless leading to and/or connected to a common hallway, deck or entry
rather than a specific room.
8. For purposes of calculating lot coverage, a private street easement shall not be considered a part of the lot area and the
improved area of a private street easement shall not be counted as lot coverage.
Source: City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 2021.
A-139
131
Figure 75: Multi-family Residential Development Standards
Notes:
1. For description, clarification and exceptions, see Chapter 17.48 (Lots, Setbacks, Open Space Area and Building Height).
2. For parking area development standards, see Chapter 17.50 (Nonresidential Parking and Loading Standards). Any
under-building parking structures must be completely enclosed or have openings screened from the public right-of-way and
other affected views. In all RM Districts, 25 percent of the required parking shall be provided as guest parking in addition to
the standard parking requirements.
Source: City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 2021.
State Government Code Section 65940.1 subdivision (a)(1) (A) through (E) require that certain
development standards be posted on the City website. The City’s Community Development
Department provides some, but not all of this information on the City’s website. The City’s
website includes a current schedule of fees (the City Council approved a fee update on
4/20/21 and new fees went into effect 7/1/21) as well as zoning information. The Housing
Element will include a program to publish all required information regarding development
standards on the City’s website.
As the City does not have “objective development standards” for approval of low-/moderate-
income housing projects, the Housing Element will include a program to adopt objective
development standards for low- and moderate-income housing.
Parking Standards
City Parking/Driveway Standards for single-family homes are as follows:
1. A minimum of two enclosed parking spaces shall be provided and maintained in a
garage, and a minimum of two unenclosed parking spaces shall be provided and
A-140
132
maintained as a driveway, on the property of each single-family dwelling unit
containing less than 5,000 square feet of habitable space, as determined by the
director.
2. A minimum of three enclosed parking spaces shall be provided and maintained in a
garage, and a minimum of three unenclosed parking spaces shall be provided and
maintained as a driveway, on the property of each single-family dwelling unit
containing 5,000 square feet or more of habitable space, as determined by the
director.
3. A garage with a direct access driveway from the street of access shall not be located
less than 20 feet from the front or street-side property line, whichever is the street of
access.
4. In addition to the parking requirements for the primary single-family residence on a
property, parking for city-approved accessory dwelling units shall be provided in
accordance with Chapter 17.10 (Accessory Dwelling Unit and Junior Accessory
Dwelling Unit Development Standards).
5. An enclosed parking space shall have an unobstructed ground space of no less than
nine feet in width by 20 feet in depth, with a minimum of seven feet of vertical
clearance over the space. An unenclosed parking space shall have an unobstructed
ground space of no less than nine feet in width by 20 feet in depth.
6. The following minimum driveway widths and turning radii shall be provided for all
driveways leading from the street of access to a garage or other parking area on a
residential parcel:
a. A driveway shall be a minimum width of ten feet; and
b. A paved 25-foot turning radius shall be provided between the garage or other
parking area and the street of access for driveways which have an average
slope of ten percent or more, and which are 50 feet or more in length.
7. Driveways shall take into account the driveway standards required by the department
of public works for driveway entrances located in the public right-of-way.
8. A driveway that is located adjacent to a side property line shall provide a minimum 18-
inch-wide landscaped area between the side property line and the adjacent driveway,
unless such buffer would reduce the minimum width of the driveway to less than ten
feet, in which case the width of the landscape buffer may be narrowed or eliminated at
the discretion of the director.
9. All driveways shall be built and maintained in accordance with the specifications of the
Los Angeles County Fire Department. If there is any inconsistency between the
standards imposed by this chapter and the standards imposed by the Los Angeles
County Fire Department, the stricter shall apply.
10. Unless otherwise expressly permitted elsewhere in this title, enclosed tandem parking
spaces may only be used for parking spaces in excess of the minimum requirements of
subsections (1) and (2) of this section, provided that each space meets the minimum
dimensions specified in subsection (5) of this section.
A-141
133
The City’s multi-family residential parking standards are as follows:
1. A minimum of two garage spaces shall be provided for each dwelling unit;
2. A minimum of one uncovered parking space shall be provided for each dwelling unit
with no or one bedroom and a minimum of two spaces for each unit with two or more
bedrooms;
3. The uncovered spaces shall be in off-street parking areas, except that parallel, on-
street parking may be permitted to meet up to one-half of the uncovered parking space
requirement, if the planning commission finds this to be the only feasible method to
provide required parking;
4. Parking spaces shall be individually accessible without the need for moving any vehicle
to gain access to a space, except that the uncovered spaces may be in the driveway of
the unit served. Required spaces shall be located within 300 feet of the dwelling unit
served;
5. The number of uncovered spaces required may be reduced to one per dwelling unit,
with approval of the planning commission, where the dwelling units are served with
common off-street parking lots in close proximity to the residence; and
6. Consideration shall be given to the necessity of storage areas for boats, trailers and
campers.
Lot Coverage
Figure 74 summarizes the lot coverage limitations for the City’s single-family residential
districts. As indicated in Error! Reference source not found., the City does not have lot
coverage limits for multi-family residential developments.
Floor Area Ratio
The City does not impose floor-area-ratio restrictions in residential districts. Rather, building
intensity is limited by allowable lot coverage, setback requirements, height limitations, and
other development standards that determine the maximum building envelope.
Heights
Figure 74 and Error! Reference source not found., respectively, provide the height limits for the
City’s single-family and multi-family residential districts, respectively. Section 17.02.040 of the
Municipal Code addresses view preservation and restoration and imposes additional
limitations on building heights to ensure that residential buildings do not impair protected
views.
Unit Size Requirements
The City’s Municipal Code does not impose minimum unit size requirements within its
residential zones with the exception of limitations for ADUs.
A-142
134
Open Space Requirements
The City’s development standards for Residential Planned Developments (Section 17.42.040
of the Municipal Code) require that common open space and recreational open space
comprise a minimum of 30 percent of the property. Furthermore, common open space must
be landscaped and irrigated according to a plan approved by the City. Undevelopable areas or
areas of extreme slope (35 percent or more) can be counted toward this requirement.
Properties located in the Coastal Specific Plan have specific requirements regarding the siting
of and public access to common open space.
Accessory Dwelling Unit Requirements
To encourage establishment of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on existing developed lots,
State law requires cities and counties to either adopt an ordinance based on standards set out
in the law allowing ADUs in residentially-zoned areas, or where no ordinance has been
adopted, to allow ADUs on lots zoned for single family or multi-family use that contain an
existing single family unit subject to ministerial (i.e., staff level) approval (“by-right”) if they
meet standards set out by law. Local governments are precluded from totally prohibiting ADUs
in residentially-zoned areas unless they make specific findings (Government Code, Section
65852.2).
Several bills have added further requirements for local governments related to ADU
ordinances (AB 2299, SB 1069, AB 494, SB 229, AB 68, AB 881, AB 587, SB 13, AB 671, and
AB 670). The 2016 and 2017 updates to State law included changes pertaining to the allowed
size of ADUs, permitting ADUs by-right in at least some areas of a jurisdiction, and parking
requirements related to ADUs. More recent bills reduce the time to review and approve ADU
applications to 60 days and remove lot size requirements and replacement parking space
requirements. AB 68 allows an ADU and a junior ADU (JADU) to be built on a single-family lot, if
certain conditions are met. The State has also removed owner-occupancy requirements for
ADUs and created a tiered fee structure that charges ADUs based on their size and location
and prohibits fees on units less than 750 square feet. AB 671 requires local governments to
include in Housing Elements plans to incentivize and encourage affordable ADU rentals and
requires the State to develop a list of state grants and financial incentives for affordable ADUs.
In addition, AB 670 makes any governing document, such as a homeowners’ association
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions, void and unenforceable to the extent that it prohibits,
or effectively prohibits, the construction or use of ADUs or junior ADUs.
The City approved an ADU/JADU Ordinance in January 2021. Chapter 17.96. of the Municipal
Code defines ADU and JADUs, and Chapter 17.10 provides standards for the development and
maintenance in accordance with California State Government Code Sections 65852.2 and
65852.22. For a lot with an existing or proposed single-family residence, the City allows for no
more than one ADU and one JADU, and defines each as follows:
A-143
135
• ADU– Defined as an attached or detached residential dwelling unit which provides
complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. It shall include
permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same
parcel as the single-family dwelling is situated. A minimum of one enclosed parking
space is required, unless the ADU is located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
(tandem parking is allowed under this circumstance).
• JADU – Defined as a secondary a residential dwelling unit no more than 500 square
feet in size and contained entirely within a single-family residence. A JADU may include
separate sanitation facilities or may share sanitation facilities with the existing
structure. A JADU is required to provide separate entrance from the main entrance to
the proposed or existing single-family residence. No additional parking is required.
ADUs and JADUs are allowed on or within existing multi-family structures for up to a number
equal to 25 percent of the existing dwelling units (rounded down). The non-livable space, such
as attics, garages, passageways, and boiler rooms, may be converted to livable space and
granted a certificate of occupancy. No more than two detached ADUs are allowed on a lot with
existing multi-family structures.
Section 17.10.220, of the Municipal Code describes development standards for new ADUs
and JADUs. Development standards for new ADUs and JADUs are as follows per Section
17.10.220 of the Municipal Code:
• ADUs and JADUs, attached or detached, are allowed in all RS and RM districts, and on
lots with single-family dwelling units if they adhere to the development standards
outlined in Section 17.10.020 of the Municipal Code with ministerial approval of a Site
Plan Review by the Director. Ministerial approval will be processed within 60 days of
receiving a completed application. ADUs and JADUs that do not meet the applicable
standards may be permitted with the granting of the applicable permits.
• Development of ADUs and junior ADUs may be restricted due to the Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone. Detached ADUs in this zone must maintain a ten-foot separation
from the primary dwelling unit and five-foot setbacks from the side and back yards. A
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required for construction of ADUs on property located
in the City’s Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone if that property does not have two
distinct means of access. CUPs are considered by the Planning Commission.
On May 21, 2021, the State Department of Housing and Community Development sent a letter
to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes regarding its review of the City’s ADU Ordinance. The letter
stated that the City must revise certain aspects of the ADU ordinance to bring it into alignment
with State law. The City has provided HCD responses in response to the agency’s comments
and is awaiting further feedback from HCD before making modifications to the City’s existing
A-144
136
ADU regulations. The 2021-2029 Housing Element Update includes a program to better align
the City’s ADU Ordinance with State law in the event that these issues are not resolved by the
time of adoption of the Final Housing Element Update.
Inclusionary Requirements
All new residential developments of five or more dwelling units in the City are required to
provide up to five percent of all units affordable to very low-income households or to provide
up to ten percent of all units affordable to low-income households. Payment of in-lieu fees
must be approved by City Council. The inclusionary program is described in more detail below.
Consistency with State Density Bonus Law and Housing Accountability Act
The City’s Density Bonus code provisions were last updated in 2008. The Density Bonus
regulations have not been updated to comply with AB 2345, which went into effect in 2021,
which requires that local jurisdictions allow for density bonuses of up to 50 percent for
affordable housing projects and relaxes standards for granting additional concessions and
incentives to facilitate affordable housing projects. The 2021-2029 Housing Element Update
includes a program to review and align the City’s Density Bonus provisions with State law.
Local Processing and Permit Procedures
The Housing Element is required to provide information regarding local processing and permit
procedures, including timeframes, permit types and requirements by housing type and zone,
decision making criteria/findings, design/site/architectural review process and findings,
description of standards, and the residential planned development process. Additionally, each
jurisdiction must provide information regarding its process to accommodate SB35 streamline
applications and by-right applications for permanent supportive housing and navigation
centers.
Typical Processing Timeframes
The typical timeframe between application for a housing development and granting of planning
approvals in Rancho Palos Verdes depends on the type of project being proposed and the
requested applications. Some residential development projects can be processed by the
Planning Division over-the-counter with a ministerial review in a matter of a couple of days
(e.g., single story additions, interior/exterior remodels) while a project for a new residence or
demo/rebuild of a residence can take six months to a year or so in the Planning Division
review process. This depends on the type of project being proposed and the requested
applications.
Generally speaking, new residential construction requires preliminary geo-technical approval,
through the City’s geotechnical consultant (Cotton Shires & Associates). A new residence
would also require a Neighborhood Compatibility (NC) Analysis, which requires notification of
neighbors within a 500-foot radius of the project site. If the new residence will be over the
maximum building height of 16 feet, the project also requires a Height Variation Permit, which
A-145
137
requires an applicant to complete an early neighborhood consultant process prior to
submitting the application. These types of applications can be reviewed by the City’s Planning
Commission or Community Development Director.
A project may also require a Grading Permit that may be discretionary depending on the
amount or location of grading quantity, depth, and slope steepness and activity proposed. If
the new residence is located within the City’s Landslide Moratorium Area, the project will
require an additional Landslide Moratorium Exception (LME) Permit, prior to the submittal of
formal Planning applications. Development in the City’s Coastal Zone also presents a number
of application considerations and review/appeal authority by the California Coastal
Commission. Most residential projects that the Planning Division processes are categorically
exempt, so no extended environmental review process is required.
After Planning Division approvals are provided and/or appeal periods end, an applicant can
then submit to the City’s Building & Safety Division for plan-check and permitting. The
Planning Division’s Conditions of Approval require an applicant to submit development plans
to the City’s Building & Safety Division for plan-check within 180 days or one-year, depending
on the decision-making body of the project approval. Otherwise the approvals expire but can
be re-issued if, a) no changes have been made or will be made to the originally approved
plans; b) the development permit application has not been null and void for more than one
year; and c) a fee of one-half the original application fee is paid by the applicant. However,
according to City staff, most projects do submit plans for plan-check within the specified
timelines.
Plan-check timelines vary but are generally completed within a couple of weeks. As part of the
plan-check process, the Building & Safety Division requires an applicant to provide Fire
Department approvals (the City contracts with the Los Angeles County Fire Department) as well
as more specialized reviews including geo-technical, drainage, sewer, and Low Impact
Development.
Permit Types and Requirements by Housing Type and Zone
Generally, new residential development requires preliminary geo-technical approval,
Neighborhood Compatibility Analysis, and/or may require a Grading Permit. Most residential
projects that the City’s Planning Division process are categorically exempt, so no extended
environmental review process is typically required. Applications ultimately result in issuance of
a building permit.
On a more limited basis, residential development projects may require:
• A Landslide Moratorium Exception Permit, if located in the Landside Moratorium Area
• A Height Variation Permit, if proposed height exceeds 16 feet (which is reviewed under
the Neighborhood Compatibility analysis)
A-146
138
• A number of applications, reviews, approvals, and appeals associated with the City’s
Coastal Zone and California Coastal Commission requirements, if located within the
Coastal Zone
• A finding of conformance with the Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat
Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) if a proposed residential development is proposed in or
abuts areas known to contain sensitive wildlife habitat or vegetation.
Objective Development Standards
The State Legislature has enacted several bills that require jurisdictions to adopt objective
design standards. First, under the Housing Accountability Act, a housing development may only
be denied or reduced in density if it is inconsistent with objective standards. Senate Bill (SB)
330, Housing Crisis Act of 2019, prohibits cities and counties from adopting standards that
reduce residential development capacity and imposing or enforcing new design standards
established on or after January 1, 2020, that are not objective design standards. Finally,
SB 35, passed in 2017, requires jurisdictions that have failed to approve housing projects
sufficient to meet their State-mandated RHNA to provide streamlined, ministerial entitlement
process for housing developments that incorporate affordable housing. Per SB 35, review and
approval of proposed projects with at least 50 percent affordability must be based on
objective standards and cannot be based on subjective design guidelines.
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes has not revised its design standards since SB 330 and SB 35
were enacted. The 2021-2029 Housing Element Update includes a program to review and
revise the City’s design standards to ensure compliance with the requirements of SB 330 and
SB 35.
Senate Bill 35 Mandated Streamlining for Affordable Housing
SB 35 requires jurisdictions that have failed to meet their RHNA to provide streamlined,
ministerial entitlement process for housing developments that incorporate affordable housing.
If a project meets certain requirements, including complying with objective standards, paying
prevailing wages, and exempting the project from CEQA. The local jurisdiction must approve
the project within 90 days of submittal of an application for 150 or fewer housing units, or
within 180 days of submittal of an application for than 150 units. As of August 2021, the City
had not received any applications for SB 35 approval. The 2021-2029 Housing Element
includes an implementation program to establish a process for SB 35 streamlining consistent
with SB 35.
Senate Bill 330 Processing Procedures
SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, established specific requirements and limitations on
development application procedures. The bill allows a housing developer to submit a
“preliminary application” to a local agency for a housing development project. Submittal of a
preliminary application allows a developer to provide a specific subset of information on the
proposed housing development before providing the full amount of information required by the
A-147
139
local government for a housing development application. Submittal of the preliminary
application secures the applicable development standards and fees adopted at that time. The
project is considered vested and all fees and standards are frozen, unless the project changes
substantially (by 20 percent or more of the residential unit count or square footage) or the
applicant fails to timely submit a complete application as required by the Permit Streamlining
Act.
Each jurisdiction may develop their own preliminary application form or may use the
application form developed by HCD. In addition, the bill limits the application review process to
30 days, for projects less than 150 units, and 60 days, for projects greater than 150 units,
and no more than five total public hearings, including planning commission, design review,
and city council.
SB 330 also prohibits cities and counties from enacting a development policy, standard, or
condition that would have the effect of: (A) changing the land use designation or zoning to a
less intensive use or reducing the intensity of land use within an existing zoning district below
what was allowed on January 1, 2018; (B) imposing or enforcing a moratorium on housing
development; (C) imposing or enforcing new design standards established on or after January
1, 2020, that are not objective design standards; or (D) establishing or implementing certain
limits on the number of permits issued or the population of the city or county.
In addition, the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update includes a program to accept the use of
the preliminary application form provided by HCD in compliance with SB 330.
Building Codes and Enforcement
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes generally adopts the State’s Building Code as required. The
City has also adopted Chapter 15.20 of the Building Code section of the Municipal Code that
establishes a moratorium on the issuance of Land Use Permits in the City’s Landslide
Moratorium Area within the Portuguese Bend Landslide complex. However, for the purpose of
determining whether a land parcel is excluded from the moratorium, the City does allow for the
filing and preparation of assessments, studies, negative declarations, and environmental
impact reports.
On- and Off -Site Improvements Requirements
On-Site Improvements Requirements
The following are the City’s onsite improvement requirements for residential projects:
• All utility lines installed for new construction are to be placed underground from an
existing power pole or other off-site point of connection. This requirement can be
waived if the nature of the development makes such installations unreasonable or if
there are existing overhead lines and the underground location is not consistent with a
A-148
140
likely future utility “undergrounding” project. Single-family additions are exempt from
this requirement.
• Underground cable television is to be installed in all new residential development.
• All mechanical equipment and all outside storage areas are to be screened from view
of public areas and neighboring properties.
• At least 50 percent of the required 20-foot front and the 10-foot street-side setback
areas are to be landscaped.
• Two garage spaces (18 feet width by 20 feet depth), completely enclosed, are required
for each single-family dwelling unit, with one additional space (9’ width by 20’ depth)
required for homes exceeding 5,000 square feet. Multiple family units are required to
have one completely enclosed garage space per unit (9 feet width by 20 feet depth),
with an additional one-third parking space for each unit with less than two bedrooms
and one additional parking space for each unit with two or more bedrooms. Another
one-quarter parking space per unit is to be provided for visitors.
• Residential planned developments are required to have at least two completely
enclosed garage spaces (18 feet width by 20 feet depth) for each unit of less than two
bedrooms, and two additional uncovered spaces for each unit with two or more
bedrooms.
• Two-bedroom apartment units are required to have 2.25 parking spaces with one
space completely enclosed in a garage. The requirement for a space to be enclosed
adds incrementally to the total production costs of rental housing.
• A driveway shall be a minimum width of 10 feet and a paved 25 foot turning radius
shall be provided between the garage or other parking area and the street of access
for driveways which have an average slope of 10% or more, and which are 50’ or more
in length.
Off-Site Improvements Requirements
The following right-of-way improvements and off-site improvements are required by the City,
pursuant to Section 17.52.040 of the Municipal Code, unless existing in an acceptable
condition as determined by the director of public works. Construction projects subject to these
requirements include new construction or any addition to an existing building which adds 25
percent or more to the building’s gross floor area. Single-family homes are exempt.
Regardless of whether a building permit is required, these requirements may be a condition of
imposed as part of a Planning entitlement.
A. Street or Alley Paving. Street or alley paving or repaving, not to exceed the area from the
centerline to the curb for the length of the lot frontage. The city finds that this requirement is
reasonably related both in type and extent to the impact of the proposed development based
upon any one or more of the following: 1. The impacts of construction vehicles coming to and
from the site; 2. The anticipated traffic generated by the project once completed; and 3. The
project's proportional traffic impact on area roadways.
A-149
141
B. Sidewalks. Sidewalks, where required by the director of public works, based on the city's
street standards study report, not to exceed the length of the lot frontage, or the total length of
the front and street-side property lines for corner lots. The city finds that this requirement is
reasonably related both in type and extent to the impact of the proposed development based
upon any one or more of the following: 1. The need to provide safe pedestrian access to and
from the adjacent properties and the site; 2. The need, from the perspective of safety, to
separate pedestrian traffic from vehicular traffic coming to and from the site; and 3. The
increase in pedestrian traffic generated by the proposed development.
C. Curbs and Gutters. Curbs and gutters, where required by the director of public works, based
on the city's street standards study report, not to exceed the length of the lot frontage, or the
total length of the front and street-side property lines for corner lots. The city finds that this
requirement is reasonably related both in type and extent to the impact of the proposed
development based upon any one or more of the following: 1. The increase in impervious
coverage on the property created by the development; 2. The need to protect down-stream
properties from uncontrolled runoff from the site; and 3. The need to protect vehicles and
pedestrians coming to and from the site from uncontrolled and unchanneled storm water
runoff from the site.
D. Street Trees. Street trees, 15-gallon can minimum size (unless a smaller size is specified by
the city) at the spacing standards established by the director of public works. The city finds
that this requirement is reasonably related both in type and extent to the impact of the
proposed development based upon any one or more of the following: 1. The reduction in
existing landscaping and/or open space and natural vegetation on the site; 2. The need to
reduce the aesthetic impacts of the proposed development on the existing streetscape design;
and 3. The need to screen the proposed development from the street.
E. Ornamental Streetlights. Ornamental streetlights, in accordance with the type and spacing
requirements designated for the particular street by the director of public works. The city finds
that this requirement is reasonably related both in type and extent to the impact of the
proposed development based upon any one or more of the following: 1. The need created by
the development to provide safe pedestrian and vehicular access to and from the site at night;
2. The need to reduce the risk of increased crime to and from persons coming onto the site at
night or in early morning hours; and 3. The need to mitigate the aesthetic impacts of the
project by providing for consistency and compatibility with surrounding developments and
streetscape design.
F. Sewer and Drainage Facilities. Sewer and drainage facilities, as required by the director of
public works. The city finds that this requirement is reasonably related both in type and extent
to the impact of the proposed development based upon any one or more of the following: 1.
The increase in sewage and/or storm water runoff generated by the development; and 2. The
A-150
142
need created by the development to provide safe and proper disposal of sewage and storm
water runoff from the site to protect the subject property and surrounding properties.
Fees and Exactions
This section describes and quantifies permit, development, impact and other fees imposed on
housing development in Rancho Palos Verdes. Exactions also are discussed.
Fees
Appendix B contains the City’s Master fee schedule, which includes fees for several Planning
applications. Not every residential development project requires all of these applications.
Individually, the applications are not highly expensive. For example:
• Site Plan Review $357
• Site Plan Review (with Neighborhood Compatibility) $1,846
• Height Variation (Director Level Review) $4,651
• Parcel Map Tentative $11,731 + $1,000 trust deposit
• Parcel Map Final $4,688
• Tentative Tract Map $15,000 trust deposit
• Final Tract Map $9,606
• Environmental Assessment $856
• Initial Study/Negative Declaration $15,000 trust deposit + staff time
• Conditional Use Permit (New) $6,406
• Grading Permit (Major- Director Level Review) $2,884
• Environmental Excise Tax (varies by bedrooms) $1,951-$3,902
Dedications and fees associated with on-site and off-site improvements are generally required
of new subdivision tracts or parcel maps, not for improvements on existing lots. Such
improvements and fees are based on the actual cost of providing needed infrastructure and
public services. It is difficult, if not impossible, to estimate these costs on a “typical”
development basis. For instance, parkland dedication fees amount to the equivalent of
funding needed to provide .014 acre of parkland per dwelling unit (approximately 4 acres of
parkland per 1,000 population). The dollar amount of the fee, however, is dependent on both
the value of the land involved and the number of units proposed for development. Other
improvements, such as roadways or landscaping, are particularly site specific, differing widely
from project to project.
In addition to City fees, the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District Board of Education
has adopted the levying of these fees in accordance with Assembly Bill 2926, Statutes of
1986, State of California. For residential development projects, the fee is $3.48 per square
foot. Most of the City (pre-annexation) pays this amount. The eastside of the City that was
annexed in the 1980s pays an amount set by the Los Angeles Unified School District. The fees
paid by residential construction are $4.08 per square foot of assessable space.
A-151
143
Although the fees for “typical” single-family and multi-family developments cannot be
computed, the aggregate total fees would represent a small percentage of the cost of new
housing in Rancho Palos Verdes, considering the high costs of land and construction, which
are discussed in the Non-Governmental Constraints section of this Housing Element.
As stated above, typical fees cannot be computed; however, the actual fees for built projects is
known. Following are the fee amounts for representative single-family and multi-family housing
projects:
Single-Family Unit (3,000 square feet)
Per Sq. Ft.
City Permit Fees - PLAN CHECK FEES NSFR $0.6423
PERMIT FEE NSFR $1.6613
MEP PERMIT FEE $1.8756
EET Fee for New Development (Ground Up)- 2 bedroom more- $3,902.00
PVUSD School Fees- Residential - $3.48 Per Sq. ft.
Based on a 3,000 square foot single-family home, the fees above would amount to
$26,880.50 per unit, or $8.96 per square foot.
Multi-family Unit (1,000 square feet):
Per Sq. Ft.
City Permit Fees- PLAN CHECK FEES APT/CONDO/HOTEL 1ST 10K SF $0.4587
PLAN CHECK FEES APT/CONDO/HOTEL OVER 10K SF $0.1859
PERMIT FEE 1ST 10K SF $1.0539
PERMIT FEE 0VER 10K SF $0.7145
EET Fee for New Development (Ground Up)- 2 bedroom more- $3,902.00
PV School Fees – Commercial/Industrial- $0.56 Per Sq. Ft.
Based on the 1,000 square foot example unit, the City fees would amount to $6,875 per unit,
or $6.88 per square foot.
Exactions
By definition, an exaction is a large capital improvement included in a project’s approval for
development (e.g., a park dedication, building a school, etc.). The City does not generally
require large-scale capital improvements to be constructed by project applicants. Instead, the
City’s fees are intended to finance construction of such facilities.
A-152
144
In summary, the City concludes that the fees established by the City do not pose a constraint
to development. Since the City does not carry out exactions, they are not a constraint to local
development.
Housing for Persons wit h Disabilities
Definition of Family
Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code section 17.96.680 defines “family” as, “an individual or
two or more persons, living together as a single housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit.” The
City’s definition of family complies with fair housing laws, as it does not limit the number of
persons that occupy a housing unit, does not make a distinction regarding related or unrelated
persons living together, does not define family in terms of blood, marriage, or adoption, and
emphasizes that a family means a single “housekeeping” unit in a dwelling unit.
Concentrating/Siting Requirements for Group Homes
The City’s Municipal Code does not establish siting or separation requirements for group
homes.
Reasonable Accommodation Procedures
Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code chapter 17.67 contains provisions for reasonable
accommodations for persons with disabilities in the application of zoning laws and other land
use regulations, policies and procedures when necessary to eliminate barriers to housing
opportunities. The chapter includes:
• Procedure for requests for a reasonable accommodation
• Reference to applicable fair housing laws
• Definition of disability
• Timeline for a decision within 60 days
• Findings for granting a reasonable accommodation request
• Community Development Director determines whether to grant a request
Applications are made to the Community Development Director and a written determination
must be issued within 60 days of a complete application.
Application of Building Codes and ADA Requirements
The City has adopted the 2010 California Building Code (CBC). Due to its unique climatic,
topographical and geological characteristics, the City has adopted amendments to the CBC.
These amendments include storm damage precautions, fire retardant roofing, specialized
foundation requirements, seismic safety requirements, and geological and geotechnical
reports for the evaluation and elimination of hazards. None of these amendments uniquely
affect housing for the disabled. Per federal law, housing constructed after March 13, 1991,
needs to comply with the accessibility standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
A-153
145
As mentioned previously, the City has adopted a reasonable accommodation procedure. A
request for a reasonable accommodation may include a modification or exception to the rules,
standards and practices for the “development” of housing. The term “development” includes
modifications or exceptions to the Building Code.
In summary, the City’s rules, policies, and standards are consistent with fair housing laws. The
City’s Municipal Code does not impose constraints on the development of housing for disabled
persons.
Zoning for Group Homes and Community Care Facilities
City allows - by-right - all licensed residential care facilities housing six or fewer persons to be
located in single-and multi-family residential zones. The City does not impose any
requirements on these facilities other than those required for single-family homes. Apart from
requiring a conditional use permit, the City has no other conditions or use restrictions on group
homes serving seven or more persons.
Locally Adopted Ordinances that Directly Impact Housing Supply
City policies and code regulations that positively and directly impact housing supply are the
Inclusionary Housing program, the Density Bonus for Affordable Housing, and the prohibition
on Short-Term Rentals. Policies and code regulations that may constrain development, and
that existed prior to the current Housing Element adoption, include the Landslide Moratorium
Ordinance, the Neighborhood Compatibility Analysis, and the Coastal Development Permit
process (required by the State Coastal Act).
Inclusionary Housing
To encourage and facilitate the development of affordable housing, the City has adopted the
following land use controls:
Citywide Affordable Housing Requirement: All new residential developments of five or more
dwelling units are required to provide up to five percent of all units affordable to very low-
income households or to provide up to ten percent of all units affordable to low-income
households. The affordable units shall be provided on-site or off-site. Upon City Council
approval, in-lieu fees can be paid instead of providing the required affordable housing units. In
2005, the City Council established an in-lieu fee of $201,653 plus a ten percent
administrative fee per affordable unit required, in which the in-lieu fee is adjusted annually
based on the annual Consumer Price Index (CPI).
Housing Impact Fee: In order to mitigate the impact of local employment generation on the
local housing market, new nonresidential development or conversion of existing development
to a more intense use must make provision for housing affordable to low and very low
households. This requirement applies to applications for the construction, expansion or
A-154
146
intensification of nonresidential land uses, including but not limited to commercial projects,
golf courses, private clubs, and institutional developments.
Developers of nonresidential projects must pay a residential impact fee as established by the
City Council if the project cannot provide low- or very low-income affordable housing units for
each 10 employees to be generated by the nonresidential development, or every 5,000 square
feet of nonresidential space to be created. The same in-lieu fee established by the City Council
is applied and must be adequate to provide one low- or very low-income affordable housing
unit for each 10 employees to be generated by the nonresidential development
Density Bonus for Affordable Housing
A Density Bonus is a density increase over the maximum allowable residential density in a
particular zone and as allowed by the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The City’s density
bonus incentives were updated in 2008 to be consistent with SB 1818. SB 1818, which took
effect on January 1, 2005, requires all cities to adopt an ordinance that specifies how
compliance with Government Section 65915-65918 will be implemented.
The City provides the opportunity for a Density Bonus when a developer constructing a housing
development of five or more dwelling units agrees to the following:
• 10 percent of the total units covenanted for lower income households
• 5 percent of the total units covenanted for very low-income households
• A senior citizen housing development or mobile home park
• 10 percent of the total dwelling units are a common interest development for persons
and families of moderate income.
The amount of the Density Bonus is based on the percentage of affordable units and is
provided in Table 31 below.
Table 31: Density Bonuses for Affordable Housing
Affordable Units Density Bonus Additional Density Bonus
10% of Units at Low Income 20%
One percent increase in the number of affordable units
above initial ten percent, density bonus is increased by
one and one half percent up to a maximum of 35
percent.
5% of Units at Very Low Income 20%
One percent increase in the number of affordable units
above initial ten percent, density bonus is increased by
two and one half percent up to amaximum of 35
percent.
Senior Citizen Development 20%None.
10% of Units in Common Interest
Development at Moderate Income 20%
One percent increase in the number of affordable units
above initial ten percent, density bonus is increased by
one half percent up to amaximum of 35 percent.
A-155
147
Sources: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, Chapter 17.11 - Affordable Housing, 2021; BAE, 2021
AB 2345 went into effect in 2021 and increased the maximum possible Density Bonus for
projects incorporating affordable housing to 50 percent and also lowered thresholds for
projects to request additional concessions and incentives from standard zoning regulations in
conjunction with the density bonus. The City has not yet adopted revised density bonus
provisions, but State law requires the City to follow the provisions of AB 2345 even if it hasn’t
updated its local ordinance. The 2021-2029 Housing Element Update includes a program to
review and revise the City’s Density Bonus provisions to align with the new State law.
Short Term Rentals
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes prohibits the operation or advertisement of short-term rentals
in single-family and multi-family zoning districts. The single-family restriction is outlined in
Section 17.02.026 of the City’s Municipal Code and the multi-family restriction is outlined in
Section 17.04.050 of the Municipal Code. Additionally, definitions of advertisement,
responsible party, and short-term rental are provided in Section 17.96 of the Municipal Code.
On September 20, 2016, the City Council affirmed that short-term rentals, which are typically
considered rentals of a residential property for a period of time less than 30 consecutive days,
are prohibited within the City's residential zoning districts. Violations of the short-term rental
prohibition in the City's residential zoning districts maybe subject to fines of $2,500 for first
citation, $5,000 for the second citation and $7,500 for the third citation.
Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan
The City updated its General Plan and approved a final draft of the Natural Community
Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) in 2018. The City’s NCCP/HCP
includes provisions for the protection of wildlife and vegetation communities. The General Plan
Update did not introduce any major policies, programs or procedures that would constrain
development. As part of the protection efforts, the NCCP/HCP outlined a number of code
amendments required to protect sensitive communities/resources including Coastal Sage
Scrub. More specifically, Section 6.3.3 of the NCCP/HCP requires the adoption of an interim
Resource Protection Ordinance that would ensure that no proposed impacts, including but not
limited to grading, grubbing and development within the Preserve, on a vacant lot abutting the
preserve, or on a vacant lot outside the preserve that supports Coastal Sage Scrub will be
approved by the City without a determination of conformance with the established NCCP/HCP.
Article 34
Article 34 of the State Constitution requires local jurisdictions to obtain voter approval for
specified “low rent” housing projects that involve certain types of public agency participation.
Generally, a project is subject to Article 34 if more than 49 percent of its units will be rented to
low-income persons and includes State or federal funding; however, projects using tax credits
are not subject to Article 34. If a project is subject to Article 34, it will require an approval from
A-156
148
the local electorate. This can constrain the production of affordable housing, since the process
to seek ballot approval for affordable housing projects can be costly and time consuming, with
no guarantee of success. Local jurisdictions typically place a measure or referendum on the
local ballot that seeks authority to develop a certain number of units during a given period of
time. To date, Article 34 has not posed a barrier to affordable housing development in Rancho
Palos Verdes.
Efforts to Remove and Reduce Governmental Constraints
As a part of the 2018 General Plan update, the City revised the Open-Space Hazard land use
boundaries that bisected residential properties, so as to provide for more flexibility in
accommodating development activities in these restricted use areas.
Non-Governmental Constraints
A variety of nongovernmental constraints impact the maintenance, improvement, and
development of housing in a community. The Housing Element is required to discuss the
availability of financing and development costs such as the price of land and cost of
construction.
Availability of Financing
The availability of financing is a critical factor that can influence the cost and supply of
housing. There are generally two types of financing used in the housing market: (1) capital
used for initial site preparation and construction; and (2) capital used to finance the purchase
of units by homeowners and investors. Interest rates substantially impact home construction,
purchase, and improvement costs. A small fluctuation in rates can make a dramatic difference
in the annual income needed to qualify for a loan. While interest rates for development and
construction are generally higher than interest rates for home purchase (i.e.,
mortgages), financing is generally available in the City for new construction, rehabilitation, and
refinancing.
While financing is generally available for market-rate development, limited availability of
funding to subsidize for affordable projects is a key impediment to the construction of
affordable housing, not only in Rancho Palos Verdes, but throughout California and the U.S.
Cost of Land
Typically, land costs account for the largest single component of housing development costs.
The variable cost of land is influenced by many factors including location, lot size, zoning,
accessibility, availability of services, and existing infrastructure.
[Note: Land cost information will be included for the next draft after completion of pending
stakeholder interviews.]
A-157
149
Cost of Construction
Construction costs for residential development are based on the cost of labor and materials,
which vary depending on the type of development. Once a vacant parcel is purchased, the
contractor is also required to make site improvements before constructing a building on the
property. Site improvements can include connections to existing utility systems, rough grading,
and installation of water and sewer lines. The cost variation for site improvements depends on
the lot size, unit size, and type of residential dwelling. Other factors that can influence costs
are the primary infrastructure needed for the site and roadway improvements.
[Note: Construction cost information will be included for the next draft after completion of
pending stakeholder interviews.]
Factors contributing to these costs include geology and expansive soils conditions that often
require that new construction have deepened footings, grade beams, caissons, removal and
compaction of soils, and other conditions that drive up costs.
In recent years, several factors have caused the increased cost of materials, including global
trade patterns and federal policy decisions, such as tariffs, as well as state and local
regulations, such as building codes. Most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic has also
influenced the cost and availability of construction materials. Supply chain disruptions have
resulted in project delays and increased costs due to a shortage of construction materials and
equipment as well. In addition, labor costs have also increased in recent years, as the labor
pool has not kept pace with the increase in demand. Since the recession, California has seen
a severe tightening in the construction labor market, especially for workers trained in specific
construction trades. The lack of an available labor force drives up the cost of labor and leads
to project delays as workers are either unavailable or lost to more profitable projects.
[Note: total housing development cost information will be added to the next draft of the
Housing Element Update once information is collected from pending stakeholder interviews.]
Requests for Housing Developments at Reduced Densities
State law requires the Housing Element to include an analysis of requests to develop housing
at densities below those anticipated in the sites inventory. City staff indicated that no requests
were received to develop housing on sites identified in the Housing Element at densities below
the permitted levels.
Length of Time between Project Appro val and Applications for Building Permits
State law requires an analysis of the length of time between receiving approval for housing
development and submittal of an application for building permit. As mentioned previously, an
applicant can be submitted to the City’s Building & Safety Division for plan-check and
permitting after receiving Planning Division approval including any applicable appeal periods.
The Planning Division’s Conditions of Approval require an applicant to submit development
plans to the City’s Building & Safety Division for plan-check within 180 days or one year from
A-158
150
the project approval depending on the decision-making body. Otherwise, the Planning Division
approvals expire. According to City staff, most projects are submitted for plan check by the
Building & Safety Division within the aforementioned timeframe with a few exceptions that
request extensions prior to expiration or re-issuance after expiration. The length of time
passed is dependent on a number of factors, including funding constraints, time needed to
finalize project design, and time needed to construct infrastructure improvements.
Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes Zoning Code, consistent with the General Plan, includes
provisions for a variety of residential use types by zoning districts. The following analysis
explains how the City facilitates these housing types consistent with State law requirements.
Specifically, State Housing Element law (Government Code Section 65583(c)(1) and
65583.2(c)) require that local governments analyze the availability of provisions that will
“facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income
levels, including multi-family rental housing, factory-built housing, mobile-homes, housing for
agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters,
and transitional housing.”
Multi-family Rental Housing
As summarized previously in Error! Reference source not found., the Zoning Code includes five
zoning districts for development of multi-family housing.
Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Units
Development standards were established for SRO housing. SROs are permitted through a
Conditional Use Permit in the Commercial General (CG) zoning district. Municipal Code section
17.76.190 provides criteria for the development, operation and regulation of SRO facilities.
The criteria ensures that SRO facilities are developed and operated on adequate sites, at
proper and desirable locations with respect to development patterns, adjacent land uses, and
the goals and objectives of the general plan and any applicable specific plans.
Emergency Shelters
Section 17.96.625 of the Municipal Code defines emergency shelter as follows:
Housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of
six months or less by a homeless person. No individual or household may be denied
emergency shelter because of an inability to pay.
Section 17.20.020 of the Municipal Code permits emergency shelters in the Commercial
General (CG) District by-right.
A-159
151
Low Barrier Navigation Centers
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code does not include a definition of Low Barrier
Navigation Centers or regulations regarding the permitting of such facilities. AB 101, passed in
2019, requires that a low barrier navigation center be a use allowed by-right in mixed-use
zones and nonresidential zones permitting multi-family uses if it meets specified requirements.
The 2021-2029 Housing Element Update includes a program to review the Municipal Code to
define low barrier navigation centers and identify zones where they will be allowed by-right,
consistent with AB 101.
Transitional Housing
Section 17.96.2115 of the Municipal Code defines transitional housing as follows:
Rental housing that in which residents stay longer than overnight, but not more than six
months, and is exclusively designated and targeted for individuals and households at
immediate risk of becoming homeless or transitioning from homelessness to permanent
housing. Transitional housing is a permitted use in the single-family and multi-family
residential zones.
Supportive Housing
Section 17.96.2095 of the Municipal Code defines supportive housing as follows:
A facility that provides housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target
population, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing
resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her
ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. For purposes of this definition,
"target population" means persons with low incomes having one or more disabilities, including
mental illness, HIV or AIDS, substance abuse, or other chronic health conditions, or individuals
eligible for services provided under the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act
(Division 4.5 (commencing with Section 4500) of the California Welfare and Institutions Code)
and may include, among other populations, adults, emancipated youth, families, families with
children, elderly persons, young adults aging out of the foster care system, individuals exiting
from institutional settings, veterans, and homeless people. Supportive housing is a permitted
use in the single-family and multi-family residential zones.
Group Homes
State law requires that State-licensed group homes of six or fewer residents be regulated in
the same manner as single-family residences for zoning purposes. In the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes, licensed group homes serving six or fewer persons are a permitted use in single-family
and multi-family zones. Section 17.02.020 of the Municipal Code states that such zones must
permit “Any other use which specifically is required to be permitted in a single-family
residential district by state or federal law.”
A-160
152
Housing for Farmworkers
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is not proximate to agricultural land uses and does not have
any residents who are employed in farmworker occupations; therefore, housing for
farmworkers is not needed in the community.
Manufactured Homes
Manufactured homes are permitted by-right in single-family zones and are not subject to
restrictions that are not applicable to conventionally built housing. Mobile home parks are
permitted in multi-family zones with approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
Accessory Dwelling Units
ADUs and JADUs are permitted in single-family and multi-family residential zones pursuant to
Municipal Code Chapter 17.10, and for the residential use of one family per dwelling unit.
A-161
153
REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION
A key component of any Housing Element Update is identifying adequate sites to address the
jurisdiction’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The California Department of Housing
and Community Development (HCD) determines state-wide projected housing needs and
allocates new housing unit target numbers to regional Councils of Government (COGs). State
law (California Government Code Section 65584) provides for COGs to then prepare and adopt
plans that assign a “fair share” of the region’s housing construction need to each city and
county. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the COG that
determines fair-share portions of state allocations for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. These
allocations are contained in SCAG’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment.18
This process provides for minimum fair share allocation targets, or basic housing construction
needs, called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The RHNA is divided into four
income categories of housing affordability (i.e., very low, low, moderate, and above moderate).
Cities and counties must prepare housing elements showing how they plan to accommodate
their RHNA on available land that is appropriately zoned for residential development
affordable to all income categories. While the City of Rancho Palos Verdes is obligated to
ensure adequate land is zoned for housing, the City is not obligated to build any of the units or
finance their construction.
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes was given a total RHNA of 639 dwelling units for the 6th Cycle
RHNA projection period, which starts on October 15, 2021, and ends on October 15, 2029.
Table 32 shows the City’s 6th Cycle RHNA; however, in addition to the figures shown for the 6th
Cycle allocation, the updated Housing Element must accommodate eight additional lower-
income units that are carried over from the 5th Cycle.
18 See https://scag.ca.gov/rhna
A-162
154
Table 32: 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation for Rancho Palos Verdes
Note:
For the housing element update, local jurisdictions will have to consider extremely low income (ELI) households as well.
ELI housing needs may be calculated either by using Census data or simply assuming that 50 percent of the very low-
income households qualify as extremely low-income households.
Source: SCAG 6th Cycle Final RHNA Allocation Plan (pending HCD approval), 3/4/21.
The City has limited ability to control economic pressures that are largely driven by regional
housing supply and demand dynamics that are beyond the City’s control. However, ensuring
that the City adequately plans to accommodate its RHNA, including providing sites that can
accommodate housing for lower-income households is a key responsibility to ensure that the
City provides opportunity for development of housing that is suitable for households at all
income levels and does not contribute to economic pressures by unnecessarily constraining
the local supply of land available to meet demand for an expanded supply of housing.
Income Level Units
Very-Low Income (<50% of AMI)253
Low Income (50-80% of AMI)139
Moderate Income (80-120% of AMI)125
Above Moderate Income (>120% of AMI)122
Total 639
A-163
155
HOUSING SITES INVENTORY
State law requires the City to document its capacity to accommodate its RHNA for the
2021-2029 Housing Element planning period. Most of this capacity must be demonstrated in
the form of land appropriately zoned for production of new multi-family and single-family
housing. A portion of the RHNA may be accommodated via the projected production of ADUs.
This section details how Rancho Palos Verdes will accommodate its RHNA for 2021-2029. As
previously discussed, the City’s 2021-2029 RHNA is for a total of 639 housing units, spread
across various income categories. In addition, the City must accommodate an additional eight
lower-income units that are carried over from the 2013-2021 Housing Element, for a total of
647.
Accessory Dwelling Unit Production
State policy is to allow local jurisdictions to project a certain amount of housing development
to satisfy RHNA requirements via the development of ADUs, without identifying specific sites
where these ADUs may be developed. The ADU projection is based on the local community’s
track record of permitting ADUs.
Since a major overhaul of the ADU ordinance has been adopted and amended in 2020, the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes has processed increasing numbers of ADU applications. Between
the January 2020 and September 2021 time period, ten ADUs were permitted. This translates
to an average of five ADUs per year. Projecting this forward for the eight-year 2021-2029
Housing Element planning period, the City could expect to produce 40 ADUs.
Further, in collaboration with HCD, the SCAG has conducted a regional ADU affordability
survey, the results of which HCD has approved for local jurisdictions to use in projecting the
household income levels that future ADUs will serve. For Rancho Palos Verdes, the applicable
affordability assumptions are:
Extremely Low 15.0%
Very Low 2.0%
Low 43.0%
Moderate 6.0%
Above Moderate 34.0%
Based on the eight-year projection of 40 ADU units, and the above affordability assumptions,
ADU production could account for the following portions of the City’s RHNA for the lower- (very
low- and low-), moderate-, and above moderate-income levels:
Lower 24 units
Moderate 2 units
Above Moderate 14 units
A-164
156
Remaining RHNA After Accounting for ADU Production Potential
After accounting for the projected ADU production, the remaining RHNA to be accommodated
on identified housing sites is as follows:
Lower 371 units
Moderate 123 units
Above Moderate 108 units
Housing Sites
Given the large increase in the City’s RHNA in comparison to the 2013-2021 Housing Element,
it was a challenging process to identify housing sites sufficient to fully accommodate the
2021-2029 RHNA. City staff and consultants began the process of identifying potential
housing sites using a Geographic Information System (GIS) tool provided by SCAG to assist
with the process. The SCAG HELPR tool contains an assessor’s parcel database for the entire
SCAG region which had been populated with data regarding the property characteristics for
each parcel. The HELPR tool is searchable by jurisdiction and for vacant sites and commercial
sites that may be suitable for redevelopment with housing. City staff and consultants reviewed
the relevant parcel data for the City and conducted an initial scan. Then City staff, based on
local knowledge identified additional parcels within the City for consideration. This included
some sites that were the subject of a study of potential redevelopment along the Western
Avenue’s commercial corridor by Piasky Solutions that the City commissioned (“Piasky study”),
which were not included in the SCAG database. City staff also added some additional sites that
were anticipated to be included in a second phase of the Piasky study. These sites, along with
the HELPR tool and City staff input, formed the basis for a preliminary housing sites inventory
which was shared with the public for review and comment at an in-person public open house
hosted by the City on September 25, 2021, as well as a virtual public workshop that the City
hosted online from September 27, 2021 to October 3, 2021. This feedback was then shared
with the Planning Commission at their October 12, 2021 meeting and with the City Council at
their October 19, 2021 meeting. The feedback from the public provided at the Planning
Commission and City Council meetings, as well as those from the appointed and elected
members of these bodies served as the basis for City staff and consultants to refine the sites
inventory. All feedback is to be included in a public review draft of the 2021-2029 Housing
Element Update, for further public input and refinement. At this stage, additional information
will be added to the sites inventory and accompanying analysis to document the viability of
non-vacant sites for future housing development (see discussion below). The housing sites
inventory will be reviewed again by the Planning Commission when it reviews the Draft Housing
Element Update prior to submittal to HCD for its statutory review, and before the City Council
considers adoption of a final Housing Element Update. It is anticipated that the housing sites
inventory will undergo continuous refinement throughout the process leading up to adoption of
the Final 2021-2029 Housing Element Update. Table 33 lists the sites and their
A-165
157
characteristics. In Figure 76, the site locations are identified with the numbers corresponding
to the Site # column in the table.
A-166
158
Table 33: Housing Sites Inventory List (page 1 of 2)
Low
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
Income
1 7550-020-013 0.29 Existing Parking Lot for Commercial
Uses Yes 100%Mixed Use 25 7 0 0 7
2 7557-030-031 0.33 Existing Parking Lot for Commercial
Uses Yes 100%Mixed Use 12 3 0 0 3
3 7557-039-017 0.37 Adjacent to Existing Commercial
Building Yes 67%Mixed Use 45 11 11 0 0
4 7564-024-001 3.71 Vacant Insitutional Zoned Lot
Adajacent to Marymount University Yes 100%RM-12 12 44 0 0 44
5 7573-006-024 1.56 Vacant Instituational Lot Yes 69%RM-12 12 12 0 0 12
6 7578-002-011 6.89 Vacant Residential and Open Space
Lot Yes 93%RS-5 4 25 0 0 25
7 7586-028-007 0.41 Adjacent to Existing Professional /
Office Building & Parking Yes 20%Mixed Use 45 3 3 0 0
8 7586-028-009 0.65 Adjacent to Existing Bank Building &
Parking Yes 100%Mixed Use 45 29 29 0 0
9 7586-028-015 1.44 Adjacent to Existing Professional /
Office Building & Parking Yes 15%Mixed Use 45 9 9 0 0
10 7586-028-020 1.52
Adjacent to Existing Professional/Office
Building & Parking Yes 32%Mixed Use 45 21 21 0 0
11 7557-031-012 0.68 Existing Commercial Building Yes 82%Mixed Use 12 6 0 0 6
12 7557-039-005 0.55 Existing Commercial Building Yes 92%Mixed Use 45 22 22 0 0
13 7557-039-006 0.23 Existing Professional / Office Building &
Parking Yes 80%Mixed Use 45 8 8 0 0
14 7557-039-018 0.77 Existing Professional / Office Building &
Parking Yes 67%Mixed Use 45 23 23 0 0
15 7586-028-002 0.83 Existing Professional / Office Building &
Parking Yes 68%Mixed Use 45 25 25 0 0
16 7586-028-008 0.53 Existing Professional/Office Building &
Parking Yes 73%Mixed Use 45 17 17 0 0
17 7586-028-016 0.87 Existing Professional/Office Building &
Parking Yes 49%Mixed Use 45 19 19 0 0
18 7444-001-003 4.09 Existing Commercial Buildings Yes 100%Mixed Use 25 102 0 0 102
19 7444-001-004 0.92 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 25 23 0 0 23
20 7444-001-005 0.93 Existing Commercial Buildings Yes 100%Mixed Use 25 23 0 0 23
21 7445-005-002 0.56 Existing Commercial Buildings Yes 100%Mixed Use 45 25 25 0 0
22 7550-009-024 2.35 Existing Commercial Buildings Yes 100%Mixed Use 25 58 0 0 58
23 7550-020-015 0.41 Existing Commerical Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 12 4 0 0 4
24 7557-030-013 0.65 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 12 7 0 0 7
25 7557-030-032 0.45 Existing Commercial Building Yes 91%Mixed Use 12 4 0 0 4
26 7557-030-034 0.26 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 12 3 0 0 3
27 7557-030-035 0.44 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 12 5 0 0 5
29023 S. Western Ave.
29229 S. Western
550 Silver Spur Rd.
29051 S. Western
29105 S. Western
29125 S. Western
29215 S. Western
28500 S. Western Ave.
28300 S. Western Ave.
28326 S. Western Ave.
28900 S. Western Ave.
28619 S. Western Ave.
29229 S. Western Ave.
29519 S. Western
29529 S. Western
580 Silver Spur Rd.
430 Silver Spur Rd.
No Assigned Address
No Assigned Address
No Assigned Address
No Assigned Address
29601 S. Western Ave.
29317 S. Western
29505 S. Western
500 Silver Spur Rd.
550 Silver Spur Rd.
No Assigned Address
Parcel
Size Ac.CommentAPNSite #Infrastructure
Available ?
% of Site
Developable
Potential Rezone
to What Zone
Maximum Res.
Density (du/ac)
Max
Units
Potential RHNA Suitability
Physical Address
A-167
159
Table 33: Housing Sites Inventory List (page 2 of 2
Low
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
28 7557-031-010 0.18 Existing Commercial Building Yes 91%Mixed Use 12 1 0 0 1
29 7557-031-013 0.36 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 12 4 0 0 4
30 7557-031-014 0.53 Existing Commercial Building Yes 88%Mixed Use 12 5 0 0 5
31 7557-039-011 0.43 Existing Commercial Building Yes 77%Mixed Use 45 15 15 0 0
32 7557-039-014 0.77 Existing Commercial Building Yes 72%Mixed Use 45 24 24 0 0
33 7557-039-020 0.60 Existing Commerical Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 45 27 27 0 0
34 7561-001-002 0.13 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 20 2 0 0 2
35 7561-001-003 0.11 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 20 2 0 0 2
36 7561-001-013 0.26 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 20 5 0 0 5
37 7561-001-014 0.20 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 20 4 0 0 4
38 7561-001-900 0.11 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 20 2 0 0 2
39 7573-001-014 3.85 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 12 46 0 0 46
40 7573-001-015 2.52 Existing Commercial Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 12 30 0 0 30
41 7573-002-014 39.75 Existing Institutional Lot (Salvation
Army)Yes 32%Mixed Use 12 152 0 0 152
42 7586-028-010 0.43 Existing Professional / Office Building &
Parking Yes 100%Mixed Use 45 19 19 0 0
43 7588-015-008 4.52 Existing Retail / Market Yes 17%Mixed Use 22 16 0 0 16
44 7550-020-012 0.46 Existing Commercial Building Yes 67%Mixed Use 25 7 0 0 7
45 7550-020-014 0.30 Existing Commercial Building Yes 69%Mixed Use 25 5 0 0 5
46 7557-030-033 0.30 Existing Commercial Building Yes 87%Mixed Use 12 3 0 0 3
47 7550-019-018 11.15 Existing Multi-Level Commerical Building Yes 100%Mixed Use 30 334 334 0 0
48 7572-012-024 16.84
Residential Lot with Agriculture, Golf-
course and Event Center (Point View
Property)
Yes 100%RS-5 4 67 0 0 67
49 7572-012-028 36.18 Vacant Residental Lot (Point View
Property)Yes 100%RM-6 6 217 0 0 217
50 7581-023-037 27.48 Vacant Residential Lot (Plumtree
Property)None 100%RS-5 4 109 0 0 109
% of Site
Developable
Potential Rezone
to What Zone
Maximum Res.
Density (du/ac)
Max
Units
Potential RHNA Suitability
Site #APN Parcel
Size Ac.Comment Infrastructure
Available ?
28821 S. Western
6001 Palos Verdes Drive
South
6001 Palos Verdes Drive
South
No Assigned Address
450 Silver Spur Rd.
30019 Hawthorne Blvd.
29019 S. Western
29035 S. Western
29211 S. Western
16 Miraleste Plaza
No Assigned Address
31098 Hawthorne Blvd.
31100 Hawthorne Blvd.
30840 Hawthorne Blvd.
29601 S. Western
29701 S. Western
40 Miraleste Plaza
29 Miraleste Plaza
4007 Miraleste Dr.
29413 S. Western
29403 S. Western
29409 S. Western
29619 S. Western
Physical Address
A-168
160
Figure 76a: Housing Sites Inventory Map, West
A-169
161
Figure 76b: Housing Sites Inventory Map, East
A-170
162
Table 34 contains a summary of the housing capacity of the identified housing sites, including
a summary of the 2021-2029 6th Cycle RHNA, followed by a categorization of the potential for
sites to accommodate the portions of the RHNA at different income levels. The table assumes
that housing units that could be developed on sites and rezoned for densities of 30 dwelling
units per acre could potentially accommodate housing to address lower-income (i.e., very low-,
and low-income) housing needs. As shown in the table, sites in the inventory list could
potentially accommodate up to 631 new lower-income housing units. With a total lower-
income RHNA of 400 units, this leaves excess capacity of 231 units.
The 231 excess lower-income units can also help to address the RHNA for moderate-income
housing, which is 125 units for the 2021-2029 6th Cycle RHNA. As shown in the table, this
leaves an excess capacity of 106 units after accounting for the lower-income and moderate-
income RHNA needs. This represents an approximately 20 percent buffer above the City’s
lower- and moderate-income RHNA obligation.
The lower part of Table 34 shows that sites in the housing inventory list could potentially
accommodate an additional 1,003 above moderate-income housing units on sites. These sites
could be zoned for housing at densities below 30 dwelling units per acre this representing a
substantial 881-unit surplus above the RHNA obligation for above moderate-income
households.
Overall, the housing sites inventory provides a limited buffer above the need for lower- and
moderate-income housing sites and a substantial buffer for above moderate-income housing
sites. However, the inventory is dependent upon potential infill and redevelopment to
accommodate more than half of its RHNA for lower-income households. As discussed below,
this triggers additional requirements for analysis of the viability of the non-vacant sites to
successfully accommodate the RHNA. Ideally, the City would identify additional vacant sites
that could accommodate development for lower-income housing at densities of 30 dwelling
units per acre or more; however, as a mostly built-out City, this may not be feasible.
A-171
163
Table 34: Summary of Housing Inventory Capacity
Notes:
(a) The Very Low-Income and Low-Income categories each include four carryover units from the 5th Housing Element
Update Cycle.
(b) 30 dwelling units per acre is the default minimum density provided in State law for zoning to accommodate very low-
income and
low-income housing in Rancho Palos Verdes.
(c) A limited number of additional housing units at the very low-, low-, moderate-, and above moderate-income levels can
be accommodated
with construction of Secondary Dwelling Units on lots with existing housing units.
(d) Moderate-income housing will require below-market rents or sales prices. Moderate-income units can be
accommodated on excess
sites suitable for lower-income housing development. A limited number of additional moderate-income units could be
accommodated as
Secondary Dwelling Units on lots with existing homes.
Sources: City of Rancho Palos Verdes, BAE, 2021.
Analysis for Non-Vacant Sites
AB 1397 requires additional analysis to demonstrate the likelihood that non-vacant sites will
be redeveloped as housing. The methodology must include:
• The jurisdiction’s “past experience with converting existing uses to higher density
residential development;”
• The “current market demand for the existing use;” and
Above
Very Low-Low-Moderate-Moderate-
Income Income Income Income
6th Cycle RHNA (New Housing Units) (a)257 143 125 122
Default Minimum Density for Lower-Income RHNA Sites (b)30 d.u./ac.30 d.u./ac.n.a.n.a.
Preliminary RHNA Housing Sites Inventory Capacity
Accommodation of Lower-Income RHNA
Potential
Zoning at
30 d.u./ac.+
Potential New Units on Preliimary Sites (c)631
Total Lower-Income RHNA 400
Surplus Lower-Income Site Capacity 231
Accommodation of Moderate-Income RHNA
Potential New Units on Excess Lower-Income Sites (d)231
Moderate-Income RHNA 125
Surplus Moderate-Income Site Capacity 106
Accommodation of Above Moderate-Income RHNA
Potential
Zoning at
<30 d.u./ac.
Potential New Units on Preliimary Sites (c)1,003
Above Moderate-Income RHNA 122
Surplus Above Moderate Income Site Capacity 881
A-172
164
• “An analysis of any existing leases or other contracts that would perpetuate the
existing use or prevent redevelopment of the site for additional residential
development.” (Section 65583.2(g)(1).)
Furthermore, when a community relies on non-vacant sites to accommodate 50 percent or
more of its lower-income RHNA, HCD presumes that the existing use will “impede additional
residential development.” (Section 65583.2(g)(2).) To overcome this presumption, the housing
element must include site-specific “findings based on substantial evidence that the use is
likely to be discontinued during the planning period.” (Section 65583.2(g)(2).)
[Note: The non-vacant sites analysis will be added to the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element
Update when the housing sites list is further refined.]
A-173
165
QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES
While the RHNA represents the City’s legal obligation to plan for the capacity to accommodate
new housing development, the Housing Element also establishes quantified objectives that
represent the City’s anticipated new housing construction, rehabilitation, and preservation
accomplishments during the 2021-2029 Housing Element period.
Table 35 summarizes the City’s quantified objectives for the construction, rehabilitation, and
conservation for the 2021-2029 Housing Element period. The quantified objectives do not
represent a ceiling on development, but rather set a goal for the City to achieve based on
needs, resources, and constraints.
New Construction
The objectives for new construction are based on the City’s historic production patterns and
anticipated resources available to support the development of below-market housing for lower-
income households. Although the RHNA does not include allocations for extremely low-income
households, Housing Element Law requires that jurisdictions estimate the need for housing
units affordable to extremely low-income households. The quantified objectives assume that
half of the very low-income housing production addresses needs for housing to serve
extremely low-income households.
To date in the 2013-2021 Housing Element planning period, the City has permitted 120 net
new above-moderate income housing units. The City’s above moderate-income RHNA for the
2021-2029 Housing Element planning period is approximately equal to this number – 122.
Based on the results of the 2013-2021 time period, the City’s quantified objective for above
moderate-income housing units for the 2021-2029 planning period is equal to the new RHNA.
Due to limited resources and the need for substantial subsidy for all unit types other than
above moderate-income units, the City has seen much more limited production of housing
units for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. Although the City intends to fully
accommodate the 2021-2029 6th Cycle RHNA for these groups by providing land,
appropriately zoned for development that could serve these income groups, the City’s
quantified objectives for these income categories are more modest, and are based on the
following:
1. Assuming the City achieves its objective of 122 above moderate-income units (market
rate units), the City’s inclusionary housing policies could potentially generate up to
seven very low-income units or up to 13 low-income units. For the purposes of
quantified objectives, the Housing Element assumes that the market-rate units will
generate inclusionary units or in-lieu fees that be leveraged to indirectly develop
affordable units equal to three very low-income units and seven low-income units.
A-174
166
2. As discussed previously, the City anticipates eight-year projection of 40 ADU units and,
based on SCAG’s ADU affordability analysis, these would break into income categories
as follows:
Lower 24 units
Moderate 2 units
Above Moderate 14 units
The City assumes that the lower-income ADU units will be distributed as follows: 6 extremely
low-, 6 very low-, and 12 low-income units. The above-moderate ADU units are assumed to be
included in the 122-unit moderate-income production objective discussed above.
Finally, the City’s housing in-lieu fee fund has a balance of approximately $856,000. During
the 2021-2029 Housing Element planning period, the City will issue a notice of funds
availability (NOFA) for affordable housing developers interested in using the City’s in-lieu fees
to help develop one or more affordable housing projects in the City. Assuming approximately
$35,000 in local assistance per affordable unit can be leveraged with State, federal, and other
affordable housing funding sources, the City’s existing in-lieu fee fund balance could leverage
production of approximately 24 new affordable housing units. For the purpose of quantified
objectives, the City assumes that these units could be distributed as follows: 6 extremely low-,
6 very low-, 12 low-income.
These quantified objectives total to 182 new housing units over the 2021-2029 time period,
as summarized in Table 35.
Rehabilitation
The rehabilitation goal of zero reflects the facts that the City does not have significant housing
rehabilitation needs and that the City lost its funding source for housing rehabilitation projects
with the State’s dissolution of local redevelopment agencies; however, the Housing Element
contains a program for the City to assist lower-income households that may be in need of
housing rehabilitation assistance by providing referrals to other agencies or organizations that
may be able to help.
Preservation
The preservation goal of zero reflects the fact that the City does not have any assisted housing
units at risk of conversion to market rates during the next ten years.
A-175
167
Table 35: 2021-2019 Quantified Objectives by Income Level
Source: City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 2021.
New
Income Category Construction Rehabilitation Conservation
Extremely Low 0 0
Inclusionary Units 0
ADU Units 6
Existing Housing Impact Fees 6
Very Low 0 0
Inclusionary Units 3
ADU Units 6
Existing Housing Impact Fees 6
Low 0 0
Inclusionary Units 7
ADU Units 12
Existing Housing Impact Fees 12
Moderate 0 0
ADU units 2
Above Moderate 122 0 0
All Income Categories 182 0 0
A-176
168
HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND PROGRAMS
This chapter presents Rancho Palos Verdes’ goals for the 2021-2029 Housing Element
planning period as well as an implementation program to support these goals and policies.
The goals and programs outlined below are based on findings from the needs analysis,
assessment of fair housing, constraints analysis, and sites inventory presented in prior
chapters, as well as input received from the community and stakeholders during the Housing
Element Update process.
The programs below outline a strategy for addressing State Housing Element requirements
and advancing the City’s housing objectives, while remaining tailored to be achievable within
the Housing Element planning period, given the City’s financial and staffing resources. The
goals and programs described in this chapter address five overarching goals. Each goal is
supported by one or more programs that will be implemented during the 2021-2029 Housing
Element planning period. Table 36 summarizes the programs and also identifies the
anticipated timing and responsible parties for implementation.
Goal 1: Housing Supply
Provide an adequate supply of housing for people of all ages, incomes, lifestyles, and housing
preferences, and types of households, including for households with special housing needs.
1. Zoning Amendments to Increase Housing Development Potential (modification of
existing Program #1)
• Include component for Mixed-Use Overlay Zoning District (modify existing program
and expand beyond Western Avenue)
• Include component for other re-zonings to fully accommodate RHNA with
appropriate zoning amendments for sites targeted in the sites inventory.
• Rezone for at least eight lower-income carryover units within 12 months, and
remainder sites necessary to fully accommodate the RHNA within 36 months of
adoption of the Housing Element Update.
2. General Plan Amendment to Include a High-Density Residential Land Use Category
(new)
• Establish General Plan land use category that allows for residential density of at
least 30 dwelling units per acre, or higher, as appropriate to provide General Plan
consistency for sites to be zoned to accommodate the City’s RHNA for lower-
income households in Program #1.
3. Accessory Dwelling Unit Production (modify existing)
• Bring local ADU Ordinance in minimal compliance with State ADU laws.
• Include component to incentivize and encourage affordable ADU units including
the development of an ADU handout and development spec sheet.
A-177
169
• Include component to publicize and provide links to State’s list of grants and
financial incentives for affordable ADUs pursuant to AB 671.
4. No Net Loss (continue existing)
Goal 2: Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
Affirmatively further fair housing and protect existing residents from displacement.
5. Section 8 Rental Assistance (modify existing to ensure outreach to minority groups that
experience disproportionate housing problems)
6. Citywide Affordable Housing Requirement/Housing Impact Fee (continue existing)
• Include a component to issue a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for affordable
housing developers to utilize the City’s affordable housing in-lieu fees to develop
an affordable housing project in the City.
7. First-time Homebuyer Assistance (modify existing to ensure outreach to minority
groups that experience disproportionate housing problems)
8. Outreach for Persons with Disabilities (modify existing to ensure outreach to minority
groups that experience disproportionate housing problems)
9. Extremely Low-income Housing (modify existing to ensure outreach to minority groups
that experience disproportionate housing problems)
10. Fair Housing Services (modify existing to ensure outreach to minority groups that
experience disproportionate housing problems)
11. Fair Housing Information (modify existing to ensure outreach to minority groups that
experience disproportionate housing problems)
Goal 3: Address Governmental Constraints
Address City policies and practices that constrain the City’s ability to provide housing for
households at all income levels and for households with special housing needs and bring City
policies in line with recent changes in State law.
12. Zoning Ordinance Amendments to Remove Governmental Constraints (modify existing)
• Component to bring City’s Density Bonus Ordinance (2008) in line with State
Density bonus law (AB 2345, 2020).
• Component to establish objective design standards in line with SB 330/SB 35
• Component to establish permit streamlining for qualifying housing projects under
SB 35.
A-178
170
• Component to establish use of HCD’s SB 330 Preliminary Project Application form.
• Component to include Low Barrier Navigation Centers as a by-right use in mixed-
use overlay zones and nonresidential zones permitting multi-family housing,
subject to meeting requirements as allowed by AB 101.
13. Transparency in Housing Standards and Fees (new)
• Program to publish all development standards information and housing fee
information on the City’s website in compliance with California Government Code
Section 65940.1.
Goal 4: Maintenance of the Housing Stock
Maintain and improve the condition of Rancho Palos Verdes’ housing stock.
14. Housing Code Enforcement (continue existing)
Goal 5: Energy Conservation
Promote energy conservation in residential buildings.
15. Energy Conservation (continue existing)
A-179
171
Table 36: 2021-2029 Housing Element Programs (page 1 of 2)
Program Name Description/Objectives Timing Responsibility
1. Zoning Amendments to Increase Housing
Development Potential (modification of existing
Program #1)
Establish Mixed-Use Overlay
Zoning District (modification of
existing program to expand
beyond Western Avenue);
Include other rezonings to fully
accommodate the 2021-2029
RHNA with appropriate zoning.
Rezone for at leat eight lower-
income carryover units from 5th
Cycle.
Rezone for at least
eight lower-income
units within 12
months and rezone
to accommodate
remainder of RHNA
within 36 months.
Community
Development
Department,
Planning
Commission, City
Council
2. General Plan Amendment to Include a High-
Density Residential Land Use Category (new)
Establish General Plan land use
category that allows for
residential density of at least 30
dwelling units per acre, or higher,
as appropriate to provide General
Plan consistency for sites to be
zoned to accommodate the
City’s RHNA for lower-income
households in Program #1.
Concurrent with
rezonings under
Program 1.
Community
Development
Department,
Planning
Commission, City
Council
3. Accessory Dwelling Unit Production
(modification of existing)
Bring ADU Ordinance in minimal
compliance with State ADU laws.
Include component to incentivize
and encourage affordable ADU
units, including development of
an ADU handout and
development specifications
sheet. Include component to
publicize and provide links to
State's list of grants and financial
incentives for affordable ADUs
pursuant to AB 671.
Within 12 months of
HEU adoption.
Community
Development
Department,
Planning
Commission, City
Council
4. No Net Loss (continue existing)Monitor housing sites inventory
to ensure sites are adequate to
accommodate RHNA and take
action to identify and zone
additional sites if necessary.
On-going Community
Development
Department,
Planning
Commission, City
Council
5. Section 8 Rental Assistance (modification of
existing program to ensure outreach to minority
groups that experience disproportionate housing
problems)
Continue to assist the Housing
Authority (LACDA) by conducting
a Landlord Outreach Program,
informing the Housing Authority
of the City's status on providing
affordable housing through the
existing housing stock and
providing an Apartment Rental
Survey to the Housing Authority.
On-going Community
Development
Department
6. Citywide Affordable Housing
Requirement/Housing Impact Fee (continue
existing program)
Continue to implement
inclusionary requirements and
housing impact fee requirements.
During the 2021-2029 period
issue a NOFA to utilize in-lieu
fee funds.
On-going; issue
NOFA by 2024.
Community
Development
Department
7. First-time Homebuyer Assistance (modify
existing to ensure outreach to minority groups
that experience disproportionate housing
problems)
Connect qualifying households
with first-time homebuyer
assistance programs offered by
other agencies: County
Homeownership Program,
Morgage Credit Certificate
Program, and So Cal Home
Financing Authority First Home
Mortgage Program.
On-going Community
Development
Department
A-180
172
Table 36: 2021-2029 Housing Element Programs (page 2 of 2)
Program Name Description/Objectives Timing Responsibility
8. Outreach for Persons with Disabilities (modify
existing to ensure outreach to minority groups
that experience disproportionate housing
problems)
Continue to work with the Harbor
Regional Center to implement an
outreach program that informs
families within Rancho Palos
Verdes about housing and
services available for persons
with developmental disabilities.
On-going Community
Development
Department
9. Extremely Low-income Housing (modify
existing to ensure outreach to minority groups
that experience disproportionate housing
problems)
Assist 15 extremely low-income
households through a
combination of inclusionary units,
ADUs, new affordable housing
supported with in-lieu fees, and
assistance with securing Section
8 vouchers through LACDA
On-going Community
Development
Department
10. Fair Housing Services (modify existing to
ensure outreach to minority groups that
experience disproportionate housing problems)
Continue to contract with
Housing Right Center for fair
housing services.
On-going Community
Development
Department in
collaboration with
Housing Rights
Center
11. Fair Housing Information (modify existing to
ensure outreach to minority groups that
experience disproportionate housing problems)
Continue to provide Fair Housing
brochure that describes fair
housing laws and rights; links to
the Housing Rights Center
website; State Department of
Fair Employment and Housing;
and U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development.
• Fair Housing Services and
Program information continues to
be made available on the City's
website.
On-going Community
Development
Department
12. Zoning Ordinance Amendments to Remove
Governmental Constraints (modify existing)
Bring City's Density Bonus
Ordinance in line with State
Density Bonus law; establish
objective design standards in line
with SB 330/SB 35; adopt use of
HCD's SB 330 Preliminary
Project Application form; amend
Zoning Ordinance to include Low
Barrier Navigation Centers as a
by-right use in mixed-use overlay
zones and non-residential zones
permitting multi-family housing,
subject to meeting requirements
as allowed by AB 101.
Update Density
Bonus Ordinance
within 24 months of
HEU adoption.
Establish objective
design standards
within 36 months of
HEU adoption.
Adopt SB 330
Preliminary
Application form
within 24 months of
HEU adoption.
Create by-right
zoning for Low
Barrier Navigation
Centers within 18
months of HEU
adoption.
Community
Development
Department,
Planning
Commission, City
Council
13. Transparency in Housing Standards and
Fees (new)
Publish all development
standards information and
housing fee information on the
City’s website in compliance with
California Government Code
Section 65940.1.
Within 6 months of
HEU adoption.
Community
Development
Department
14. Housing Code Enforcement (continue
existing)
Continue to manage the housing
code enforcement on a
complaint basis and strive for
voluntary compliance through the
Code Enforcement Division.
On-going Community
Development
Department
15. Energy Conservation (continue existing)Continue to encourage voluntary
participation in the City's Green
Building Construction Program
by offering permit streamlining
as well as up to a 50% rebate for
Planning and Building fees
On-going Community
Development
Department
A-181
173
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
State law requires that General Plans are internally consistent. This means that the contents
of one element, such as the Housing Element, must not be in conflict with any other part of the
General Plan. The 2021-2029 Housing Element Update represents a substantial modification
of the 2013-2021 Housing Element. In particular, the 2021-2029 Housing Element programs
call for post-adoption actions to update various parts of the Municipal Code to align with State
law and modify the zoning for certain parcels in order for the City to be able to accommodate
its RHNA for the 2021-2029 Housing Element planning period.
Because these actions will be undertaken after adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element
Update, amendments to other parts of the General Plan are necessary to ensure consistency.
The General Plan amendments related to the Housing Element Update will not be made
concurrent with the adoption of the Housing Element Update. Rather, it will be handled
concurrently as various Housing Element programs are completed over the next eight years.
A-182
174
APPENDIX A: SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
ACTIVITIES
• Joint Planning Commission/City Council Study Session - August 25, 2021
• 6th Housing Element Survey - August 25, 2021 to October 3, 2021
• Stakeholder Interviews - August/September/October 2021
• In-Person Housing Element Open House - September 25, 2021
• Virtual Housing Element Open House - September 25, 2021 to October 3, 2021
• Draft Housing Element Planning Commission Meeting - October 12, 2021
• Draft Housing Element City Council Meeting - October 19, 2021
[ Note: to be added when community engagement process is completed.]
A-183
175
APPENDIX B: MASTER FEE SCHEDULE
A-184
CITY CLERK
Fee Description Fee
Document Copies
Photocopy
Document Copy 8.5 x 11 $0.23
Document Copy 11 x 17 $0.24
Document Copy 8.5 x 14 $0.24
Document Copy FPPC related documents per Govt Code Section 81008 $0.10
PHOTOCOPY OF MAPS AND OTHER OVERSIZED ITEMS
AUDIO AND VIDEO MEDIA
Electronic Records
COPY OF EXISTING ELECTRONIC RECORD BURNED TO CD ‐ Per CD $5
COPY OF EXISTING ELECTRONIC RECORD EMAILED TO REQUESTER
Document Copy
Copies $0
RETRIEVAL OF FPPC FILINGS 5 OR MORE YEARS OLD $5
BUILDING PLANS COPY FEE:
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
THIS IS THE COST PER PAGE IF CITY STAFF COPIES THE RECORDS. IF THE CITY ELECTS TO USE AN OUTSIDE VENDOR, REQUESTER
SHALL PAY THE AMOUNT CHARGED BY THE OUTSIDE VENDOR.
THE CITY USES AN OUTSIDE VENDOR FOR OVERSIZED ITEMS. THE REQUESTER SHALL PAY THE AMOUNT CHARGED TO THE CITY
BY THE OUTSIDE VENDOR.
SEE FEE EXPLANATION
SEE FEE EXPLANATION
THE CITY USES AN OUTSIDE VENDOR FOR COPYING RECORDS THAT ARE IN AUDIO OR VIDEO MEDIA FORMAT. THE REQUESTER
SHALL PAY THE AMOUNT CHARGED TO THE CITY BY THE OUTSIDE VENDOR.
FPPC FILINGS PURSUANT TO SECTION 81008 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE:
PER REQUEST FEE ESTABLISHED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 81008. A REQUEST FOR MORE THAN ONE REPORT, OR
STATEMENT, OR REPORT AND STATEMENT, AT THE SAME TIME SHALL BE CONSIDERED A SINGLE REQUEST.
SEE FEE EXPLANATION
SEE FEE EXPLANATION
THE COST OF THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT TAKES A CITY EMPLOYEE TO COPY THE FILES TO AN EMAIL (1), BASED UPON THE FULLY
BURDENED HOURLY RATE OF THE CITY EMPLOYEE PERFORMING THE TASK.
PRODUCTION OF AN ELECTRONIC RECORD AT OTHER THAN A REGULARLY SCHEDULED INTERVAL
OR WHERE THE REQUEST REQUIRES DATA COMPILATION, EXTRACTION, OR PROGRAMMING TO
PRODUCE THE RECORD (2).
SEE FEE EXPLANATION
IF CITY STAFF PERFORMS THE TASK, THE COST OF THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT TAKES A CITY EMPLOYEE TO PRODUCE A COPY OF
THE RECORD (INCLUDING THE AMOUNT OF TIME TO CONSTRUCT THE RECORD, AND THE AMOUNT OF TIME TO PERFORM
PROGRAMMING AND COMPUTER SERVICES NECESSARY TO PRODUCE A COPY), BASED UPON THE FULLY BURDENED HOURLY
RATE OF THE CITY EMPLOYEE PERFORMING THE TASK, PLUS COSTS FOR COPYING TO CD OR EMAIL AS PROVIDED ABOVE. IF THE
CITY ELECTS TO USE A CONTRACTOR TO PERFORM THE WORK, REQUESTER SHALL PAY THE AMOUNT CHARGED TO THE CITY BY
THE CONTRACTOR PLUS COSTS FOR COPYING TO CD OR EMAIL AS PROVIDED ABOVE.
PER PAGE FEE ESTABLISHED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 81008.
STAFF TIME TO RESEARCH ADDRESSES, PREPARE LETTERS TO BUILDING OWNER AND BUILDING
PROFESSIONAL (E.G. ARCHITECT) AND PROCESS SAME
A-185
CITY CLERK
Fee Description Fee
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
POSTAGE (REGISTERED MAIL OR RETURN RECEIPT)
COPIES
MISCELLANEOUS COSTS:
MAILING COSTS
DEPOSIT
WAIVER OF COSTS
Election
CANDIDATE FILING $25
INITIATIVE FEE $200
SEE FEE EXPLANATION
SEE FEE EXPLANATION
SEE FEE EXPLANATION
SEE FEE EXPLANATION
SEE FEE EXPLANATION
ACTUAL COST CHARGED BY THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE.
(1) THIS TIME DOES NOT INCLUDE THE TIME IT TAKES TO RESEARCH, LOCATE OR REVIEW A RESPONSIVE ELECTRONIC RECORD.
(2) GOVERNMENT CODE 6253.9 (b).
(3) CALIFORNIA HEALTH & SAFETY CODE SECTION 19851 AUTHORIZES THE CITY TO CHARGE A FEE IN AN AMOUNT IT DETERMINES
IS REASONABLY NECESSARY TO COVER
SAME AS PHOTOCOPIES AND ELECTRONIC RECORDS LISTED ABOVE, DEPENDENT UPON SIZE.
THE COSTS OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT IN PRODUCING COPIES OF BUILDING PLANS AND IN COMPLYING WITH THE
PROVISIONS OF SECTION 19851 WHICH REQUIRE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO OBTAIN CERTAIN RELEASES BEFORE
DUPLICATING THOSE PLANS.
UNDER THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT, THE CITY IS NOT REQUIRED TO MAIL DISCLOSABLE RESPONSIVE RECORDS TO A REQUESTER.
IF A REQUESTER ASKS TO HAVE DISCLOSABLE RESPONSIVE RECORDS SENT TO THEM EITHER THROUGH U.S. MAIL OR VIA
ANOTHER DELIVERY SERVICE, THE REQUESTER SHALL PAY THE ACTUAL POSTAGE COSTS AND A HANDLING FEE EQUAL TO THE
COST OF THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT TAKES A CITY EMPLOYEE TO PACKAGE, ADDRESS AND MAIL THE REQUESTED DOCUMENTS,
BASED UPON THE FULLY BURDENED HOURLY RATE OF THE CITY EMPLOYEE PERFORMING THE TASK.
THE CITY CLERK, OR HIS OR HER DESIGNEE, MAY COLLECT THE COST OF DUPLICATION BEFORE DUPLICATING THE RECORDS. IN
THE EVENT THE EXACT COST IS NOT KNOWN IN ADVANCE DUE TO THE VOLUME OF THE RECORDS REQUESTED, THE CITY CLERK
MAY MAKE A GOOD FAITH ESTIMATE OF THE COST AND REQUIRE THE REQUESTER TO PAY A DEPOSIT EQUAL TO THE
ESTIMATED COST PRIOR TO DUPLICATING THE RECORDS REQUESTED. ANY FUNDS IN EXCESS OF THE DIRECT COST OF
DUPLICATION SHALL BE PROMPTLY REFUNDED TO THE REQUESTER.
THE CITY CLERK, OR HIS OR HER DESIGNEE, MAY WAIVE OR REDUCE THE COPYING FEE IF THE REQUEST FOR REPRODUCTION IS A
MINIMAL ONE, IF THE RECORDS ARE BEING SUPPLIED TO ANOTHER PUBLIC ENTITY WITH WHICH THE CITY EXCHANGES RECORDS
AT NO COST TO THE CITY, OR IF IT IS IN THE CITY'S BEST INTEREST TO DO SO.
THE COST OF THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT TAKES A CITY EMPLOYEE TO PERFORM THE TASK, BASED ON THE FULLY BURDENED
HOURLY RATE OF THE CITY EMPLOYEE PERFORMING THE TASK
A-186
FINANCE
Fee Description Fee
Business License
Processing Fee
NEW LICENSE $0
RENEWAL $0
PEDDLING PERMITS (PLUS BUSINESS LICENSE FEE)$165
SENATE BILL 1186: EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2013, STATE LAW REQUIRES COLLECTION OF A $4 FEE FROM EVERY BUSINESS LICENSE
APPLICANT TO FUND CERTIFIED DISABILITY ACCESS SPECIALIST PROGRAMS.
OTHER: ADDITIONAL SERVICES FOR WHICH A FEE HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED SHALL BE CHARGED AT THE CITY'S FULLY
BURDENED HOURLY RATE.
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
A-187
PUBLIC WORKS
Fee Description Fee Notes
Encroachment Permits
AGREEMENT $301
MAILBOX $92
WALL $513
DUMPSTER $66
PARKWAY TREE INSTALLATION, REMOVAL OR REPLACEMENT ‐
INSTALLED BY CITY $231 PLUS ACTUAL COST OF TREE REPLACEMENT
PARKWAY TREE INSTALLATION, REMOVAL OR REPLACEMENT ‐
INSTALLED BY RESIDENT $44 PLUS ACTUAL COST OF TREE REPLACEMENT
STREET TREE INSTALLATION $344 Installation of street trees in the public right‐of‐way
at the request of adjacent property owner.
OUT‐OF‐GRID TREE TRIMMING
Actual cost of
trimming and
Arborist, plus City
staff time at the fully
allocated hourly rate
for all personnel
involved
Trimming of a public tree that is outside of the regular
tree trimming schedule at the request of the adjacent
property owner
TRAFFIC CONTROL INSPECTION
Non‐Utility Project $260 FOR FIRST DAY PLUS $130 PER EACH ADDITIONAL DAY
Utility Project $520 FOR FIRST DAY PLUS $260 PER EACH ADDITIONAL DAY
Street Closure $1,040 FOR FIRST DAY PLUS $520 PER EACH ADDITIONAL DAY
ALTERNATE MATERIALS AGREEMENT PROC $1,415
RETAINING WALL PERMIT (>32")$706
RIGHT‐OF‐WAY/EASEMENT VACATION $5,000
Wireless Permits
WIRELESS PERMIT ‐ MINOR $3,800 PLUS $5,000 TRUST DEPOSIT
WIRELESS PERMIT ‐ MAJOR $14,000 PLUS $5,000 TRUST DEPOSIT
EXISTING CELL SITE ADDITION $3,800 PLUS $5,000 TRUST DEPOSIT
WIRELESS PERMIT – MASTER DEPLOYMENT $38,700 PLUS $5,000 TRUST DEPOSIT
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
ADDITIONAL SERVICES FOR WHICH A FEE HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED SHALL BE CHARGED AT THE CITY'S FULLY BURDENED HOURLY RATE.
ITEMS ABOVE INCLUDE A TRUST DEPOSIT FOR PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTION
PLUS TRUST DEPOSIT FOR PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR. IF TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN (TCP) IS REQUIRED, THERE WILL BE A TRUST DEPOSIT REQUIRED
FOR REVIEW AND TCP INSPECTION COSTS.
NOTE: MINIMUM INITIAL DEPOSIT TO BE DETERMINED BY STAFF FOR ALL TRUST DEPOSITS. ALL CITY FEES MAY REQUIRE A TRUST DEPOSIT IN
ADDITION TO LISTED FEES. TRUST DEPOSITS MAY BE USED TO PAY FOR SERVICES FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY, TRAFFIC COMMITTEE, NPDES
CONSULTANT, CITY ENGINEER, CITY GEOLOGIST AND BIOLOGICAL CONSULTANT, AS SET FORTH IN RESOLUTION 2009‐19.
ITEMS ABOVE INCLUDE A TRUST DEPOSIT FOR PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTION. IF TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN (TCP) IS REQUIRED, THERE WILL BE A TRUST
DEPOSIT REQUIRED FOR REVIEW AND TCP INSPECTION COSTS.
A-188
PUBLIC WORKS
Fee Description Fee Notes
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PLAN CHECK
Contruction Cost
$0 ‐ $1,000 $88
$1,001 ‐ $5,000 $203
$5,001 ‐ $20,000 $273
$20,001 ‐ $100,000 $273 PLUS 1% OF THE CONSTRUCTION VALUATION
$100,001+$882 PLUS 1.75% OF THE CONSTRUCTION VALUATION
IMPORTED DIRT INSPECTION
HAUL ROUTE PERMIT $44
BLOCK PARTY PERMIT $469 Ordinance No. 581 ‐ 50% waiver for local non‐profit,
100% waiver for RPV HOA and free speech events
WIDE LOAD PERMIT $88
OVERSIZE VEHICLE PERMITS
OVERSIZED VEHICLE INITIAL PERMIT $44
OVERSIZE VEHICLE RENEWAL PERMIT $44
OVERSIZE VEHICLE GUEST PERMIT $44
EXTRA ENGINEERING REVIEW/INSPECTION $141
MISC ENGINEERING REVIEW/INSPECTION $141
BLUEPRINT COPY $10 plus actual
reproduction costs
ENGINEERING RECORDS MANAGEMENT
10% of Engineering
Plan Check and
Permit fees
A-189
PLANNING
Fee Description Fee Notes
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NEW $6,406
REVISION TO EXISTING $4,294
COMPLIANCE $4,294
LARGE ANIMAL (DIRECTOR)$2,850
MINOR MODIFICATION REQUEST $2,527
MINOR MODIFICATION APPLICATION APPEAL PROCESSING $1,500
COASTAL PERMIT
APPEALABLE ‐ PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW $4,367
NONAPPEALABLE ‐ PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW $1,613
APPEALABLE ‐ STAFF REVIEW $1,429
NONAPPEALABLE ‐ STAFF REVIEW $3,834
APPLICATION APPEAL PROCESSING $3,100
VARIANCE REVIEW $4,630
MISCELLANEOUS
GENERAL PLAN/LOCAL COASTAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT & ZONE (CODE) CHANGE ‐
INITIATION $163
Plus initial $10,000 Trust Deposit for cost
of staff and outside consultant. Does not
include CEQA fee/deposit
GENERAL PLAN/LOCAL COASTAL PLAN/SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT & ZONE (CODE) CHANGE ‐
APP. PROCESSING $163
Plus initial $10,000 Trust Deposit for cost
of staff and outside consultant. Does not
include CEQA fee/deposit
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT $856
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION $15,000 Trust Deposit Trust Deposit is for cost of staff time
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT $15,000 Trust Deposit Trust Deposit is for cost of staff time
COVENANT PROCESSING/TERMINATION $484
Plus any outside costs such as title search,
legal costs to draft covenant, and/or
County filing fees
DENSITY BONUS REQUEST $1,846
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
DIRECTOR REVIEW $2,411
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW $3,733 PLUS $1,000 TRUST DEPOSIT
TRUST DEPOSIT $1,000 Trust Deposit
SITE PLAN
ANTENNA $3,128
MAJOR $357
MINOR $143
SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT $107
USE/INTERPRETATION PROCEDURE $3,024
PLUS THE ACTUAL COST OF THE PROJECT PLANNER, CITY ENGINEER, TRAFFIC ENGINEER, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT, AND OTHER CONSULTANTS CHARGED
AGAINST A TRUST DEPOSIT
MINIMUM TRUST DEPOSIT OF $1,000 FOR TRACT ENTRY OBSERVATION BOOTHS (GUARD SHACKS).
PLUS THE ACTUAL COST OF THE PROJECT PLANNER, CITY ENGINEER, TRAFFIC ENGINEER, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT, AND OTHER CONSULTANTS CHARGED
AGAINST A TRUST DEPOSIT
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
A-190
PLANNING
Fee Description Fee Notes
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
SIGN PERMIT
SIGN PERMIT ‐ TEMPORARY (ONE OR MORE) $107
SIGN PERMIT ‐ PERMANENT $250
SIGN PERMIT ‐ MASTER SIGN PROGRAM‐PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW $3,407
SPECIAL USE PERMIT $2,610
TEMPORARY VENDOR PERMIT $107
PARKING LOT PERMIT $2,259
EXOTIC ANIMAL PERMIT $2,182
MARIJUANA CULTIVATION PERMIT $641
ANTENNAS
NON COMMERCIAL AMATEUR ANTENNA PERMIT $2,610
LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE PERMIT $2,182
BUSINESS LICENSE/HOME OCCUPATION (ZONING REVIEW)$71
FENCES, WALLS AND HEDGES PERMIT
FENCES, WALLS AND HEDGES PERMIT $3,390
FENCES AND WALL SITE INSPECTION $428
EXTREME SLOPE PERMIT $2,182
MINOR EXCEPTION PERMIT $2,182
HEIGHT VARIATION
DIRECTOR REVIEW $4,651
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW $6,117
NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY ANALYSIS $1,846
FOLIAGE ANALYSIS $571
VIEW RESTORATION
PERMIT PROCESSING FEE $5,106
PERMIT FOLLOW‐UP FEE $653
SITE VISIT FEE (VIEW OWNERS)$338
EXTRA MEDIATION MEETING $262
PLANNING CERTIFICATION LETTER $532
PUBLIC WORKS REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION $575
GEOLOGIC REVIEWS
GEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION PERMIT $327
GEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION PERMIT TRUST DEPOSIT TRUST DEP.
REQUIRED ONLY IF ANTENNA DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR THE SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS
REQUIRED BY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ENSURE THAT TRENCHES, BORINGS, ETC. ARE PROPERLY BACKFILLED.
A NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY FEE OR TRUST DEPOSIT MAY BE REQUIRED FOR HEIGHT VARIATION PERMITS.
PLUS ACTUAL COST OF THE CITY ENGINEER CHARGED AGAINST A TRUST DEPOSIT
A-191
PLANNING
Fee Description Fee Notes
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
GRADING PLAN REVIEW
MINOR $143
MAJOR ‐ PLANNING COMMISSION $4,264
MAJOR ‐ STAFF $2,884
WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPER PERMIT $285 PLUS $1,000 TRUST DEPOSIT
LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK AND INSPECTION $1,028
LANDSLIDE MORATORIUM
LANDSLIDE MORATORIUM EXCLUSION TRUST DEP INITIAL $15,000 TRUST DEPOSIT
LANDSLIDE MORATORIUM EXCEPTION PERMIT ‐ STAFF REVIEW $2,182
MISCELLANEOUS HEARING $3,076
TIME EXTENSIONS ‐ ADMINISTRATIVE $1,215
TIME EXTENSIONS ‐ P.C./C.C.$1,989
AFTER‐THE‐FACT PENALTY FEE APP. FEE X 2 PLUS ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION FEES IF
ANY
DATA ENTRY ‐ HISTORICAL FEE (PER PROPERTY)$0 SERIVCE NO LONGER PROVIDED
DATA ENTRY ‐ DATA PROCESSING (PER APP. & BUILDING PERMIT)$0 SERVICE NOW INCLUDED IN APPLICABLE
PLANNING FEES
DOCUMENT PRINTING SERVICES (PER PAGE COPIED)
AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS TRUST DEP.
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEV PERMIT
Initial $10,000 Trust
Deposit for cost of
staff and outside
consultant
GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE 1.4% surcharge of all
Building Permit Fees
DEVELOPMENT TECH SURCHARGE
2.4% of all Building
Permit and Plan
Check fees
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE REVIEW $727 PLUS $1,000 TRUST DEPOSIT
SUBDIVISIONS/LOT SPLITS
TENTATIVE MAP ‐ PARCEL $11,731 PLUS $1,000 TRUST DEPOSIT
TENTATIVE MAP ‐ TRACT
Initial $15,000 Trust
Deposit for cost of
staff and outside
CONSULTANT
MAP AMENDMENT ‐ PARCEL
$5,945 per map plus
$5,000 Trust Deposit
for outside costs
MAP AMENDMENT ‐ TRACT
1/2 or original fee
(including any Trust
Deposits paid) plus
$5,000 Trust Deposit
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $4,744 PLUS A TRUST DEPOSIT FOR SERVICES
RENDERED BY CITY ENGINEER
LOT MERGER $4,744 PLUS A TRUST DEPOSIT FOR SERVICES
RENDERED BY CITY ENGINEER
SEE FEES AND COSTS FOR COPIES ON CITY CLERK'S MASTER FEE
SCHEDULE
PLUS A TRUST DEPOSIT FOR SERVICES RENDERED BY THE CITY ENGINEER
PLUS TRUST DEPOSIT FOR CONTRACT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
PLUS ACTUAL COST OF CONTRACT ENGINEER BILLED AGAINST TRUST DEPOSIT
A-192
PLANNING
Fee Description Fee Notes
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
REVERSION TO ACREAGE $4,744
PLUS A TRUST DEPOSIT FOR SERVICES
RENDERED BY CITY ENGINEER
REVISION/AMENDMENT FEE 1/2 APP. FEE
PARCEL MAP ‐ FINAL $4,688 PLUS A TRUST DEPOSIT FOR SERVICES
RENDERED BY CITY ENGINEER
TRACT MAP ‐ FINAL $9,606 PLUS A TRUST DEPOSIT FOR SERVICES
RENDERED BY CITY ENGINEER
LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) ‐ NEW DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS:
ALL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, INCLUDING ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND HILLSIDE HOMES
(25% OR GREATER), EQUAL TO 1 ACRE OR GREATER OF DISTURBED AREA THAT ADDS MORE
THAN 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA.
INDUSTRIAL PARKS 10,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE OF SURFACE AREA.
COMMERCIAL MALLS 10,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE OF SURFACE AREA.
RETAIL GASOLINE OUTLETS WITH 5,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE OF SURFACE AREA.
RESTAURANTS WITH 5,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE OF SURFACE AREA.
PARKING LOTS WITH 5,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE OF SURFACE AREA.
AUTOMOBILE SERVICE FACILITIES 5,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE OF SURFACE AREA.
PROJECTS LOCATED IN OR DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO, OR DISCHARGING DIRECTLY TO A
SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA, WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT WILL:
DISCHARGE STORMWATER RUNOFF THAT IS LIKELY TO IMPACT A SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL
SPECIES OR HABITAT; AND
1) CREATE 2,500 SQUARE FEET OR MORE OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA.
LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) ‐ REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS:
LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY THAT RESULTS IN THE CREATION OR ADDITION OR REPLACEMENT
OF 5,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA ON AN ALREADY DEVELOPED
SITE FOR CATEGORIES IDENTIFIED IN ‘NEW DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS’.
ALTERATION TO MORE THAN 50% OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACES OF A PREVIOUSLY EXISTING
DEVELOPMENT, AND THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT WAS NOT SUBJECT TO POST‐
CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER QUALITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS, THE ENTIRE PROJECT
MUST BE MITIGATED.
ALTERATION OF LESS THAN 50% OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACES OF A PREVIOUSLY EXISTING
DEVELOPMENT, AND THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT WAS NOT SUBJECT TO POST‐
CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER QUALITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS, ONLY THE ALTERATION
MUST BE MITIGATED, AND NOT THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT.
REDEVELOPMENT DOES NOT INCLUDE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE
CONDUCTED TO MAINTAIN ORIGINAL LINE AND GRADE, HYDRAULIC CAPACITY, ORIGINAL
PURPOSE OF FACILITY OR EMERGENCY REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY REQUIRED TO PROTECT
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE REPLACEMENT, SUCH AS THE
RECONSTRUCTION OF PARKING LOTS AND ROADWAYS WHICH DOES NOT DISTURB ADDITIONAL
AREA AND MAINTAINS THE ORIGINAL GRADE AND ALIGNMENT, IS CONSIDERED A ROUTINE
MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY. REDEVELOPMENT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE REPAVING OF EXISTING
ROADS TO MAINTAIN ORIGINAL LINE AND GRADE.
EXISTING SINGLE‐FAMILY DWELLING AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ARE EXEMPT UNLESS SUCH
PROJECTS CREATE, ADD, OR REPLACE 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA.
EXEMPT PROJECTS
$1,350
$1,350
DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING ONLY EMERGENCY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIRED TO IMMEDIATELY PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY.
STREET AND ROAD CONSTRUCTION OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.
PERMIT PROCESS: A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO PLANNING DIVISION APPROVAL. A FINAL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT
ISSUANCE. THE FOLLOWING TABLE ILLUSTRATES VARIOUS PROJECT CATEGORIES THAT REQUIRE LID REVIEW AND THEIR ASSOCIATED FEES.
PERMIT PROCESS: A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO PLANNING DIVISION APPROVAL. A FINAL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT
ISSUANCE. THE FOLLOWING TABLE ILLUSTRATES VARIOUS PROJECT CATEGORIES THAT REQUIRE LID REVIEW AND THEIR ASSOCIATED FEES.
A-193
PLANNING
Fee Description Fee Notes
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT‐OF‐WAY, EXCLUDING STREET AND ROAD CONSTRUCTION OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE OF
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.
DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT INVOLVING ONLY ACTIVITY RELATED TO UTILITY SERVICES (STORM WATER, DRAIN, SEWER, GAS, WATER, CABLE, OR
ELECTRICITY SERVICES) ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT INVOLVING ONLY RESURFACING AND/OR RE‐STRIPING OF PERMITTED PARKING LOTS, WHERE THE ORIGINAL LINE AND
GRADE, HYDRAULIC CAPACITY, AND ORIGINAL PURPOSE OF THE FACILITY IS MAINTAINED.
PROJECT NOT REQUIRING A CITY BUILDING, GRADING, DEMOLITION OR OTHER PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY.
A-194
BUILDING & SAFETY
FORMAL PLAN CHECK
1 & 2 FAMILY DWELLING $64.23 PER 100 SQ FT
RESIDENTIAL REMODEL $153.50 PER 100 SQ FT
RESIDENTIAL ADDITION $255.70 PER 100 SQ FT
NEW COMMERCIAL (1ST 10,000 SQ FT) $45.87 PER 100 SQ FT
NEW COMMERCIAL (OVER 10,000 SQ FT) $31.87 PER 100 SQ FT
NEW COMM. SHELL (1ST 10,000 SQ FT) $27.83 PER 100 SQ FT
NEW COMM. SHELL (OVER 10,000 SQ FT) $18.59 PER 100 SQ FT
TENANT IMPROVEMENT $94.87 PER 100 SQ FT
APT/CONDO/HOTEL (1ST 10,000 SQ FT) $45.87 PER 100 SQ FT
APT/CONDO/HOTEL (OVER 10,000 SQ FT) $31.05 PER 100 SQ FT
APT/ETC:REMODEL/ADD'N $108.87 PER 100 SQ FT
MECH/ELEC/PLUMBING $125.00 SURCHARGE
GRADING (1ST 3 PLAN CHECKS) $807.00 10,000+ CY ‐ T&M
GRADING (EACH ADDITIONAL PLAN CHECK) $222.00
OVER THE COUNTER PLAN ‐ MINOR $124.00
OVER THE COUNTER PLAN ‐ MAJOR $187.00
GEOLOGIC REVIEW
CATEGORY 1 ‐ GEOLOGIC SITE INSPECTION FEE $365.00 $266
CATEGORY 2 ‐ GEOLOGIC REPORT REVIEW FEE $1,825.00 $1,332
CATEGORY 3 ‐ GEOLOGIC PLANNING REVIEW FEE $2,025.00 $1,478
CATEGORY 4 ‐ GEOLOGIC (RESUBMITTED) REPORT REVIEW FEE $465.00 $340
CATEGORY 5 ‐ ADDITIONAL SERVICE FEE TRUST DEP. TRUST DEP.
TIME EXTENSION
ADMINISTRATIVE $82.00
EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCE $332.00
BUILDING MISCELLANEOUS REVIEW
MODIFICATION OF TECH. CODE $664.00 NO HEARING
OTHER (PERMIT REVISION)$134.00
PLAN REVISION ‐ HOURLY $179.00 PER HOUR
BUILDING INSPECTION
1 OR 2 FAMILY DWELLING $166.13 PER 100 SQ FT
RESIDENTIAL REMODEL $223.29 PER 100 SQ FT
RESIDENTIAL ADDITION $267.95 PER 100 SQ FT
NEW COMMERCIAL (1ST 10,000 SQ FT) $71.45 PER 100 SQ FT
NEW COMMERCIAL (OVER 10,000 SQ FT) $48.23 PER 100 SQ FT
NEW COMM. SHELL (1ST 10,000 SQ FT) $78.60 PER 100 SQ FT
NEW COMM. SHELL (OVER 10,000 SQ FT) $51.80 PER 100 SQ FT
TENANT IMPROVEMENT $137.55 PER 100 SQ FT
APT/CONDO/HOTEL (1ST 10,000 SQ FT) $105.39 PER 100 SQ FT
APT/CONDO/HOTEL (OVER 10,000 SQ FT) $71.45 PER 100 SQ FT
Fee
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
Fee Description
A-195
BUILDING & SAFETY
Fee
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
Fee Description
APT/ETC:REMODEL/ADD'N $228.65 PER 100 SQ FT
MECH/ELEC/PLUMBING $187.56 PER 100 SQ FT
DEMOLITION $440.00
GRADING INSPECTION
0 ‐ 1,000 CUBIC YARDS $179.00
1,000 ‐ 5,000 CUBIC YARDS $357.00
5,000 ‐ 10,000 CUBIC YARDS $1,072.00
10,000+ CUBIC YARDS ‐ HOURLY $179.00 PER HOUR
PERMIT ISSUANCE ‐ BLDG $110.00
CHANGE OF ADDRESS $747.00 CONTRACT @ $125/HR
MISCELLANEOUS
NOT OTHERWISE CLASSIFIED $179.00
REINSPECTION $179.00
TEMP. C OF O $593.00
AFTER HOURS ‐ HOURLY $179.00
WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT INVESTIGATION $766.00
LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW $1,350.00
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN REVIEW $675.00
BUSINESS STORMWATER REVIEW ‐ NEW $150.00 PER HOUR
BUSINESS STORMWATER REVIEW ‐ ANNUAL $150.00 PER HOUR
ATTACHED GARAGE ‐ PLAN CHECK $0.47 PER SQUARE FOOT
ATTACHED GARAGE ‐ INSPECTION $1.21 PER SQUARE FOOT
DETACHED GARAGE ‐ PLAN CHECK $0.70 PER SQUARE FOOT
DETACHED GARAGE ‐ INSPECTION $1.21 PER SQUARE FOOT
UNCONDITIONED SPACE ‐ PLAN CHECK $0.70 PER SQUARE FOOT
UNCONDITIONED SPACE ‐ INSPECTION $1.21 PER SQUARE FOOT
BALCONY/COVERED DECK/PORCH ‐ PLAN CHECK $2.10 PER SQUARE FOOT
BALCONY/COVERED DECK/PORCH ‐ INSPECTION $3.11 PER SQUARE FOOT
ROOFED PATIO ‐ PLAN CHECK $0.53 PER SQUARE FOOT
ROOFED PATIO ‐ INSPECTION $0.78 PER SQUARE FOOT
LATTICE BEAM/TRELLIS ‐ PLAN CHECK $0.53 PER SQUARE FOOT
LATTICE BEAM/TRELLIS ‐ INSPECTION $0.78 PER SQUARE FOOT
PRE‐FAB PATIO ‐ PLAN CHECK $0.70 PER SQUARE FOOT
PRE‐FAB PATIO ‐ INSPECTION $1.38 PER SQUARE FOOT
DECK ‐ PLAN CHECK $0.42 PER SQUARE FOOT
DECK ‐ INSPECTION $0.62 PER SQUARE FOOT
RETAINING WALL (CONV FOOTING) ‐ PLAN CHECK $0.47 PER SQUARE FOOT
RETAINING WALL (CONV FOOTING) ‐ INSPECTION $0.67 PER SQUARE FOOT
RETAINING WALL (CAISSONS/GRADE BEAM) ‐ PC $0.58 PER SQUARE FOOT
RETAINING WALL (CAISSONS/GRADE BEAM) ‐ INSP $0.89 PER SQUARE FOOT
BLOCK WALL OVER 7 FT (REQ PERMIT)$1.54 PER SQUARE FOOTA-196
BUILDING & SAFETY
Fee
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
Fee Description
RE‐ROOF $0.08 PER SQUARE FOOT
SKYLIGHT/WINDOW/DOOR ‐ FIRST ONE $89.00 CHANGEOUT
SKYLIGHT/WINDOW/DOOR ‐ EACH ADD'L 5 $30.00 CHANGEOUT
SKYLIGHT/WINDOW/DOOR ‐ FIRST ONE $179.00 NEW
SKYLIGHT/WINDOW/DOOR ‐ EACH ADD'L 5 $59.00 NEW
POOL ‐ GUNITE ‐ PLAN CHECK $715.00 NOT INCLUDING MEP
POOL ‐ GUNITE ‐ INSPECTION $670.00 NOT INCLUDING MEP
POOL ‐ MANUFACTURED ‐ PLAN CHECK $536.00 NOT INCLUDING MEP
POOL ‐ MANUFACTURED ‐ INSPECTION $536.00 NOT INCLUDING MEP
POOL ‐ DEMO $179.00
EV CHARGING STATION $89.00
SOLAR ‐ NEW SFR $239.00
SOLAR ‐ NEW SFR + ELEC PANEL UPGRADE $507.00
SOLAR ‐ NEW MFR/COMM $43.59 PER 100 SQ FT
SOLAR ‐ GROUND MOUNTED $581.00
CAISSON PLAN CHECK $210.00
CAISSON INSPECTION ‐ FIRST $357.00
CAISSON INSPECTION ‐ EACH ADDITIONAL $89.00
A-197
RECREATION & PARKS
Facility Rentals
HESSE PARK
MULTIPURPOSE ROOM (HOURLY CHARGE)
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II $35
GROUP III $59
GROUP IV $137
ACTIVITY ROOM (HOURLY CHARGE)
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II $28
GROUP III $42
GROUP IV $88
KITCHEN (FLAT FEE)
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II, III, IV $85
DANCE FLOOR (FLAT FEE)
GROUP I NO LONGER AVAILABLE
GROUP II, III, IV NO LONGER AVAILABLE
LADERA LINDA
MULTIPURPOSE ROOM (HOURLY CHARGE)
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II $19
GROUP III $25
GROUP IV $59
CLASS/CRAFT/GAME ROOMS (HOURLY CHARGE)
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II $17
GROUP III $22
GROUP IV $47
KITCHEN (FLAT FEE)
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II, III, IV $52
RYAN PARK
ACTIVITY ROOM (HOURLY CHARGE)
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II $17
GROUP III $22
GROUP IV $47
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
FeeFee Description
A-198
RECREATION & PARKS
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
FeeFee Description
FOUNDERS PARK
GROUP I‐IV $475
TRUMP NATIONAL 16‐50 PEOPLE $475
TRUMP NATIONAL 51 OR MORE $750
NOTES:
Founders Park Wedding Ceremonies for up to 15 people
POINT VICENTE INTERPRETIVE CENTER
MULTIPURPOSE ROOM (HOURLY CHARGE, INCLUDES USE OF KITCHEN & DISHWASHING ROOM)
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II $161
GROUP III $265
GROUP IV $422
KITCHEN (FLAT FEE)
GROUP I REMOVE FROM SCHEDULE
GROUP II, III, IV REMOVE FROM SCHEDULE
DISHWASHING ROOM (FLAT FEE)
GROUP I REMOVE FROM SCHEDULE
GROUP II, III, IV REMOVE FROM SCHEDULE
ARCH (FLAT FEE)
GROUP I REMOVE FROM SCHEDULE
GROUP II, III, IV REMOVE FROM SCHEDULE
AMPHITHEATER (HOURLY CHARGE)REMOVED LAWN
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II $190
GROUP III $294
GROUP IV $526
STAFFING FEE
GROUP I, II, III, IV $18
NOTES:
Security Deposit: A deposit of $175 to $800 may be required for facility rentals.
Insurance: A minimum $1,000,000 single limit liability policy will be required for each facility use. Higher limits may apply.
Minimum Hours: As determined by staff, depending on facility demand, a minimum block of time may be required for
facility rentals.
Staffing Fee: A per hour staffing fee may be assessed for requested usage outside of regularly scheduled hours of
operation. Operating hours are subject to change.
A-199
RECREATION & PARKS
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
FeeFee Description
FIELDS
SPORTS LEAGUE
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II $3.75
GROUP III $13
GROUP IV $24
PRIVATE PARTY
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II $37
GROUP III $55
GROUP IV $102
ROAD EVENTS
GROUP I TRUST DEPOSIT
GROUP II TRUST DEPOSIT
GROUP III TRUST DEPOSIT
GROUP IV TRUST DEPOSIT
NOTES:
Road events require a minimum $3,000,000 single limit liability policy for each use. higher limits may apply.
OVERNIGHT CAMPING
GROUP I NO CHARGE
GROUP II, III, IV $52
NOTES:
An additional $3 per camper shall apply for Groups II, III, and IV
Security Deposit: None for Group I, $150 for Group II, and $250 for Groups III and IV.
ABOLONE COVE PARKING
CAR
First 30 minutes free
$6 30 min to 2 hours
$12 > 2 hours
BUS $55
SENIORS NO CHARGE
DISABLED RATE NO CHARGE
A-200
RECREATION & PARKS
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
FeeFee Description
REACH
REACH ‐ WEEKDAY EVENING ACTIVITY **$8
REACH ‐ WEEKDAY EVENING ACTIVITY WITH MEAL **$10
REACH‐ Quarterly Membership (Resident)$120
REACH‐ Quarterly Membership (Non‐Resident)$180
REACH ‐ WEEKEND TRIPS ***
** non‐resident fees are 150% of resident fees
MISCELLANEOUS ‐ HOURLY CHARGE
PRIVATIZED INSTRUCTION ‐ REGULAR HOURS $15
PRIVATIZED INSTRUCTION ‐ OTHER HOURS $24
OUTDOOR CLASSES/TENNIS INSTRUCTION $10
MISCELLANEOUS ‐ FLAT CHARGE
RANGER‐LED PUBLIC NIGHT HIKE $7/PERSON
RANGER‐LED PRIVATE NIGHT HIKE $200/GROUP
SELF‐LED NIGHT HIKE (ANNUAL CHARGE)$75
SILENT FLYER PERMIT (ANNUAL CHARGE)$10
SCORCH REMOTE HELICOPTER PERMIT (ANNUAL CHARGE)$10
DOCENT‐LED HIKES
CHILD HIKER REMOVE FROM SCHEDULE
ADULT HIKER REMOVE FROM SCHEDULE
GROUP DESIGNATION DEFINITIONS
GROUP I: Department Of Recreation & Parks Sponsored Or Co‐Sponsored Events; Official City Functions; Governmental
Agencies Serving Peninsula Residents, Any Organizatio When Sponsoring A Public Forum Or Candidates' Night, Rpv
Homeowners' Associations, Peninsula Seniors Groups, And Peninsula Non‐Profit, Civic, Social, And Youth Organizations
With Non‐Paid Management.
GROUP II: Non‐Resident Homeowners' Associations, And Non‐Resident Non‐Profit, Civic, Social, And Youth Organizations
With Paid Management.
GROUP III: Rancho Palos Verdes Resident/Private Party Activities, Resident Commercial And Religious Organizations
GROUP IV: Non‐Resident Private Party Activities, Non‐Resident Commercial And Religious Organizations.
*** REACH weekend trips vary in cost depending upon venue admission costs, transportation costs and the number of city
staff members required to facilitate the event. the fee for each event shall be calculated by using the following formula:
sum of the minimum hours for the event multiplied by the hourly rate of pay of each city staff member assigned to the
event, plus mileage (calculated by multiplying the irs mileage rate times the number of round‐trip miles) to obtain subtotal.
the subtotal shall be divided by the maximum number of participants for the event to obtain subtotal per participant.
subtotal per participant will then be added to the cost of admission ticket (if applicable) to obtain the fee that will be
charged for each such event.
A-201
RECREATION & PARKS
Fee Description Fee
Film Permits
Application Fee
PRIVATE PROPERTY ‐ MOVIE & TV $275
PUBLIC PROPERTY ‐ MOVIE & TV $645
PRIVATE PROPERTY ‐ VIDEO $275
PRIVATE PROPERTY ‐ STILL PHOTOGRAPHY $275
PUBLIC PROPERTY ‐ VIDEO $645
PUBLIC PROPERTY ‐ STILL PHOTOGRAPHY $645
FILM PERMIT CANCELLATION
$90 if requested 1 business day prior
to filming. Full Film Permit Processing
Fee is non‐refundable if cancellation
is within 1 business day of filming
City Property Fee
COASTAL AREA
MOVIE $2,500
TV $2,500
VIDEO $2,500
STILL PHOTOGRAPHY $1,000
NON‐COASTAL AREA
MOVIE $1,500
TV $1,500
VIDEO $1,500
STILL PHOTOGRAPHY $500
PALOS VERDES DRIVE EAST, SOUTH, & WEST
MOVIE $2,500
TV $2,500
VIDEO $2,500
STILL PHOTOGRAPHY $1,000
OTHER PUBLIC RIGHTS‐OF‐WAY
MOVIE $1,000
TV $1,000
VIDEO $2,500
STILL PHOTOGRAPHY $500
SECURITY DEPOSIT: A REFUNDABLE SECURITY DEPOSIT MAY BE REQUIRED FOR USE OF PUBLIC PROPERTY. DEPOSIT MAY COVER
ANY UNANTICIPATED STAFFING AND CLEAN UP COSTS.
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
ANY PRE‐APPROVED ACTIVITY OCCURRING OUTSIDE THE REGULAR FILMING HOURS OF 7:00 AM TO 7:00 PM, MONDAY THROUGH
SATURDAY OR ANY DRIVING SCENES ON MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADS WITHIN THE RESTRICTED HOURS OF 7:00 AM TO 9:30 AM AND
2:00 PM TO 6:00 PM.
BUSINESS LICENSE: A BUSINESS LICENSE IS REQUIRED FOR ALL BUSINESSES OPERATING IN THE CITY.
STAFFING: A PER HOUR STAFFING FEE MAY APPLY FOR UNANTICIPATED ONSITE CITY PERSONNEL (MINIMUM 3 HOUR CHARGE).
A-202
RECREATION & PARKS
Master Fee Schedule
Fees Effective 7/1/2021
OTHER:
MISCELLANEOUS: ADDITIONAL FEES MAY APPLY FOR PUBLIC PROPERTY USE BY A PRIVATE ENTITY. PUBLIC PROPERTY INCLUDES
FACILITIES, PARKS, PRESERVES, RESERVES, PARKING LOTS, ETC.
APPLICATION CHANGES: ANY APPLICANT INITIATED APPLICATION CHANGE MAY RESULT IN A FEE OF ONE‐HALF THE ORIGINAL
APPLICATION FEE.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES FOR WHICH A FEE HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED SHALL BE CHARGED AT THE CITY'S FULLY BURDENED
HOURLY RATE.
A-203
From:Ara Mihranian
To:Karina Banales
Subject:FW: Comment regarding Draft Housing Element
Date:Tuesday, October 12, 2021 5:05:12 PM
Attachments:image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Ara Michael Mihranian
City Manager
___________________________________
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310-544-5202 (telephone)
310-544-5293 (fax)
aram@rpvca.gov
www.rpvca.gov
P Do you really need to print this e-mail?
This e-mail message contains information belonging to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, which may be privileged, confidential and/or
protected from disclosure. The information is intended only for use of the individual or entity named. Unauthorized dissemination,
distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, or are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation.
From: Adrienne Mohan <amohan@pvplc.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 4:08 PM
To: Octavio Silva <OctavioS@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; Ken Rukavina
<krukavina@rpvca.gov>
B-1
Subject: Comment regarding Draft Housing Element
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
Hello Octavio,
On behalf of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy, I respectfully submit a comment for the
Draft Housing Element being considered by the Planning Commission this evening.
The Draft Housing Element Report identifies constraints to the housing plan. There are important
details about the City Council-adopted Natural Community Conservation Plan and Habitat
Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) that are not clearly articulated in the document but must be
considered when reviewing the inventory for privately-owned open space properties. I believe these
considerations were not included in the inventory numbers identified for Sites 41, 48, 49 and 50.
1. The NCCP/HCP describes a 40-acre wildlife corridor required for Site #49, with minimum 300-
foot width which must be set excluded from the development footprint
2. New development adjacent to Preserve land must accommodate fuel modification setbacks
(300 feet) on the development property. Fuel modification must not impact adjacent Preserve open
space.
Given the two constraints above, it is inconsistent with the NCCP/HCP to conceptualize this quantity
of housing units. Doing so may significantly change the General Plan which serves as a foundational
document for the NCCP/HCP and undermine the City's permit.
In addition to the NCCP/HCP conditions, there are other site constraints which would seem to make
the quantity of inventory for Sites 41, 48, 49 and 50 unrealistic. The High Fire Severity of the
peninsula (and setback requirements on the development parcel) compounded by high
development of open space adjacent to the Preserve will increase risk of major fires. The geologic
instability of the steep slopes and Abalone Cove Landslide Zone must be considered when evaluating
the inventory numbers for Sites 48, 49 and 50. And further, the public unpopularity of developing
the scenic coastal open space are all reasons to consider the inventory numbers provided are no
realistic. In reviewing the Report, it seems as though there is enough housing inventory identified in
other areas of the City (which are also closer to transportation resources with built infrastructure
support) that removing the inventory identified for undeveloped open spaces would be the ideal
decision.
I respectfully request that the Planning Commission and city staff carefully review the requirements
of the NCCP/HCP and determine what would be truly feasible for development on these four open
space sites identified in the inventory. Further, I respectfully ask that the Planning Commission
consider not what could be built on open spaces, but if we SHOULD.
Sincerely,
Adrienne Mohan
B-2
Executive Director
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy
B-3
From:Teresa Takaoka
To:Karina Banales
Subject:FW: Miraleste Plaza opinion on the possible housing development
Date:Tuesday, October 12, 2021 5:18:50 PM
-----Original Message-----
From: Barbara Cambilargiu <bclark@lilybleu.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 4:50 PM
To: CityClerk <CityClerk@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Miraleste Plaza opinion on the possible housing development
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
Miraleste is a beautiful, historic neighborhood, one of the original in PV under the jurisdiction of the art Jury and
Palos Verdes homeowners association along with Palos Verdes Estates. It is a quiet, peaceful and charming
neighborhood which is what people pay for when they buy single family houses here. The kind of neighborhood
where your children can walk or ride their bike to school and the locals including our elderly population regularly
get their hair and nails done as well as frequent the deli and Italian restaurant, Union Bank and the real estate office.
For many residents this is one of the few convenient and safe places on this side of the hill where you can find these
goods and services without having to drive a distance.
Miraleste plaza houses a fire department which continuously responds to emergency situations on a daily basis with
firetrucks and paramedics going in and out. What impact will additional housing in that plaza have on the access for
the fire department to respond to emergency situations?
How will this extra density affect the safety of our children walking to and from Miraleste middle school? The plaza
is a safe place for them to ride bikes and hang out while waiting for their parents to pick them up after school. I am
wondering if you have reached out to the principal of the school to inquire about the congested traffic patterns and
how this will further affect the safety of our children. Was there an actual assessment done when picking this area?
We feel strongly that this is not an appropriate place to put multi use apartments as there are already affordable
apartments in the neighborhood and many more just down the street at Miraleste Canyon Estates. This particular
parcel is more suited to single family homes and we prefer to keep the plaza as a commercial zone.
B-4
From:Teresa Takaoka
To:Karina Banales
Subject:FW: 6th Cycle - Housing Element: Comment
Date:Tuesday, October 12, 2021 5:19:19 PM
From: Bob Nelson <nelsongang@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 10:56 AM
To: PC <PC@rpvca.gov>
Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>
Subject: 6th Cycle - Housing Element: Comment
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
Chair Perestam, Vice-Chair Hamill, members Leon, James, Chura, Saadatnejadi and Santa Rosa, copy
City Council
This is one of the most professional, informative Planning documents I've read. In my 8 years on your
Commission I read a few! Comments:
1. It is doable. The goal, fortunately, is not to build but to identify sites for building.
2. It may change. I under understand RHNA numbers are under legal challenge and future state law
could effect the entire process (for ex: eliminate Very High Fire District exemption).
3. ADUs count. I'm sure RPV will shortly have their current ADU statute in compliance with state law. The
ADU problem is the number of home sites that could accommodate an outside ADU. Vertically, yes;
garages (JrADU) yes but existing lot coverages could impact some yard placements. However, I'm
positive our staff can work out any ADU challenges.
4. We are a Very High Fire District, given exemption to many new Housing laws. Using this designation, I
believe we have appealed our numbers to SCAG saying do you really want to increase a housing goal
over 20 times (from 5th cycle 31 units to 6th cycle 647 units) in such a district? SCAG answer: yes. (By
the way, if you are tracking RHNA RPV history: 4th cycle goal 60, 5th 31, 6th 647!)
Tonight I hope you will decide to forward this to our City Council for their approval and their forwarding to
our state's Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
By the way, I did read all 211 pages! Proof: Staff Rpt pg 20, document pg.3: footnote: 'low-income limit' is
stated twice, once for 'Very low income' ($53,200) and again for 'Low Income' ($85,150). Just. a minor nit-
pick in an amazing demographic, status document on our city, RPV!
Congratulations to Ken, Octavio and staff!
Bob Nelson
B-5
From:Ara Mihranian
To:Karina Banales
Subject:FW: Draft Housing Element/NCCP/HCP Consistency
Date:Tuesday, October 12, 2021 5:04:28 PM
Attachments:image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Ara Michael Mihranian
City Manager
___________________________________
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310-544-5202 (telephone)
310-544-5293 (fax)
aram@rpvca.gov
www.rpvca.gov
P Do you really need to print this e-mail?
This e-mail message contains information belonging to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, which may be privileged, confidential and/or
protected from disclosure. The information is intended only for use of the individual or entity named. Unauthorized dissemination,
distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, or are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation.
From: Drewe, Karen@Wildlife <Karen.Drewe@wildlife.ca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 4:27 PM
To: Octavio Silva <OctavioS@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; Katie Lozano <KatieL@rpvca.gov>; Adrienne Mohan
B-6
<amohan@pvplc.org>; Mayer, David@Wildlife <David.Mayer@wildlife.ca.gov>; Schmalbach,
Heather@Wildlife <Heather.Schmalbach@Wildlife.ca.gov>; Porter, Eric <Eric_Porter@fws.gov>;
Snyder, Jonathan <Jonathan_d_Snyder@fws.gov>; Woulfe, MaryBeth <marybeth_woulfe@fws.gov>
Subject: RE: Draft Housing Element/NCCP/HCP Consistency
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
To Octavio,
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has been made aware of a Draft
Housing Element being considered by the Planning Commission this evening. CDFW is
concerned that the draft document does not adequately address inconsistencies between
the conceptualized inventory of housing units on some open space properties (Table 33)
and the City-adopted Natural Community Conservation Plan and Habitat Conservation Plan
(NCCP/HCP).
The Draft Housing Element should not preclude implementation of the NCCP/HCP, as
adopted, particularly with respect to Sites 41, 48, 49, and 50. Specifically, the proposed Site
49 lot is located in an area described in the NCCP/HCP as essential for purposes of
maintaining preserve connectivity.
CDFW respectfully requests that the Planning Commission and City of Rancho Palos
Verdes consider the requirements of the NCCP/HCP when evaluating the Draft Housing
Element.
Regards,
Karen
Karen Drewe
Senior Environmental Scientist (Supervisor)
Habitat Conservation Planning
CA Department of Fish and Wildlife
South Coast Region
3883 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123
From: Woulfe, MaryBeth <marybeth_woulfe@fws.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 2:07 PM
To: Octavio Silva <OctavioS@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Ara Mihranian <aram@rpvca.gov>; Katie Lozano <KatieL@rpvca.gov>; Adrienne Mohan
<amohan@pvplc.org>; Mayer, David@Wildlife <David.Mayer@wildlife.ca.gov>; Drewe,
Karen@Wildlife <Karen.Drewe@wildlife.ca.gov>; Schmalbach, Heather@Wildlife
<Heather.Schmalbach@Wildlife.ca.gov>; Porter, Eric <Eric_Porter@fws.gov>; Snyder, Jonathan
<Jonathan_d_Snyder@fws.gov>
Subject: Draft Housing Element/NCCP/HCP Consistency
WARNING: This message is from an external source. Verify the sender and exercise caution when clicking links or
opening attachments.
B-7
Good afternoon, Octavio:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlfe Service (Service) is submitting comments on the Draft Housing
Element that we received last night in advance of tonight's Planning Commission meeting.
The Service encourages the City of Rancho Palos Verdes' staff, Planning Commission, and the
Council to consider the permitted City of Rancho Palos Verdes Natural Community
Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP), Implementing Agreement (IA),
and Federal permit when evaluating the Draft Housing Element.
It is imperative that the Draft Housing Element does not preclude the City's NCCP/HCP from
being implement as described and permitted consistent with the existing General Plan.
Specifically, we recommend the City evaluate the NCCP/HCP with respect to Sites 41, 48, 49
and 50 identified in the Draft Housing Element. For example, the NCCP/HCP describes a 40-
acre live-in wildlife corridor required for Site 49, with minimum 300-foot width which must
be set excluded from the development footprint along with associated fuel modification.
We respectfully request that the Planning Commission, City Staff, and the Council fully
evaluate the Draft Housing Element to ensure its feasibility and ultimate consistency with the
federally permitted NCCP/HCP and associated IA.
Sincerely, Mary Beth Woulfe
Please confirm receipt
Mary Beth Woulfe
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Biologist
Section 6 Coordinator Palm Springs/Carlsbad
2177 Salk Avenue, Suite 250
Carlsbad, California 92008
760.431.9440, ext. 294
B-8
From:Ara Mihranian
To:Karina Banales
Subject:FW: Draft Housing Element/NCCP/HCP Consistency
Date:Tuesday, October 12, 2021 5:06:01 PM
Attachments:image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Ara Michael Mihranian
City Manager
___________________________________
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310-544-5202 (telephone)
310-544-5293 (fax)
aram@rpvca.gov
www.rpvca.gov
P Do you really need to print this e-mail?
This e-mail message contains information belonging to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, which may be privileged, confidential and/or
protected from disclosure. The information is intended only for use of the individual or entity named. Unauthorized dissemination,
distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, or are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation.
From: Woulfe, MaryBeth <marybeth_woulfe@fws.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 2:07 PM
To: Octavio Silva <OctavioS@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; Katie Lozano <KatieL@rpvca.gov>; Adrienne Mohan
B-9
<amohan@pvplc.org>; David Mayer <david.mayer@wildlife.ca.gov>; Drewe, Karen@Wildlife
<Karen.Drewe@wildlife.ca.gov>; Schmalbach, Heather@Wildlife
<Heather.Schmalbach@Wildlife.ca.gov>; Porter, Eric <Eric_Porter@fws.gov>; Snyder, Jonathan
<Jonathan_d_Snyder@fws.gov>
Subject: Draft Housing Element/NCCP/HCP Consistency
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
Good afternoon, Octavio:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlfe Service (Service) is submitting comments on the Draft Housing
Element that we received last night in advance of tonight's Planning Commission meeting.
The Service encourages the City of Rancho Palos Verdes' staff, Planning Commission, and the
Council to consider the permitted City of Rancho Palos Verdes Natural Community
Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP), Implementing Agreement (IA),
and Federal permit when evaluating the Draft Housing Element.
It is imperative that the Draft Housing Element does not preclude the City's NCCP/HCP from
being implement as described and permitted consistent with the existing General Plan.
Specifically, we recommend the City evaluate the NCCP/HCP with respect to Sites 41, 48, 49
and 50 identified in the Draft Housing Element. For example, the NCCP/HCP describes a 40-
acre live-in wildlife corridor required for Site 49, with minimum 300-foot width which must
be set excluded from the development footprint along with associated fuel modification.
We respectfully request that the Planning Commission, City Staff, and the Council fully
evaluate the Draft Housing Element to ensure its feasibility and ultimate consistency with the
federally permitted NCCP/HCP and associated IA.
Sincerely, Mary Beth Woulfe
Please confirm receipt
Mary Beth Woulfe
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Biologist
Section 6 Coordinator Palm Springs/Carlsbad
2177 Salk Avenue, Suite 250
Carlsbad, California 92008
760.431.9440, ext. 294
B-10