Council Zones 8 Parcels for Low-Density Usage : Planning: The vote formalizes the decision not to build more apartments and condominiums in the city as a means to provide low-income dwellings.

The City Council has made official its decision not to build more apartments and condominiums in the city as a means to provide affordable housing.

On a straw vote taken Jan. 14, city officials rejected a Planning Commission recommendation to revise the city’s General Plan in order to build 141 multiple-family, low-income units on two sites.

On Tuesday, the council made the decision formal by voting to zone eight vacant parcels in the city for low-density residential or commercial uses.

Councilman Marshall Mouw abstained from voting on two of the sites. Councilmen Bob Kuhn and David Bodley were absent.

The council will vote on the complete General Plan on Feb. 11, after revisions are completed.

Barbara Martinoff, director of the county’s Community Development Division, said the agency began looking last week at the city’s General Plan revisions and council meeting minutes to determine whether Glendora’s potential $261,000 in federal housing funds would be in jeopardy.

On Wednesday, Martinoff said that the agency will continue the review but that, for now, federal funds will not be withheld because the city spends more than 50% of such block grants on housing rehabilitation and other programs.

“At this point, we feel that the city is making an effort to work toward affordable housing, based on those activities,” she said.

But state law requires cities to provide their regional fair share of affordable housing as determined by the Southern California Assn. of Governments, a regional planning agency.

Under an SCAG edict, Glendora is supposed to come up with 338 low-income units by 1994.

City Manager Art Cook said that, although officials have not designated specific housing sites, the city has programs and goals that will eventually bring it into compliance.

In addition to providing some residents with low-interest loans for home improvement, the city has built a senior citizens’ home, he said.

“Why designate properties (for low-income housing) and just put them in isolated areas?” he asked. “We’re integrating it into the whole community, not setting aside parcels. The main thing is that we do it, not how we do it. Don’t tell us how to do it.”

But Paul Kranhold, assistant director of the state’s Housing and Community Development Department, said Glendora’s refusal to agree to build more affordable structures may hinder its chances of receiving a share of $500 million in state funds earmarked for such projects.

He explained that the state department awards low-interest loans and grants based on a city or county’s compliance with state law.

Although Kranhold questioned how Glendora could satisfy state requirements without building more housing units, he did not rule out the possibility that the city might eventually comply.

He said the state does not dictate how affordable housing goals should be met.

“If they want to be creative and increase their supply through other strategies, then that’s something we’re open to look at,” he said.

Times correspondent Brad Haugaard contributed to this article.