Malibu Municipal Code § 7.2 Housing Needs Assessment

The City of Malibu ("City") lies within an approximately 21-mile strip of coastline at the western edge of Los Angeles County ("County"). Malibu is primarily a residential community consisting of beachfront residential lots and large estate lots in the hillsides and canyons overlooking the ocean. Some multi-family development and neighborhood/visitor-serving commercial development is located in the flatter portions of the City along Highway 1 (Pacific Coast Highway). The City has a highly scenic rural character that it seeks to preserve. Development within the City is constrained by numerous land features including steep slopes, environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA), geologic instability, flood hazards, and extreme wildfire hazards. The entire City lies within the Coastal Zone as defined by the California Coastal Act of 1976.[1] Because of these constraints, a large portion of the City remains undeveloped and rural in character. Growth is also limited by the lack of a centralized sewer system.

Since its incorporation in 1991, the City has grown from a population of approximately 11,700 to 12,699 residents in 2012, according to recent Census data. The City is approximately 19.9 square miles in area and is bounded by unincorporated County to the west and north, the City of Los Angeles (Pacific Palisades) to the east and the Pacific Ocean to the south. Further to the east is the City of Santa Monica. The Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area lies just to the north. The City's population is affluent with a median household income, according to recent Census data, of $132,926. Malibu's median household income was significantly higher than that of Los Angeles County ($56,266) and California as a whole ($61,632).

This chapter examines general population and household characteristics and trends, such as age, race and ethnicity, employment, household composition and size, household income, and special needs. Characteristics of the existing housing stock (e.g., number of units and type, tenure, age and condition, costs) are also addressed. Finally, the City's projected housing growth needs based on the 2014-2021 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) are discussed.

The Housing Needs Assessment utilizes the most recent data from the U.S. Census, the California Department of Finance (DOF), the California Employment Development Department (EDD), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and other relevant sources. Supplemental data were obtained through field surveys and from private vendors, where appropriate.

(Resolution Nos. 14-04, 1/13/14; 13-34, 8/26/13)

[1]

California Public Resources Code, Division 20.

(a) Population Growth Trends

In 1990, the unincorporated community of Malibu had a population of 11,643. The City of Malibu was incorporated on March 28, 1991. From 1990 to 2000, the population of the newly incorporated City grew by about 8% to 12,575. During the decade 2000 to 2012 the City's population grew by only 124 persons, or one percent compared to almost four percent for Los Angeles County as a whole (see Table 7-1).

Table 7-1 Population Trends 1990-2012 Malibu vs. Los Angeles County

(b) Age

Housing needs are influenced by the age characteristics of the population. Different age groups require different accommodations based on lifestyle, family type, income level, and housing preference. Table 7-2 provides a comparison of the City's and County's population by age group in 2010. This table shows that the age distribution of the City's population differs from Los Angeles County as a whole, in that a lower proportion of the City's population is 19 years of age or younger (20% in the City versus 28% in the County) and a higher proportion of the City's population is 45 years of age and above (55% in the City versus 36% in the County). The median age of the City's population is 13 years older than the median age in the County (47.8 years in the City versus 34.8 years in the County).

Table 7-2 Age Distribution Malibu vs. Los Angeles County

(c) Race and Ethnicity

The racial and ethnic composition of the City differs from that in the County, in that a lower proportion of City residents are Hispanic/Latino or other racial minorities. Approximately 87% of City's residents are non-Hispanic white, contrasted with 28% for the County as a whole. The percentage of Hispanics residing in the City, at 6.1%, is approximately one-eighth that of the percentage of Hispanics residing in the County. Asians, at 2.6%, represent the largest non-Hispanic minority group in the City (Table 7-3).

Table 7-3 Race/Ethnicity

(Resolution Nos. 14-04, 1/13/14; 13-34, 8/26/13)

(a) Household Composition and Size

Household characteristics are important indicators of the type and size of housing needed in a city. The Census defines a "household" as all persons occupying a housing unit, which may include single persons living alone, families related through marriage or blood, or unrelated persons sharing a single unit. Persons in group quarters such as dormitories, retirement or convalescent homes, or other group living situations are included in population totals, but are not considered households.

Table 7-4 provides a comparison of households by type for the City and County as a whole, according to recent Census data. Family households comprised approximately 61% of all households in the City, somewhat lower than the County with 68%. Household composition in the City differs from that of the County with the most significant difference being non-family households with individuals under 18 years of age (City 26% versus County 38%). Other less significant differences include non-family households headed by individuals 65 and older (City 32% versus County 24%) and family households headed by a female with no husband present (8% City versus 15% County). The City's average household size of 2.37 is somewhat lower than the County as a whole (2.98).

Table 7-4 Household Composition

(b) Housing Tenure and Vacancy

Housing tenure (owner versus renter) is an important indicator of the housing market. Communities need an adequate supply of units available both for rent and for sale in order to accommodate a range of households with varying income, family size and composition, and lifestyle. Table 7-5 provides a comparison of the number of owner-occupied and renter-occupied units in the City in 2010 as compared to the County as a whole. It reveals that the level of homeownership for the City (54.1%) is higher than for the County (44.8%).

This table also shows that the vacancy rate in the City is very high (23%) due to the large number of second homes.

Table 7-5 Household Tenure

(c) Overcrowding

Overcrowding is often closely related to household income and the cost of housing. The U.S. Census Bureau considers a household to be overcrowded when there is more than one person per room, excluding bathrooms and kitchens, with severe overcrowding when there are more than 1.5 occupants per room. Table 7-6 summarizes overcrowding for the City of Malibu.

Table 7-6 Overcrowding

According to recent Census data, overall overcrowding in the City was substantially lower than in the County as a whole (1.4% occupied units in the City versus 23.6% occupied units in the County). In the City, overcrowding was more prevalent among renter-occupied units than for owner-occupied units. Approximately 1% of the City's renter-occupied households were overcrowded, compared to only 0.4% of owner-occupied households. The relatively high cost of housing in Malibu is the primary cause of overcrowding. Several programs in the Housing Plan (Chapter V) that are designed to address housing affordability will also help to alleviate overcrowding. These programs include: Program 1.1 - Code Enforcement; Program 1.3 - Housing Rehabilitation Assistance; Program 1.4 - Preserve Existing Mobile Home Parks; Program 1.5 - Conserve Affordable Housing in the Coastal Zone; Program 2.2 - Ensure Adequate Capacity to Accommodate Housing Needs; Program 2.3 - Encourage Mixed-Use and Adaptive Reuse Development in Appropriate Locations; Program 2.2A - Second Units; Program 2.3 - Streamline Development Review and Assist Affordable Housing Developments; and Program 3.3 - Provide Financial Support and Referral Information to Persons in Need of Assistance.

(d) Household Income

Household income is a primary factor affecting housing needs in a community. According to recent Census data, the median household income in the City was $132,926, approximately 226% higher than the County median income of $56,266 (Table 7-7).

Table 7-7 Median Household Income Los Angeles County and Cities

(e) Overpayment

According to state housing policy, overpaying occurs when housing costs exceed 30% of gross household income. According to SCAG, 46% of all renter households and 42% of all owner households in the City were overpaying for housing.

Although homeowners enjoy income and property tax deductions and other benefits that help to compensate for high housing costs, lower-income homeowners may need to defer maintenance or repairs due to limited funds, which can lead to deterioration. For lower-income renters, severe cost burden can require families to double up resulting in overcrowding.

The relatively high cost of housing in Malibu is the primary cause of overpayment for lower-income households. Several programs in the Housing Plan designed to address housing affordability will also help to alleviate overpayment. These programs include Program 1.1 - Code Enforcement; Program 1.3 - Rehabilitation Assistance; Program 1.4 - Preserve Existing Mobile Home Parks; Program 1.5 - Conserve Affordable Housing in the Coastal Zone; Program 2.2 - Ensure Adequate Capacity to Accommodate Housing Needs; Program 2.2A - Second Units; Program 2.3 - Streamline Development Review and Assist Affordable Housing Development; and Program 3.3 - Provide Financial Support and Referral Information to Persons in Need of Assistance.

Extremely Low Income Households

State law requires quantification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs of extremely-low-income (ELI) households. ELI is defined as households with income less than 30% of area median income. The 2013 area median income for the County was $64,800 (see Table 7-14). For ELI households, this results in an income of $25,600 or less for a four-person household. Households with extremely low incomes have a variety of housing problems and needs.

Existing Needs

According to ACS data reported by SCAG, approximately 342 ELI households resided in the City, representing 6.3% of the total households.

Projected Needs

The projected housing need for ELI households is assumed to be 50% of the very-low-income regional housing need of 1 unit. As a result, the City has a projected need for 1 ELI unit. The resources and programs to address this need are the same as for low-income housing in general and are discussed throughout the Housing Element, including the Housing Plan. Because the needs of ELI households overlap extensively with other special needs groups, further analysis and resources for ELI households can be found in Section 7.2.5, Special Needs and Section 7.4.1(a), Land Use Plans and Regulations.

(Resolution Nos. 14-04, 1/13/14; 13-34, 8/26/13)

Employment is an important factor affecting housing needs within a community. The jobs available in each employment sector and the wages for these jobs affect the type and size of housing residents can afford.

(a) Current Employment

Current employment and projected job growth have a significant influence on housing needs during this planning period. Table 7-8 shows that the City had a workforce of 6,173 persons, or 58% of the working-age population, according to recent Census data. The table shows that the characteristics of the City's working population are generally similar to those countywide with a slightly lower proportion of the working-age population in the labor force (58% City versus 65.2% County). Approximately 42% of City residents were not in the labor force.

Table 7-8 Labor Force Malibu vs. Los Angeles County

According to recent Census data, approximately 61.7% of the City's working residents were employed in management and professional occupations (Table 7-9). A significant percentage of workers (22.6%) were employed in sales and office-related occupations. A relatively low percentage of workers (11.1%) were employed in service-related occupations such as waiters, waitresses, and beauticians. Blue collar occupations such as machine operators, assemblers, farming, transportation, handlers, and laborers constituted 4.6% of the workforce.

Table 7-9 Employment by Occupation

In a high-cost area like Malibu second units provide an important option for low-wage workers, including household employees. Program 2.2 in the Housing Plan describes the City's strategy for expanding the availability of second units.

(b) Projected Job Growth

Future housing needs are affected by the number and type of new jobs created during this planning period. Table 7-10 shows projected job growth by industry for the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale Metropolitan Statistical Area (Los Angeles County) for the period 2010-2020. Total employment in Los Angeles County is expected to grow by 15.5% during this time period. The overall growth is expected to add about 658,000 new jobs and bring the employment of Los Angeles County to about 4.9 million by 2020.

Generally, residents who are employed in well-paying occupations have less difficulty obtaining adequate housing than residents in low-paying occupations.

Table 7-10 2010-2020 Industry Employment Projections Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale Metropolitan Statistical Area

Data sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics' Current Employment Statistics (CES) March 2011 benchmark and Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) industry employment. Industry detail may not add up to totals due to independent rounding. Notes

(c) Jobs-Housing Balance

A regional balance of jobs to housing helps to ensure that the demand for housing is reasonably related to supply. When the number of jobs significantly exceeds the housing supply, the rental and for-sale housing markets may become overheated, requiring households to pay a larger percentage of their income for housing. In addition, a tight housing market can result in overcrowding and longer commute times as workers seek more affordable housing in outlying areas. The current jobs-housing objective within the SCAG region is one new housing unit for every 1.5 jobs.[1]

According to recent Census data, 96% of employed City residents worked in Los Angeles County, and approximately 40.4% of all workers were employed within the City limits (Table 7-11).

Table 7-11 Job Location for Malibu Residents

[1]

SCAG Draft 2007 Regional Comprehensive Plan, Land Use & Housing Chapter

(Resolution Nos. 14-04, 1/13/14; 13-34, 8/26/13)

This section presents an evaluation of the characteristics of the community's housing stock and helps in identifying and prioritizing needs. The factors evaluated include the number and type of housing units, recent growth trends, age and condition, tenure, vacancy, housing costs, affordability, and assisted affordable units at-risk of loss due to conversion to market-rate. A housing unit is defined as a house, apartment, mobile home, or group of rooms, occupied as separate living quarters or, if vacant, intended for occupancy as separate living quarters.

(a) Housing Type and Growth Trends

According to recent Census data, the housing stock in the City was comprised mostly of single-family detached homes, which made up about 78% of all units, while multi-family units comprised about 15% of the total. Mobile home units comprised about 8% of the total. Table 7-12 provides a breakdown of the housing stock by type along with growth trends for the City compared to the County as a whole for the period from 2000 to 2012.

Second units provide an important source of housing for lower-income persons in Malibu. A discussion of second unit production and affordability is presented in Appendix B. Program 2.2 in the Housing Plan describes the City's strategy for expanding the availability of second units.

Table 7-12 Housing by Type, 2000-2012 Malibu vs. Los Angeles County

Between 2000 and 2012, only single-family detached homes were added to the City's housing stock (second units are not reported in these data). The number of multi-family units and mobile homes in the City were reduced during that same period by 29.9% and 9.3%, respectively. Approximately 61.6% of new residential units in the County as a whole were single family units and 35.7% were multi-family units.

(b) Housing Age and Conditions

Housing age is often an important indicator of housing condition. Housing units built prior to 1978, before stringent limits on the amount of lead in paint were imposed may have interior or exterior building components coated with lead-based paint. Housing units built before 1970 are the most likely to need rehabilitation and to have deteriorated lead-based paint. Table 7-13 shows the age distribution of the housing stock in the City compared to the County as a whole.

This table shows that about 44% of the units in the City were constructed prior to 1970. The fact that a significant percentage of the City's housing stock is more than 30 years old suggests that there may be some need for rehabilitation, which is typical of most jurisdictions in Southern California.

Table 7-13 Age of Housing Stock by Tenure Malibu vs. Los Angeles County

In general, the quality of housing is exceptional in the City. At a minimum, most dwelling units are wellmaintained, especially with respect to the harsh environmental conditions that they are subject to. There are areas where older housing units exist, such as along Pacific Coast Highway in the eastern portion of the City. However, even these units are maintained given their economic value. It is estimated that about 2% of the housing units within the City are in need of minor repair, and two are in need of major structural repair or replacement due to landslides.

A goal of the City's Building & Safety Division as well as Code Enforcement staff is to address housing concerns before they become serious problems. Staff has helped to reduce structural deterioration by identifying problems and informing residents of programs to assist with improvements. In addition, the City addresses issues related to lead-based paint and asbestos removal through adding standard conditions of approval to include Best Management Practices for all projects that include the demolition or remodeling of older structures.

(c) Housing Cost

Housing Affordability Criteria

State law establishes five income categories for purposes of housing programs based on the County's area median income ("AMI"): extremely-low (30% or less of AMI), very-low (31-50% of AMI), low (51-80% of AMI), moderate (81-120% of AMI) and above-moderate (over 120% of AMI). Housing affordability is based on the relationship between household income and housing expenses. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") and the California Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD")[1], housing is considered "affordable" if the monthly payment is no more than 30% of a household's gross income. In some areas (such as Los Angeles County), these income limits may be increased to adjust for high housing costs.

Table 7-14 shows affordable rent levels and estimated affordable purchase prices for housing in the City (and County)[2] by income category. Based on state-adopted standards, the maximum affordable monthly rent for extremely-low-income households is $640, while the maximum affordable rent for very-low-income households is $1,068. The maximum affordable rent for low-income households is $1,708, while the maximum for moderate-income households is $1,944.

Maximum purchase prices are more difficult to determine due to variations in mortgage interest rates and qualifying procedures, down payments, special tax assessments, homeowner association fees, property insurance rates, etc. With this caveat, the maximum home purchase prices by income category shown in Table 7-14 have been estimated based on typical conditions.

Table 7-14 Income Categories and Affordable Housing Costs Los Angeles County

For-Sale Housing

As expected, housing sales price statistics for calendar year 2012 reveal that real estate continues to be very expensive in the City. According to DataQuick's DQNews[3], the median single-family home price in the City during 2012 was more than $2 million, while the median condo price was $550,000. Based on the estimated affordable purchase prices shown in Table 7-14, only upper-income residents can afford to purchase a home in the City.

Rental Housing

A recent survey of rental housing units in the City[4] found that rents ranged from $3,675 to over $5,000 per month. When market rents are compared to the amounts that low-income households can afford to pay (Table 7-14), it is clear that it is not possible for low-income households to find market-rate rental housing without overpaying.

[1]

HCD memo dated 4/18/07. Also available at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/hrc/rep/state/inc2k9.pdf.

[2]

Affordable rent and purchase prices are based on the county median income.

[3]

http://www.dqnews.com/Charts/Annual-Charts/LA-Times-Charts/ZIPLAT12.aspx

[4]

http://www.forrent.com/search-apartments-by-area/CA/Greater-Los-Angeles/West-LA/Malibu.php

(Resolution Nos. 14-04, 1/13/14; 13-34, 8/26/13)

Certain groups have greater difficulty in finding decent, affordable housing due to special circumstances. Such circumstances may be related to one's employment and income, family characteristics, disability, or other conditions. As a result, some of the City's residents may experience a higher prevalence of overpayment, overcrowding, or other housing problems.

State Housing Element law defines "special needs" groups to include persons with disabilities, the elderly, large households, female-headed households, homeless people, and farmworkers. This section contains a discussion of the housing needs facing each of these groups.

(a) Persons with Disabilities

The most recent available Census data reported that the City had approximately 605 people between 16 and 64 years of age, or about 7% of the working age population, who reported a work-related disability (Table 7-15). Of those aged 65 and above, 299 (about 17.5%) reported some form of physical disability. Reported disabilities included persons whose disability hinders their ability to go outside the home (1.7% of the working age population and 10.2% of the senior population). Housing opportunities for the handicapped can be maximized through housing assistance programs and providing universal design features such as widened doorways, ramps, lowered countertops, single-level units and ground floor units. During the previous planning period an ordinance establishing procedures to ensure reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities was adopted pursuant to SB 520[1].

Developmentally Disabled

As defined by federal law, "developmental disability" means a severe, chronic disability of an individual that:

The Census does not record developmental disabilities as a separate category of disability. According to the U.S. Administration on Developmental Disabilities, an accepted estimate of the percentage of the population that can be defined as developmentally disabled is 1.5 percent. Many developmentally disabled persons can live and work independently within a conventional housing environment. More severely disabled individuals require a group living environment where supervision is provided. The most severely affected individuals may require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are provided. Because developmental disabilities exist before adulthood, the first issue in supportive housing for the developmentally disabled is the transition from the person's living situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult.

The California Department of Developmental Services (DDS) currently provides community-based services to approximately 243,000 persons with developmental disabilities and their families through a statewide system of 21 regional centers, four developmental centers, and two community-based facilities. The Westside Regional Center (WRC) located in Culver City (http://www.westsiderc.org/) provides services for people with developmental disabilities in Malibu. The WRC is a private, non-profit community agency that contracts with local businesses to offer a wide range of services to individuals with developmental disabilities and their families.

There is no charge for diagnosis and assessment for eligibility. Once eligibility is determined, most services are free regardless of age or income. There is a requirement for parents to share the cost of 24-hour out-of-home placements for children under age 18. This share depends on the parents' ability to pay. There may also be a co-payment requirement for other selected services.

Regional centers are required by law to provide services in the most cost-effective way possible. They must use all other resources, including generic resources, before using any regional center funds. A generic resource is a service provided by an agency that has a legal responsibility to provide services to the general public and receives public funds for providing those services. Some generic agencies may include the local school district, county social services department, Medi-Cal, Social Security Administration, Department of Rehabilitation and others. Other resources may include natural supports. This is help that disabled persons may get from family, friends or others at little or no cost. According to the latest available WRC Performance Report[2], the Center served approximately 7,400 individuals during 2012. Of those, 64 clients resided in Malibu and over three-quarters of whom were children or young adults age 22 or under[3].

In addition to the services provided by the WRC, City housing programs that respond to the needs of this population include 1d (Emergency Shelters and Transitional/Supportive Housing) and 3a (Section 8 Rental Assistance).

Table 7-15 Persons with Disabilities by Age – Malibu

[1]

Senate Bill 520 (Chesbro) [Stats. 2001, ch. 671].

[2]

http://www.dds.ca.gov/Transparency/docs/2012/WRCPCYearEndRpt\_2012.pdf

[3]

Westside Regional Center, 2013.

(b) Elderly

According to recent Census data, there were 1,272 households in the City where the property owner was 65 or older (Table 7-16). Many elderly persons are dependent on fixed incomes or have disabilities. Elderly homeowners may be physically unable to maintain their homes or cope with living alone. The housing needs of this group can be addressed through smaller units, second units on lots with existing homes, shared living arrangements, congregate housing, and housing assistance programs.

Second units provide an important source of housing for elderly family members as an alternative to institutional facilities (see Housing Plan, Program 2.2).

Table 7-16 Elderly Households by Tenure – Malibu

(c) Large Households

Large households are defined as those with five or more members. Approximately 65% of owner households and 70% of renter households in the City have only one or two members. About 7% of renter households have five or more members, while about 6% of owners were large households (Table 7-17). This distribution indicates that the need for large units with four or more bedrooms is expected to be significantly less than for smaller units. The City responds to the needs of large households through participation in the County's Section 8 program and other housing assistance programs (see Housing Plan Program 3.3).

Table 7-17 Household Size by Tenure – Malibu

(d) Female-Headed Households

Of the 4,673 households in the City, 6.4% or 297 households were headed by a female (Table 7-18). While female-headed households represent a small portion of households, 8.1% of these households were below the poverty level[4]. The City responds to the needs of female-headed households through the following: Housing Plan Program 1.1 – Code Enforcement; Program 1.3 – Housing Rehabilitation Assistance; Program 1.4 – Preserve Existing Mobile Home Parks; Program 1.5 – Conserve Affordable Housing in the Coastal Zone; Program 2.2 – Ensure Adequate Capacity to Accommodate Housing Needs; Program 2.3 – Encourage Mixed-Use and Adaptive Reuse Development; Program 2.2A – Second Units; Program 2.7 – Streamline Development Review and Assist Affordable Housing Development; and Program 3.3 – Provide Financial Support and Referral Information to Persons in Need of Assistance.

Table 7-18 Household Type by Tenure – Malibu

[4]

2000 Census, SF3 Table DP-3

(e) Farmworkers

Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary income is from seasonal agricultural work. Farming activities in the City are limited horticultural activities on approximately 25 acres of land scattered throughout the City. For example, there are two nurseries located west of Trancas Canyon, two orchards located north of Point Dume, one nursery located just west of Pepperdine University, and two nurseries and two orchards located in the Civic Center area. These horticultural activities are not a significant source of employment and do not generate a demand for permanent onsite farm worker housing.

Recent Census estimates published by SCAG reported about 4,573 persons employed in agricultural occupations living in Los Angeles County, with none reporting Malibu as their place of residence.

(f) Homeless Persons

Throughout the country, homelessness has become an increasing problem. Factors contributing to the rise in homelessness include the general lack of housing affordable to lower-income persons, increases in the number of persons whose incomes fall below the poverty level, reductions in public assistance for the poor, and the de-institutionalization of the mentally ill.

The McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1986[5] defines a "homeless" person as an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence, or an individual whose primary nighttime residence is:

Federal agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), interpret the McKinney-Vento definition to include only those persons who are on the streets or in shelters and persons who face imminent eviction (within a week) from a private dwelling or institution and who have no subsequent residence or resources to obtain housing.[6]

People are also at risk of homelessness when they experience a sudden drop in income or a rise in housing costs, and/or they do not have the skills necessary to manage their limited resources. According to the National Coalition for the Homeless (NCH), most individuals at risk of homelessness are on a fixed income or are marginally employed and have few ties to family and friends.

The 2008-2013 Los Angeles County Consolidated Plan[7] estimated that there may be 71 homeless persons in the City. In 2009, information regarding the estimated number of homeless in the city was obtained from the Malibu Police Services Division of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LACSD). LACSD estimates there are perhaps 25 homeless individuals living in the undeveloped hillside areas and other vacant or isolated areas of the City. While there are no homeless facilities within the City, the homeless can be found in public parks and near public restroom facilities. This LACSD figure is considered to be a more accurate assessment. Recent Census estimates published by SCAG reported no homeless persons in Malibu.

The needs of the homeless vary by subpopulation. Mentally ill persons require housing supported by mental health care and counseling. Alcohol and drug abusers require treatment facilities and medical and social support services. Victims of domestic violence need shelter and social services to assist in the transition to independent living. Runaway and recently emancipated youths require shelter, combined with counseling and social services, in order to reintegrate them with their families or enable them to live independently.

Emergency Shelters

Emergency shelters are generally geared toward providing immediate housing to persons without shelter. Emergency shelters are housing facilities with minimal supportive services for homeless persons, and are limited to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person. Stays in emergency shelters are typically limited to a short period of time (1 to 90 days). No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay. A few service agencies located near the City provide emergency shelter and services for the homeless; however, most of these facilities have restricted service areas and are not available to the City's homeless at this time (see Table 7-19). Based on this data, there are no emergency shelter beds available to serve the City's homeless population.

Table 7-19 Emergency Shelters Serving SPA 5 – West Los Angeles

Source: J.H. Douglas & Associates

SB 2 of 2007[8] strengthened the planning requirements for emergency shelters and transitional housing. Unless adequate capacity is available to serve the existing emergency shelter need, SB 2 requires that shelters be allowed "by-right" (i.e., without a conditional use permit or other discretionary approval) in at least one zoning district. As an alternative, the requirements may be satisfied through a multi-jurisdictional agreement. In accordance with SB 2, the City amended the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Malibu Municipal Code (M.M.C.) with respect to emergency shelters during the previous planning period in conformance with SB 2.

Transitional and Supportive Housing

Transitional and supportive housing are types of supportive housing used to facilitate the movement of homeless individuals and families, or those at risk of homelessness, to permanent housing. Specifically, transitional housing means rental housing operated under program requirements that call for the termination of assistance and recirculation of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at some predetermined future point in time, which shall be no less than six months. Supportive housing has no limit on the length of stay and 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. As with emergency shelter facilities, all transitional and supportive housing programs that serve the City's homeless are located in neighboring communities.

SB 2 requires that transitional and supportive housing be treated as a residential use subject to only those requirements that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone. The LCP and M.M.C. were amended in the previous planning period with respect to transitional and supportive housing in conformance with SB 2.

[5]

42 U.S.C. § 11301, et seq.

[6]

"Who is Homeless?" 2009. Published by the National Coalition for the Homeless, July 2009, p.1

[7]

Los Angeles Urban County Five-Year Consolidated Plan, Table VI.2, May 28, 2008

[8]

Senate Bill 2 (Cedillo) [Stats. 2007, ch. 633 Sections 1—3]

(Resolution Nos. 14-04, 1/13/14; 13-34, 8/26/13)

State law requires that the Housing Element identify any residential projects in the City that are under an affordability restriction, along with those housing projects that are at risk of losing their low-income affordability restrictions within the ten-year period from 2013-2021. According to the SCAG, the California Housing Partnership Corporation and City records, there are no assisted units in the City, and therefore, no housing units at risk of losing their low-income affordability.

(Resolution Nos. 14-04, 1/13/14; 13-34, 8/26/13)

California Government Code § 65588(d) requires that the Housing Element update take into account any low- or moderate-income housing provided or required in the Coastal Zone pursuant to § 6590 (the Mello Act[1]). State law requires that jurisdictions monitor the following:

Table 7-20 provides City statistics for housing units in the Coastal Zone through 2008.

Table 7-20 Malibu Coastal Zone Housing Units – 1982-2013

(Resolution Nos. 14-04, 1/13/14; 13-34, 8/26/13)

[1]

The Mello Act requires, in part, the replacement of affordable units demolished or converted within the coastal zone.

(a) Overview of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)

The RHNA is a key tool for local governments to plan for anticipated growth. The RHNA quantifies the anticipated need for housing within each jurisdiction for the period from January 2014 to October 2021. Local governments then determine how they will address this need through the process of updating the Housing Elements of their General Plans.

The current RHNA was adopted by the SCAG in 2012. Future housing needs are determined primarily by the forecasted growth of households in a community. Each new household, created by a child moving out of a parent's home, by a family moving to a community for employment, and so forth, creates the need for a housing unit. The housing need for new households is then adjusted to maintain a desirable level of vacancy to promote housing choice and mobility. An adjustment is also made to account for units expected to be lost due to demolition, natural disaster, or conversion to non-housing uses. The sum of these factors – household growth, vacancy need, and replacement need – determines the construction need for a community. Total housing need is then distributed among four income categories on the basis of the County's income distribution, with adjustments to avoid an over-concentration of low-income households in any one community.

(b) 2014-2021 Growth Needs

In October 2012, SCAG adopted the final RHNA growth needs for each of the cities in Los Angeles County, as well as the unincorporated areas. The total housing growth need for the City during the 2014-2021 planning period is 2 units. This total is distributed by income category as shown in Table 7-21.

Table 7-21 Regional Housing Growth Needs

Source: SCAG 2012 Notes:

A discussion of the City's inventory of suitable sites to accommodate the City's housing need is provided in Chapter III, Resources and Opportunities, and Appendix B.

(Resolution Nos. 14-04, 1/13/14; 13-34, 8/26/13)