Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07082003 - D4 TO: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY .. Contra FROM: JOHN SWEETEN Costa EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DATE: July 8, 2003 ounty SUBJECT: 2000-2004 AB 1290 Amended and Restated Implementation Plan: Mid-term Plan - 7143 SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: HOLD Public Hearing, and consider ADOPTION of an Amended and Restated AB 1290 Implementation Plan — Mid-term Amendment. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. The AB 1290 Implementation Pian is a planning/budgeting tool for Redevelopment Agency tax increment funds. BACKGROUND: The AB '1290 Implementation Plan provides a link between the redevelopment plan implementation, and the blighting conditions which justified the adoption of the project areas. The AB 1290 Implementation Plan is prepared for a five-year porion, and is subject to a mid- term review. The Redevelopment Agency's current Implementation Plan was adopted on November 16, 1999, and covers the time period 2000-2004. i CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: 19 YES SIGNATURE: AaA441 [aRECOMMENDATION'OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR [] RECO ENATION OF AGENCY COMMITI"E 3'APPROVE [-I OTHER I SIGNATURE(S): ° t ACTION OF At N Y ON Jhx1T 8, 2003 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED M OTHER 171 CLOSED the public hearing;ADOPTED an amended and restated AB 1290 Implementation flan—Mid Tenn Flan pertaining to redevelopment projects in the Pleasant Hill BART Station,North Richmond,Bay Paint and Rodeo areas. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND x UNANIMOUS{ABSENT ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ON THE DATE AYES: _— NOES: SHOWN. ABSENT: ABSTAIN: *'strict III Seat VACANT** ATTESTED July 8, 20D3 Contact: JOHN SWEETEN,AGENCY SECRETARY cc: CAC? County Counsel *x If �,^r Community Development -,{�f r Deputy Redevelopment Agency By: ` r ;.�. Personal\boardordersirda.bo.6.03.AB9 290.Imp.plan BACKGROUND: The Amended and Restated AB 1290 Implementation Plan is the result of the Agency's mid- term review. In consultation with local advisory bodies, as applicable, the Implementation Plan has been amended to comprise a more contemporary planning document. A brief summary of the AB 1290 Amended and Restated Implementation Plan follows, by Project Area: PLEASANT HILL BART STATION AREA Goal: The primary goal of the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Redevelopment Plan is to facilitate the creation of a transit village in the area. The program connects transportation and land use planning by providing for a balance of automobile and non-automobile related projects and programs. Non-Housing Programs: • Implementation of alternative mode enhancements, including: o Iron Horse Trail Overcrossing o Iron Horse Trail Gap Closures o Other Trail Links to Area • Public Space Improvements: o Greenspace/Respite Improvements o BART Property Place-Making Improvements, Including Infrastructure o Replacement BART Parking Housing';Programs: • Maintain Contractual Financial Payments • Secure Area Property for Future Residential Uses • Provide for Mixed-Income Residential Development on the BART Site. NORTH RICHMOND AREA Goal: The primary goals of the North Richmond Redevelopment Plan are to revitalize and expand employment related development in the industrial area and to strengthen and expand housing opportunities within the residential area. The plan strives to create a productive and attractive economic center, providing job and housing opportunities for community residents. Non-Housing Programs: • Improve the employment area, including: o Industrial Area Drain agellnfrastructure Improvements o Truck Route Planning and Implementation Project o Pittsburg Avenue Extension o Getrude Avenue Property Access • Economic development projects, including: o Machining and Tooling Business Incubator o Youthbuild Program 0 3rd Street Corridor Transportation and Community Streetscape Improvements Housing Programs: • Assist with infill and assemblage opportunities • Provide first time homeownership assistance • Assist in developing creative housing projects such as mutual housing, cooperative housing, land trusts, lease to own or other projects that would facilitate lower-income homeownership for community residents. • Collaborative with the Housing Authority of Contra Costa County to assess feasibility, and implement if deemed appropriate, reuse opportunities for the Las Deltas housing project and scatter sites. BAY POINT AREA Gaal: The goals for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area include stimulating new industrial,'commercial, and residential (both market rate and affordable)development; providing major infrastructure improvements to serve the existing area residents and Personallboardorderslyda.bo.6.03.AB 1290.imp.pian businesses, and accommodate new development; and upgrading the existing residential neighborhood's through rehabilitation of existing housing units, the facilitation of infill housing construction, and development of infrastructure improvements. Non-Housing Programs: • Implementation of the Bailey Road/BART Station Area Specific Plan • Marina/Waterfront Feasibility Analysis • Encourage and Facilitate Development of Designated Light Industrial Sites • Complete the North Broadway Area Infrastructure Program • Continue to Implement a Community Funding Program • Develop and Implement a Marketing Plan for Bay Point Housing Programs: • Bey View Housing Project • Site Acquisition for Habitat for Humanity • Promote Residential Mixed-Use Development within the BART Specific Plan Area RODEO AREA Coal: The primary goal of the Rodeo Redevelopment Plan is facilitate the revitalization of the downtown and waterfront areas through sustainable development principles. The program integrates policies and programs that promote community based economic development, capitalize on Rod'eo's bayfront location, enhance environmental assets, and provide necessary public infrastructure. Non-Housing Programs: • Waterfront Revitalization o Marina revitalization o Recreation and waterfront related retail development o Public spaces including Lone Tree Point, bay trail, and a waterfront park o Pacific Avenue bridge improvements • Downtown improvements o Parker Avenue undergrounding and recononstruction o P-1 Rezoning o Facade rehabilitation program o Downtown catalyst project— mixed use project o Artist incubator HousingPrograms: • Encourage new housing construction, particularly for homeowners • Develop housing rehabilitation program for existing low-income property owners Pers©nal\boardorders\rda.bo.f.03.AB1294.imp.pian Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency 2000-2004 AB 1200 Amended and Restated Implementation Plan: Mid-term Plan-0/03 Table of Contents Page 1 .0 Introduction.......................................................................................... 1 1 .1 Purpose......................................................................................... 1 1 .2 Background...................................................................................1 1 .3 Organization of Mid-Term Update .................. ....2 2.0 Agency Housing Obligations and Policies ...............................................3 2.1 Overview of Legal Requirements ....................................................3 2.2 Affordable Housing Goals and Policies...........................................8 2.3 Proposed Housing Programs..........................................................9 3.0 North Richmond ................................................................................. 11 3.1 Non Housing Component............................................................1 1 3.2 Housing Component ...................................................................19 4.0 Rodeo ...............................................................................................26 4.1 Non Housing Component............................................................26 4.2 Housing Component ...................................................................34 5.0 Pleasant Hill BART Station....................................................................40 5.1 Non Housing Component............................................................42 5.2 Housing Component ...................................................................46 6.0 Bay Point............................................................................................51 6.1 Non Housing Component............................................................51 6.2 Housing Component ...................................................................60 7.0 Summary of Affordable Housing Requirements......................................69 7.1 Aggregated Affordable (Inclusionary) Housing Production.............69 7.2 Aggregated Replacement Housing Obligation ..............................70 7.3 Aggregated Expenditures on Senior/Family Housing.....................70 Contra Costa County Redevelopment Implementation Flan Mid-Term Update i 1 .0 INTRODUCTION 1 .1 PURPOSE On January 1, 1994, Assembly Bill (AB) 1290, called the Community Redevelopment Law Reform Act of 1993, became effective as a law. AB 1290 enacted extensive changes to the California Community Redevelopment Law (CRL). Among those changes, AB 1290 required all redevelopment agencies to adopt an implementation plan for all project areas prior to december 31 , 1994 and every five years thereafter. Implementation plans must discuss specific goals, objectives, policies, programs, and fiscal expenditures for the redevelopment project area(s) a five- year period. The implementation plan must address all these elements for both the non-housing and housing components of the redevelopment plans. AB 1290 also required that a mid-term review of the implementation plan be conducted in the second, but no later than the third year of the five-year plan. This Mid-Term Update of the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Implementation Plan assesses the progress of the current implementation plan, and provides the Agency with an opportunity to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the programs set forth in the implementation plan. 1 .2 BACKGROUND Contra Costa County is located in Northern California, adjacent to Alameda, San Joaquin, Sacramento, and Soiano counties. The County encompasses 805 square miles - approximately 40 miles from west to east and 20 miles from north to south. Due to the large size and natural topography, the County is divided into three subregions: West County, Central County, and East County. The West County area includes the urbanized shoreline of San Francisco and San Pablo Bays; the Briones Hills separate this area from the rest of the County. West County was among one of the first areas in the County to develop with suburbs and industry. Two Redevelopment Project Areas, North Richmond and Rodeo, are located in West County. The Central County area is the most populous of the three areas, with over half of the County's population. Central County generally consists of bedroom communities that have developed in the flat valleys between the East Bay Hills on the west and the Diablo Range to the east, extending north and south of Mt. Diablo. The Pleasant Hill BART Station Redevelopment Project Area is located in this area. Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 The East County area is the largest land area in the County and includes much of the hilly terrain of the Diablo Range. A large portion of this area is rural in nature, with pockets of suburban communities. The Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area is located in this eastern portion of the County. The County activated the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency on December 6, 1983. The first Redevelopment Project Area, the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area, was adopted in 1984. Since that time, the Redevelopment Agency has adopted four additional Project Areas located throughout the County: North Richmond, Rodeo, Bay Point, and Oakley, while also adding territory to the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area. The Oakley Redevelopment Project Area was subsequently transferred to the City of Oakley upon its incorporation. The Agency designed Redevelopment Project Areas and Plans for each community to address specific physical and economic conditions prevalent in each respective Project Area. The Redevelopment Pians provide direction for the revitalization and rehabilitation of each Project Area. The Plans do not establish a specific implementation program for the redevelopment activities nor do they outline specific methods to solve or alleviate the concerns and problems of the community. Rather, the Plans provide a legal process and framework within which specific plans, projects, and solutions can be established. The Plans provide the redevelopment agency the ability to design, develop, and proceed with the implementation of specific plans, projects, and solutions. 1 .3 ORGANIZATION OF THE MID—TERM UPDATE The mid-term update follows the structure of the implementation plan. Each project area is discussed in a separate chapter. The chapter for each project area details the goals, objectives, program activities, policies, and fiscal information for both the non-housing and housing components of that area's Redevelopment Plan. All chapters include the following components: • Goals, objectives, programs, and expenditure discussion for the non- housing components, and a discussion of the progress in implementing the program since 2000; • Discussion on how programs eliminate blight; • Evaluation of the existing socioeconomic data and housing supply characteristics; • The number of new and rehabilitated housing units developed or assisted by the Agency from the adoption of each Redevelopment Plan through 1999; Personal\documents\ImpPfanEdited.revised.6.9.03 2 _.. -- .................................................... __ • The number of new and rehabilitated housing units developed since 2000; • An update of the progress in implementing the housing programs set forth in the implementation plan; • An update of the tax increment and housing set-aside revenues since 2000; and • An update of the housing set-aside expenditures since 2000. Personal`documents\Im pPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 3 2 .0 AGENCY HOUSING OBLIGATIONS AND POLICIES This chapter summarizes the Agency's housing obligations pursuant to the legal requirements of AB 315, AB 1290, AB 637, and AB 701 . The Agency must meet these requirements in each of the four project areas as described in chapters 3.0 to 6.0. This chapter also provides an overall framework for the Agency's housing goals, policies, and programs. The County's adopted and certified Housing Element and the Consolidated Plan guide the Agency. As appropriate, the Agency intends to implement all relevant goals, policies, strategies, and programs in the Housing Element and Consolidated Plan in each Project Area. 2.1 OVERVIEW OF LEGAL REQUIREMENTS This section presents an overview of the legal obligations of the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency related to the provision of affordable housing in the Redevelopment Project Areas. 2.1(A) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS: HOUSING ACTIVITIES The housing portion of the implementation Plan is required to set forth specific goals and objectives, outline the specific programs and expenditures planned, and explain how the stated goals, objectives, programs and expenditures will produce affordable housing units to meet these obligations for the ten-year planning period. In addition, CRL AB 1290 requires the housing component of the Implementation Plan to describe the following: • An explanation of how the goals, objectives, programs and expenditures will implement the low and moderate-income housing set-aside and housing production requirements set forth in Sections 33334.2, 33334.4, 33334.6 and 33413. This explanation must contain a housing program for each of the five years of the Implementation Plan in enough detail to measure performance. • Projection of housing units to be rehabilitated, price-restricted, assisted or destroyed. • Plans for using annual deposits to the Housing Fund • Identification of proposed locations for the replacement housing, which the Agency will be required to produce pursuant to Section 33413, if a planned project will result in the destruction of existing affordable housing. Personal\documents\Im pPlan Edited.revised.6.9.0 3 4 • The Project Area Affordable Housing Production Plan (AB 315 Plan) required by Section 33413 (b) (4). Personal\documen£s\impPianEdited.revised.6.9.03 5 2.1(B) MAJOR STATUTORY PROVISIONS OF CRL FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING The major statutory affordable housing requirements imposed on redevelopment agencies by the CRL may be categorized generally as: • Housing Production Requirement - Specified minimum percentages of new or substantially rehabilitated housing units in a project area are to be made available at a specified affordable housing cost. • Replacement Housing Requirement - Agencies must replace housing units removed from the housing stock because of redevelopment activities. • Housing Fund Requirement - Redevelopment agencies are required to expend specified percentages of tax increment revenue for affordable housing. Effective January 1 , 2002, AB 637 imposed new affordable housing requirements on redevelopment agencies. Additionally, AB 701 was adopted in September 2002 to clarify some of the vagueness in AB 637. The changes to the Redevelopment Law are as follows: • The agency must describe how the housing requirements will be fulfilled from 2002 and 10 years following the Implementation Plan's adoption. • The covenant period to fulfill the housing requirements must be extended to a minimum of 55-years for rental projects and 45-years for ownership projects. • Substantially rehabilitated multi-family rental dwellings that do not receive agency assistance are no longer to be included in the base count for production obligation units. • The "two for one" provision allowing two units constructed outside of the Project Area to count toward one affordable unit required inside the Project Area is now permanent, as is the aggregation of units. • The Implementation Plan must quantify the number of units needed for very low, low and moderate income households as identified by the jurisdiction's adopted Housing Element, and affirm the agency's set- aside expenditures will be in proportion these needs for the period between 2002 and 10 years following the implementation Plan's adoption, using the regional fair share allocation as the benchmark. • The Implementation Plan must provide Census data to quantify the percentage of residents 65 years of age and older, which will be the maximum percentage allowed for allocation of senior housing projects for the period between 2002 and 10 years following the Implementation Personal\documents\ImpPlan Edited.rev!sed.6.9.03 6 Plan's adoption. The remaining set-aside funds must be used in proportion to other non-senior household types. • 100% of replacement units must be available and affordable to the same income categories as the persons displaced from the destroyed or removed units. • An Agency must target its Housing Fund expenditures in .proportion to the needs for very low and low-income affordable housing. • An Agency must satisfy this targeting obligation over the term of the implementation plan instead of the life of the redevelopment plan, which is 10 years. The redevelopment agency must only use set-aside funds as gap financing between external financing and total project cost. if the agency funds exceed 50% of the project's overall funding, a resolution identifying written findings must be passed, proving that a developer tried but was unsuccessful in getting outside funding. • An Agency may no longer use "health and safety of existing residents" as reasons to pay for on- and off--site improvements using set--aside funds. Instead the improvements must be a "reasonable and fundamental" component of the units being rehabilitated and the agency must record affordability covenants as previously described. In addition, only the proportion of affordable units to total units may be funded by the agency for on- and off-site improvements (i.e. 50%). • In addition to units being available to low and moderate income households, units must also be occupied by low and moderate-income households. • The agency must now keep a list of displaced low and moderate-income households and may establish reasonable rules for determining priority for spending set-aside funds on those on the list. These changes are reflected in the following sections describing the production and replacement requirements. 2.1(C) HOUSING PRODUCTION REQUIREMENT Genera/ Housing Production Requirement - Project areas created by redevelopment plans adopted on or after January 1 , 1076, and territory newly added to project areas by amendments adopted on or after January 1 , 1976, must meet an affordable housing production obligation (the "Housing Production Requirement"). Personal`documents\ImpPlan Edited.revised.6.9.03 7 The CRL requires that 30% of all agency-developed or substantially rehabilitated housing must be available at affordable housing cost to low and moderate- income households. Of those units, 50% must be affordable to very low-income households. The 501Y6 very low-income requirement translates to 15% of the total units developed or substantially rehabilitated by the agency (50% of 30% = 15%). This requirement applies only to units developed directly by the agency and does not apply to units developed by housing developers pursuant to agreements (for financing and land assemblage assistance) with an agency (Section 33413). When housing is developed or substantially rehabilitated in a project area by public or private entities other than the agency, including entities receiving agency assistance and housing built without any agency assistance, 15% of the total number of units must be affordable to low and moderate income households. Of those units, 40% must be affordable to very low-income households. The 40% very low--income requirement translates to 6% of the units developed and substantially rehabilitated in the Project Area (40% of 15% = 6%). Under AB 1290, AB 637, and AB 701 "substantial rehabilitation" is defined as rehabilitation with cost that constitutes at least 25 percent of the after rehabilitation value of the dwelling, inclusive of the land value. As a result of AB 637, multi-family rental dwellings that are substantially rehabilitated by entities other than the Agency are no longer included in base unit calculations for inclusionary housing obligations; however, assistance provided by the agency will still trigger the obligation. 2.1 (D) REPLACEMENT HOUSING REQUIREMENTS The Replacement Housing Requirement applies to project areas established by redevelopment plans (or areas added by amendments) adopted on or after January 1 , 1976, and merged project areas regardless of the date of establishment of the individual project areas subsequently merged. The Agency must replace the aggregate number of bedrooms destroyed or removed from the housing inventory that are occupied by low and moderate-income persons with an equal number of bedrooms for low and moderate-income occupants. At least thirty days prior to acquiring property or adopting an agreement that will lead to the destruction or removal of low and moderate-income housing units, an agency must adopt by resolution a replacement housing plan. The replacement-housing plan generally must include: • The general location of housing to be rehabilitated, developed, or constructed to meet the particular Replacement Housing Requirement. An adequate means of financing such rehabilitation, development, or construction. Personal\documents\ImpPl an Edited.revised.6.9.03 8 • A finding that the replacement housing does not require the approval of the voters pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California Constitution or that such approval has been obtained. • The number of dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate income planned for construction or rehabilitation. • The timetable for meeting the replacement housing objectives, plans, relocation, and rehabilitation. Replacement units may be located anywhere within the territorial jurisdiction of the agency (H&S Code §33413[a]). An agency may either construct replacement housing or cause the construction of the housing through agreements with housing developers. The basic income and affordability standards for replacement housing are the same as those described for use of Housing Fund monies. The units must be available at affordable housing cost to households of low and moderate income. Effective January 1 , 2002, Section 33413(a) requires that 100 percent of the replacement units be available at affordable housing cost to the same income level of households as the households who were displaced from the destroyed or removed units. Income limits for replacement units are equivalent to those for inclusionary units Replacement housing,must remain affordable for low and moderate households for the longest feasible time, but not less than the period of 55 years for rentals and 45 years for ownership units. The affordability controls on such units must be made enforceable by recorded covenant or restrictions. 2.1(E) HOUSING FUND REQUIREMENT The CRL requires the agency to set aside in a separate segregated Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund (the "Housing Fund") at least 20% of all tax increment revenue generated from its project areas for the purpose of increasing, improving and preserving the community's 'supply of low and moderate-income housing. Under the CRL, Housing Fund monies must be targeted to specific income levels. Agencies are specifically required to expend their Housing Funds to assist very low, low, and moderate-income households, generally defined as; • Very Lour Income: at or below 50% of area median income, adjusted for family size • Law Income: between 51% and 80% of area median income, adjusted for family size • Moderate Income: between 81% and 120% of area median income, adjusted for family size. Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 9 over the life of the redevelopment plan, Housing Fund monies must be used to assist in the acquisition or development of housing for persons of low and very low income in at least the same proportion as the total number of housing units needed for those income groups bears to the total number of units needed for persons of very low, low and moderate income within the community. Contra Costa County's Housing Element of the General Plan, adopted in 2001, sets forth the affordable housing need for the unincorporated areas of the county as determined by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) in its regional "fair share" allocation. The following Table 2-1 shows the fair share allocation of the County (unincorporated) and the targeting objective currently applicable to the Agency. Table 2-1 Regional Housing Needs Determination - A- Low/Moderate Income Housinq Needs, % of Income Group Units Total Very Low 1,101 35% Low 642 20% Moderate 1,401 45% Total 3,144 100% Table 2-1 presents the Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) for lower and moderate income housing needs for Contra Costa County as determined by ABAG. Among the lower and moderate income housing needs, 35% should be for very low-income households, 20% for low-income households, and 45% for moderate-income households. Expenditure of the Redevelopment Housing Fund on affordable housing opportunities should reflect this income distribution. Housing assisted with Housing Fund moneys must be "available at an affordable housing cost." For housing assisted by Housing Funds, the following affordable housing cost definitions apply: • Very Low Income: 30% of 50% of the County MFI. This definition applies to both ownership and rental housing. • Low Income: 30% of 60% of the County MA for rental housing; 30% of 70% of the County MA for ownership housing. • Moderate Income: 30% of I 10% of the County MFI for rental housing; 35% of 110% of the County MFI for ownership housing. 2.2 AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOALS AND POLICIES In addition to discussion of Agency progress in meeting its specific affordable housing obligations under the CRL, the Implementation Plan must set forth the Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 10 Agency's goals and objectives for affordable housing during the next five years. In developing its affordable housing program, the Agency has been guided by the goals and objectives of the County's Housing Element and Consolidated Plan, which are incorporated, into this Implementation Plan by this reference. Through its affordable housing activities, the Agency intends to support and advance the overall Housing Element program. In 2001 , the County updated the Housing Element to reflect current housing market conditions and to comply with State laws. The 2001 Housing Element established the following goals: Goal 1 Maintain and improve the quality of the existing housing stock and residential neighborhoods in Contra Costa County. Goal Preserve the existing affordable housing stock in Contra Costa County. Goal 3 Increase the supply of housing with a priority on the development of affordable housing. Goal 4 increase the supply of appropriate and supportive housing for special needs populations. Goal 5 Improve housing affordability for both renters and homeowners. Goal Provide adequate sites through appropriate land use and zoning designations to accommodate the County's share of regional housing needs. Goal ? Mitigate potential constraints to housing development and affordability. The Redevelopment Agency will continue to dedicate its housing activities to achieving these goals. The Agency's new affordable housing strategy and programs for each Project Area will reflect the above-stated goals. In particular, projects such as rehabilitation activities will assist the County in achieving Goal 1 , while the Agency's prospective new housing development will assist the County to achieve Goals 3 and 4. 2.3 PROPOSED HOUSING PROGRAMS The Agency recognizes the important role of housing programs and activities in its redevelopment program. Consequently, the proposed affordable housing programs should be viewed not simply as the means of implementing the Agency's stated goals and objectives related to affordable housing but as key elements in its overall revitalization efforts. Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 1 1 The housing programs undertaken in each project area by the Agency and non- agency developers will address the goals and policies set forth in the Housing Element and Consolidated Plan. The Housing Fund and programs proposed to meet the Agency's Housing Fund requirement over the next five years are discussed below. The Redevelopment Agency has five basic programs, which seek to assist affordable housing production in the Project Area where relevant. The progress in implementing these programs within each project area is discussedin the individual project area sections (Sections 3.0 through E.0). 1 . Multi-Family /lousing - This program assists in new construction of multi- family rental housing affordable to and occupied by very low to moderate- income households. The multi-family program is appropriate in all redevelopment areas. 2. Senior Housing New Development - This program promotes development of new rental multi-family housing affordable to very low to moderate-income senior households. This program is active in several project areas including North Richmond and Rodeo. 3. Single-Family Housing and Infill Development - This program provides homeownership opportunities for very low to moderate-income households. The Agency assists developers in construction of single-family housing with units affordable to low and very low-income households. The First-Time Homebuyer Program is part of the Agency's strategy for promoting the development of affordable single-family housing. This is a permanent financing program for silent second mortgages to very low to moderate-income households; income targeting is tailored to the community being served. A pilot program was initiated and completed in Bay Point. Subsequent programs have been implemented in North Richmond and Bay Point, The Agency assistance is typically structured as a second loan with a principal and interest deferred for the life of the loan. The loan and accrued interest or equity share will only become due and payable at the time of sale or transfer. 4. Mortgage Credit Certificate Program - This program provides qualified homebuyers with a 20 percent Federal tax credit, based upon the amount of interest on the homebuyer's loan. Although not an Agency-funded program, this credit is often used in combination with the First-Time Homebuyer Program. 5. Substantial Rehabilitation - The Agency is evaluating the possibility of establishing an Agency-sponsored residential rehabilitation program or supplementing existing Countywide programs in Project Areas where needed. The program goal would be to assist in the maintenance and rehabilitation of housing owned and/or occupied by low to moderate-income households through subsidized loans. The Agency will combine its Housing Fund revenue with other funding sources to maximize the number of affordable units that can be developed or Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.rev!sed.6.9.03 12 rehabilitated with the limited amount of available Housing Funds. These other funding sources include Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) and HOME Investment partnership funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, California Housing Finance Agency (CHFA), and Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) program funds at the State level and low income housing tax credit equity funds. Other loans, grants, or financial assistance from other public and private sources may also be utilized if available. Personal\documents\lmpPlan Ed ited.revised.6.9.03 13 3.0 NORTH RICHMOND The North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area was adapted by Ordinance No. 87--50 on .duly 14, 1987. The North Richmond Project Area is a continuous area of approximately 900 acres located in West County. North Richmond is bordered on the south, east, and north by the City of Richmond and on the West by the San Francisco Bay and Richmond. As an older area in West Contra. Costa County, the North Richmond Area is characterized by an abundance of substandard housing and vacant, dilapidated commercial structures. Historically, the industrial area has been underdeveloped and much of the infrastructure is substandard. The North Richmond Redevelopment Plan was designed to achieve three major goals: (1) Revitalize and expand industrial and employment-related development in the northern portion of the project area; (2) Strengthen the existing residential neighborhood in the southern portion of the project area through development of a neighborhood commercial district, park and open space development, street improvement and landscaping, and expansion of community facilities; and (3) Upgrade the deteriorated housing stock in the project area and stimulate the construction of new affordable housing. 3.1 NON-HOUSING COMPONENT The non-housing component of the implementation plan addressed the following issues: • Specific goals and objectives for the 2000-2004 period • Specific programs, including a program of activities and expenditures to be made during the time frame of the plan; and • An explanation of how the goals, objectives, programs, and expenditures will eliminate blight The mid-term update assesses the progress in implementing the goals, objectives, programs, and expenditures since 2000. 3.1(A) GOALS The 2000-2004 implementation Pian set forth the following goals for the North Richmond Project Area: Personal\documents\1mpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 14 Goal Facilitate economic development, stimulate and attract private investment, and create employment opportunities for area residents in the Project Area. Goal 2 Improve the infrastructure and public facilities. Goal Expand and improve the commercial and neighborhood service opportunities. Goal Encourage and support public-private partnerships that address community needs. Goal 5 Encourage and support citizen participation. Goal Capitalize on existing and future financing resources and opportunities. Goal ? Eliminate blighting influences and remove impediments to development. Goal 8 Provide the framework to restore the economic and social health through public and private actions. 3.1(B) OBJECTIVES The Implementation Plan contained the following objectives to provide a framework for efforts to attain the goals. Objective 1 Improving the infrastructure through property acquisition, road, drainage, and sewer improvements in the industrial section of the Project Area. Infrastructure improvements are required to provide full and safe access and to construct public utilities for the newly developable land from the completion of the Richmond Parkway. Objective 2 Create a career development program for North Richmond residents, industries, and businesses. The Agency works with employers during the project application stage and is therefore knowledgeable about future employment need's. A career development program would provide the much needed link between new job creation with training and employment opportunities for residents. Objective 3 Create a strong marketing program to attract new businesses, generate revenue and change the area's image upon initiation of some of the infrastructure improvements. Objective 4 Initiate a reuse development planning process for specific sites in the Project Area. Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 15 Objective 5 Initiate a commercial/retail development program for specific sites in the Project Area. Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 16 3.1 (C) PROJECTS The Agency proposed 11 projects for the 2000-2004 period. The following is a discussion of each project, as well as an update of the progress in implementing the program since 2000. Between 2000 and 2004, the Agency projected a total of $2,101 ,600 in non-housing tax increment funds, equal to 80% of gross tax increment. Since 2000, the Agency has collected $2,665,878 in tax increment funds. The Agency's planned programs for the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area greatly exceed the projected tax increment revenue stream. Therefore, the Agency seeks applicable Federal, State, and other local and private funding necessary to bring these programs to fruition. See Housing Set-Aside Fund discussion for further information. Project 1 City Operational Management Expert Team (COMET) Community Improvement Activities. COMET is a joint City of Richmond and County program formed to upgrade the community through clean up, beautification, and special law enforcement activities. Funding Source: County General Fund, City of Richmond Funds, Tax Increment Revenue Estimated Cost: $50,000 annually Progress since 2000: The COMET group is still very active and the work program is now focused on fulfilling the projects identified in the North Richmond Community Action Plan. The current priorities are code enforcement, junk vehicle abatement, trash collection, and other community dean-up activities. Project 2 Commercial and Neighborhood-Serving Business Development. The North Richmond area lacks the basic commercial and neighborhood-serving businesses (i.e. grocery stores, barber shops, etc.) that provide the foundation for a community. Funding Source: CDBG funds, Foundation funds, Private Sector funds, and Tax Increment Revenue Estimated Cost: $3 Million Progress since 2000: The Agency and County provided financing to construct a commercial retail center on 3rd Street (Project 7). Approximately 2,500 square feet are unoccupied at this time. The Agency is working with the developers, the North Richmond community, the City of Richmond, the County Supervisor's Office, and other interested parties to identify a tenant. The primary goal is to secure a neighborhood-serving business, but market conditions currently may not support this effort. Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 17 Project 3 Light Industrial Business incubator Development Program-Phase 11. Phase II will include reaffirmation of the market and financial feasibility, business plan development, financial leveraging, and site acquisition/ improvements. Agency assistance may include financing, acquisition, construction, on/off site improvements, and/or rehabilitation. Funding Source: State and Federal Funds, Foundation Grants and Loans, Tax Increment Revenue, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $3+ Million Progress since 2000: Agency staff submitted a grant to the Economic Development Administration Department to provide construction funding for the incubator. While the grant application was positively received, the funding application has been delayed due to the presence of uncommitted funding for another Incubator located in the County. The other incubator had received grant approval but was unable to use the funds during this fiscal year. As a result, the funding allocation was moved to the next fiscal year (2003), and the North Richmond project funding will be considered the following year (2004). Project 4 Weed and Seed Program. A collaborative effort of county law enforcement, social service, housing and economic development providers, North Richmond residents, local community-based organizations, and other relevant groups formed to crime, youth, and neighborhood revitalization. North Richmond (along with Rodeo) was designated as a Weed and Seed area in 1998. Funding Source: State and Federal Funds, Foundation Grants and Loans, Tax Increment Revenue, and Private Sector Finds Estimated Cost: $250,000 annually Progress since 2000: The Weed and Seed program continues to provide funding for proactive law enforcement and youth-oriented service programs. Agency staff continues to work on the executive committee to set policy and seek additional funding for relevant Weed and Seed Program activities. Project 5 Community Preservation-Abatement and Revolving Loan Program. A revolving loan program that funds community preservation and abatement activities. The area has a multitude of substandard and unsafe structures, which require some level of abatement to improve health and safety conditions and clean up the community. Personal\documents\(mpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 18 Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, State and Federal Funds, Foundation Grants and Loans, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $50,000 annually Progress since 2000: Since 2000, the Agency has worked with the Building Inspection Department to identify priority areas for the use of these funds. Project 6 3rd Street Corridor Transportation and Community Streetscape Improvement Project Funding Source: State and Federal Funds, Tax Increment Revenue, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $500,000 Progress since 2000: The Agency has committed $500,000 and leveraged a $515,000 grant from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and approximately $75,000 in CDBG funds to provide streetscape improvements on 3rd Street between Chesley and Grove Avenues. This project is in collaboration with the City of Richmond, as the improvements will continue south through the City portion of the North Richmond community. The County is prepared to move forward, but is awaiting the City of Richmond to proceed with its portion of the improvements. Project 7 Development of a Commercial/Retail Center on 3rd Street, adjacent to the Center for Health and Senior Housing Project Funding Source: Tax increment Revenue, State and federal Funds, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $1 .4 million Progress since 2000: The project is completed. The center includes the Service Integration Team, Sheriff's office, and business offices for the Community Housing Development Corporation. The Agency is seeking a tenant for the remaining 2,500 square feet. Project 8 Infrastructure Improvements such as sewer, roads, and utilities in the industrial area. Funding Source: State and Federal Funds, Tax Increment Revenue, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $15 million Personal\documents\1mpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 19 _. .__.._...................................................... ...................................................... .._... ......... ............................................................................................. ... ...................... _ _. ........................................................................................ . ... Progress since 2000: The Agency is involved in a number of infrastructure projects, including the Giant Highway Extension (in collaboration with the City of San Pablo), and determining drainage needs and funding options for properties north of Parr Boulevard (in collaboration with the City of Richmond), identification of internal circulation needs, at-grade railroad crossing upgrades at Market and Chesley Avenues, and others. In addition, the Agency submitted a $200,000 grant to Caltrans for a truck and pedestrian route-planning project. Project 0 infrastructure Improvements such as Road Continuations, Streetlights, and Landscaping in the Residential areas Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, State and Federal Funds, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $3+ million Progress since 2000: The Agency is involved in a number of infrastructure projects, including the Giant Highway Extension (in collaboration with the City of San Pablo), and determining drainage needs and funding options for properties north of Parr Boulevard (in collaboration with the City of Richmond), identification of internal circulation needs, at-grade railroad crossing upgrades at Market and Chesley Avenues, and others. In addition, the Agency submitted a $200,000 grant to Caltrans for a truck and pedestrian route-planning project. Extension of Pittsburg Avenue to create a direct connection between the Richmond Parkway and the employment area is being planned. The realignment of Brookside Drive and improving creeks to 100- year flood standards have also been undertaken by the Agency. Project 10 Assess and Implement an Economic -Development Assistance Program for industrial, Commercial, Retail, and Office Projects to Attract New Businesses and Generate Employment Opportunities throughout the Project Area Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, State and Federal Funds, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $250,000+ Progress since 2000: The Agency created a website that has a site selection component to promote economic development. In addition, the Agency created marketing materials for business attraction and retention. Agency staff refers businesses seeking capital to the County Community Development Block Grant Personal\,documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 20 program's small business and micro-enterprise loan and grant, Small Business Administration, Recycling Market Development Revolving Loan, and other applicable programs. The Agency is also working with local business and property owners to encourage development and provide local employment opportunities. Agency staff also complements the CDBG staff in their implementation of a revolving loan program for small businesses. Two North Richmond businesses have received assistance to date. Project 11 Create and Implement a Marketing Strategy with Collateral Materials for the Community Funding Source: Private Sector Funds and Tax Increment Revenue Estimated Cost: $200,000 Progress since 2000: The Agency created a marketing brochure with collaterals for North Richmond. The Agency is currently creating its website with an economic development database link. Projects Added since 2000 Following is a discussion of the projects added since adoption of the 2000- 2004 implementation plan: Project 12 Truck Route Planning and Implementation Project The Agency leveraged federal funds to prepare a truck route transportation plan to divert trucks from the residential streets in North Richmond. Phase I will include the community planning and design processes. Phase 11 will involve securing the funding to implement the preferred infrastructure alternatives. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, CDBG funds, and other State and federal funds Estimated Cost: $1 million Program 13 Industrial Area Drainage/Infrastructure Improvements. The Agency, in collaboration with the City of Richmond and the private sector, financed the creation of a drainage plan for the industrial area north of Parr Boulevard. This area has never had an approved flood map prepared, which hinders the development of this area for economic development purposes. The collaborative partners are in the process of identifying additional infrastructure needs for this general vicinity in addition to implementation financing options. Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 21 Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, State and Federal Funds, Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost. $4.5 million Project 14 Pittsburg Avenue Extension. Assess and implement, if desired and feasible, the extension of Pittsburg Avenue easterly from 3rd Street to provide access to industrial properties for area-serving economic development and employment opportunities. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, State and Federal funds, Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $1 .5 million Project 15 Gertrude Avenue Industrial Property Access. Assess and implement, if desired and feasible, the construction of a new road to properties located north of Gertrude Avenue and west of the Richmond Parkway to provide access to industrial properties for area-serving economic development and local employment opportunities. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, State and Federal Funds, Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $1 million Project 16 Transportation and Enhancement - Phase 11 of 3rd Street Corridor Transportation and Community Streetscape Improvements Project. The Agency leveraged federal funds to provide streetscape, public space, and infrastructure improvements on 3rd Street, from Chesley to Grove Avenues. Phase Il would extend the identified improvements north along 3rd Street, from Grove Avenue to Wildcat Creek. This is a component of a larger community improvement project in collaboration with the City of Richmond. Funding Source: Tax increment Revenue, State and Federal Funds Estimated Cost: $850,000 Project 17 Youthbuild-North Richmond Construction Crew. The Agency, in collaboration with the Contra Costa County Housing Authority and the Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond, secured federal funds to implement a Youthbuild program. The program will provide out of school youth/young adults age 17.5 -24 with education, leadership, and construction training. The youth will learn on the job construction skills by converting scatter site Housing Authority units into single-family Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 22 homes that will be sold to lower income households under a first- time homebuyer program. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, State and Federal Funds, Foundation Grants and Loans, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Costs: $800,000 annually Project 18 Create and Implement a Brownfield Reuse Plan. An initiative to identify brownfield sites and remediation responsibility/funding sources. Funding Source: Federal, State, and Private Sector funds; Tax Increment revenues Estimated Costs: $4+million 3.1 (C) ELIMINATION OF BLIGHT The proposed redevelopment strategy and identified projects will provide several public benefits, as follows: 1 . The infrastructure improvements will eliminate a serious blighting influence in the Project Area. The Project Area is characterized by deteriorated, dilapidated, and obsolete public facilities, open spaces, and utilities that have a deleterious physical and economic impact on the Project Area. 2. The Project Area is also characterized by a prevalence of social and economic maladjustment. The social and economic maladjustment is simultaneously both a cause and an effect of the aspects of physical blight plaguing the area. The proposed education and employment projects are designed to address the root cause of the social and economic maladjustment. 3 This Implementation Plan provides for new improved roadways and other infrastructure; education and employment training; clean up and beautification activities; reuse opportunities; open space improvements; and industrial/commercial/retail development opportunities; thereby providing a catalyst for private reinvestment in the Project Area. 4. The Implementation Plan will serve goals and objectives set forth in Part IV of the Redevelopment Plan, including goals and objectives related to: a. Facilitate industrial and Employment Related Development; and b. Encourage the Development of Community Facilities Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 23 3.2 HOUSING COMPONENT 3.2(A) POPULATION/SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE According to the 2000 Census, North Richmond has a population of 2,804 living in 727 households. Over three quarters of the households are family households. The average household size in the area is 3.8 persons. The median household income in North Richmond is $22,796, which is only 36% of the County median of $63,675. Housing Characteristics The 2000 Census reported 764 housing units in North Richmond. Among these units, 337 are single-family detached units, 87 are single-family attached, 333 are multi-family units, and the remaining 7 units are mobile homes. Much of the housing in the North Richmond area is in poor condition, though the area has some well-maintained units. Public housing comprises a large portion of the housing stock in North Richmond. Many of the public housing units are dilapidated. The housing authority has upgraded 82 units of the 226- unit Los Deltas Public Housing complex. Level of Housing Need Excessive cost burden is a significant housing problem in the Project Area. A cost burden exists if a household pays more than 30% of gross household income for housing. According to the 2000 Census, cost burden is prevalent among both renter and owner households in North Richmond, Approximately 42% of renters and 38% of owners suffer from cost burden in the project area. Residential Market Conditions According to the 2000 Census, the median home value in North Richmond was $116,100, significantly lower than the County Median of $267,800. Median monthly gross rent in North Richmond was $588, lower than the County median of $898. 3.2(8) HOUSING REQUIREMENTS AND STRATEGIES This section updates the Housing Production Plan for the North Richmond Project Area. The Agency expects to meet its legal housing production obligations pursuant to legislation related to housing - AB 315 and AB 1290. This section discusses in detail the specific housing production obligations of the Agency in the Project Area. • Annual production goals for 2000 to 2004 • Projected production for 1995 to 2004 Personal\d ocu me nts\I mpPl anEd ited.revised.6.9.0 3 24 • Projected production through the life of the Project (2005 to 2027) • Affordable (Inclusionary) Housing Production • Replacement Housing Obligation Annual Housing Production Goals: 2000 to 2004 The 2000-2004 Implementation Plan set forth the following housing production goals: 2000: • Continued construction of the Parkway Estates - 87 single-family detached homes at buildout (with a total of 45 units to be completed in 2000). • Provide administrative support for a neighborhood based non-profit housing developer, the Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond. + Complete the 52-unit Senior Housing project. • Develop an affordable housing production strategy to meet the inclusionary redevelopment requirement of 15 percent affordable, including 6 percent very low-income units. • Assess a Lease-to-Own affordable housing program. + Continue the First Time Homebuyer program to provide silent second mortgages to lower income households to purchase and rehabilitate homes. + Promote the development of infill lots for residential uses. • Evaluate the potential for a residential project on the 1 76-acre Color Spot property that could include higher density residential development (i.e. duets and townhouses). If the project proves feasible, initiate soliciting a developer(s) for the project. + Develop a tracking program for new development production and substantial rehabilitation in the Project Area. 2003: • Evaluate infill development potential for various sites in the Project Area. if development proves feasible, initiate soliciting a developer(s) for the project. • Implement the tracking system. Personal\documents\1mpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 25 Projected Units: 1995 to 2004, Ten-Year Production Period The Agency identified 142 new units developed in the first five years (1995- 1999) of the production period. Most were single--family detached homes, with some limited multi-family (i.e., duplexes) development. The Agency anticipated that 147 units would be developed in the last five years (2000-2004) of this production period. Of these, approximately two thirds would be single-family (87 units at the Parkway Estates) and the remainder multi-family housing (60 , units at the forth Richmond Senior Housing). The Agency projected that 60 units would be developed in the project area between 2000 and 2004. Actual Production since 2000: Since 2000, two new housing projects with 139 total units have been developed in the Project Area with Agency assistance. Parkway Estates has 87 units - 36 units are restricted to low income households and 51 are market-rate units. North Richmond Community Heritage Apartments contains 52 units for very low-income senior households. In addition to the Agency-assisted development, 30 infill homes have been developed in the Project Area. None of these homes was restricted for lower and moderate-income households. Substantial rehabilitation of 6 units occurred in the project area--one unit rehabilitated with Agency assistance and 5 units rehabilitated with no Agency assistance. The Agency-assisted unit is restricted to low-income households. Projected Units. 2005 to 2027, Project Life Production The Agency estimates that 250 new units could be developed within the project area from 2005 to the end of the Project in 2027. Many of these units could be developed on a 17-acre parcel on the western edge of the residential portion of the Project Area, on a site just north of Wildcat Creek along the Richmond Parkway. Thirty-eight of these units would have affordability restrictions. Affordable (Inclusionary) Housing Production The prior Implementation Plan identified an affordable housing production deficit of 3 very low-income units and 1 low and moderate-income unit. Since 2000, 169 units have been developed in the Project Area and 6 units have been substantially rehabilitated, which results in an additional obligation of 26 units, 10 of which must be affordable to very low-income households. Therefore, the total housing production obligation for the project area is 29 units, 13 of which must be affordable to very-low income households. Among the housing units developed since 2000, 36 are restricted to low income households and 52 are restricted to very low--income households. Therefore, the Project Area now has a surplus of 20 low and moderate-income units and 39 very low-income units. Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 26 Replacement Housing Obligation The Implementation Flan identified a housing replacement obligation of 9 units (7 low-income and two moderate income units), totaling 29 low-income bedrooms. The surplus affordable units (39 very low income units totaling 57 bedrooms) from the Parkway Estates and the North Richmond Senior Housing can be used to fulfill the replacement housing obligation. Therefore, no replacement obligation currently exists. 3.2(C) AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS Based on income information from the 2000 Census, the median household income in North Richmond is $22,796, which is significantly less than the County median. This means that North Richmond residents cannot afford to pay as much to rent or purchase housing as most other County residents. Even though housing in North Richmond is substantially less expensive than the County, it is still too expensive for many North Richmond residents. The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has established three income categories for purposes of State housing-related laws and programs (including the use of Redevelopment Tax increment low and moderate income housing funds): very low income (households earning up to 50% of Countywide median income), low income (households earning between 51% and up to 80% of Countywide median income) and moderate income (households earning over 120% of Countywide median income). The HCD publishes the median income, adjusted by household size, for Contra Costa County each year. In 2003, the Contra Costa County median income is $80,100 for a household of four. Workers who are employed at such jobs as food preparers, nursing aides, truck drivers, accounting clerks and secretaries typically earn less than 50% of the County median income, and are therefore considered very low income. Table 3-1 shows the maximum affordable home and rental price for households in Contra Costa County. Based on the income data presented previously, the median income for North Richmond is below the very-low income threshold. As Table 3--1 illustrates, the maximum affordable home prices for most very-low income households are less than median housing price of $116,100. However, most low-income households can afford the median rent of $588 in the project area. Personal\documents\1mpPlan Edited.revised.6.9.03 27 Table 3-1 Housinq Affordabilit Maximum Affordable Income Levels Housing Costs Price Income Annual Affordabl Utilitie Taxes Croup Income a Pa went s & Ins. Home Rental VerV Low One Person $28,050 $701 $50 $100 $92,063 $651 Small Family $36,050 $901 $100 $150 $108,764 $801 Large Famil $43,250 $1,081 $150 $200 $122,125 $931 Low One Person $44,850T $1,121 $50 $200 $145,506 $1,071 Small Family $57,650 $1,441 $100 $250 $182,248 $1,341 Large Family...._ $69,200 $1,730 $150 $300 $213,771 $1,580 Moderate One Person $67,250 $1,681 $50 $300 $222,330 $1,631 Small Family $86,500 $2,163 $100 $350 $286,002 $2,063 Large Jamily $103,800 $2,595 $150 $400 $341,532 $2,445 3.2(D) HOUSING SET-ASIDE FUND The primary funding source for the Agency's affordable housing activities during the Implementation Plan period will be the 20% portion of annual tax increment revenue deposited by the Agency into its Housing Fund. History and Status From 1987 to 1999, the Agency allocated at least 20% of the cumulative tax increment revenue to the Housing Set-Aside Fund. Over this period, the Agency has made deposits of $757,425 to the Housing Fund. At the beginning of Fiscal Year 1999/00, the Housing f=und had a balance of $0. Updated Housing Fund Balance Table 3-2 shows the updated housing fund projections through 2004-2005. Combined with deposits made between FY 2000101 and FY 2001 /02, the Agency anticipates a total of $842,849 available in the project area through FY 2004/05. Table 3-2 Housin Fund Pro'ections Housing Fund Year Revenues 2000-2001* $146,353 20012002* $183,496 Personal\documents\1mpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 28 2002-2003 $169,000 2003-2004 $171,000 2044-2005 $173,000 Total $842,849 *Actual deposits Housing Fund Expenditures Since 2000, the Agency has expended $181 ,625 in set-aside funds. All funds were used to provide housing for families. All funds allocated for senior households were expended prior to 2000. Approximately 52% of the funds were allocated to low-income households while 48% was allocated to moderate- income households. 3.2(E) SPECIFIC PROJECT AREA GOALS The housing programs undertaken in the Project Area by Agency and non- Agency developers will address the goals and policies set forth in the Housing Element as described in Section 2.0 of this Mid-Term Update. The North Richmond Redevelopment Plan sets specific goals with respect to affordable housing in the Project Area. The Plan is designed to achieve two major goals and one objective relating to housing in the Project Area, which are consistent with the General Plan. Goals • Strengthen the existing residential neighborhood in the southern portion of the Project Area through development of a neighborhood commercial district, park and open space development, street improvement and landscaping, and expansion of community facilities. • To upgrade the deteriorated housing stock in the Project Area and to stimulate the construction of new affordable housing in the Project Area. Objectives • Assist in Housing Rehabilitation and New Construction. The Agency also has its own goals for affordable housing activities within the Project Area. The areawide P-1 rezoning program includes an affordable housing production strategy to meet the inclusionary redevelopment requirement of 15 percent affordable, including 6 percent very low-income units. The program requires projects with three or more units to include affordable units. The Agency also pians to develop a tracking program for new development production in the Project Area. Personakdocuments\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 29 40 RODEO The Agency adopted the Rodeo Redevelopment Project Area on July 10, 1990. The Rodeo Project Area consists of approximately 650 acres of land, generally bounded on the west and south by the City of Hercules, on the north by San Pablo Bay, and on the east by interstate 80. The Project Area is largely residential with commercial strips located along the major corridors. A number of substandard and deteriorating structures, particularly in the Old Town area, characterize the Project Area. Large parts of the area either lack or need neighborhood amenities such as sidewalks, gutters and curbs, as well as adequate public improvements. The commercial areas are old', in which many buildings are un-reinforced masonry, and are in need of revitalization and increased investment. in accordance with CRL, the Rodeo Redevelopment Plan was designed to achieve five major goals: (1) Fund circulation and transportation improvements throughout the Project Area. (2) Provide where lacking, or upgrade or replace where inadequate, public and community facilities. (B) Provide other infrastructure improvements, including drainage improvements and utility upgrading. (4) Upgrade existing older residential neighborhoods through rehabilitation of a substantial number of existing housing units, the facilitation of infill housing construction, and development of neighborhood amenities such as landscaping and parks. (5) Stimulate new employment generating land use development and rehabilitation activities in the Project Area in order that it may become a productive and attractive economic center, providing jobs and services for area residents and enhancing the local tax base. 4.1 NON-HOUSING COMPONENT The non-housing component of the implementation plan must address the following three issues: • Specific goals and objectives for the 2000-2004 period • Specific programs, including a program of activities and expenditures to be made during the time frame of the plan; and Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.3.03 30 • An explanation of how the goals, objectives, programs, and expenditures will eliminate blight The mid-term update assesses the progress in implementing the goals, objectives, programs, and expenditures since 2000. 4.1(A) GOALS The goals are derived from the priorities stated in the Redevelopment Plan to promote the non housing component of the Redevelopment Project Area. Goal I Facilitate economic development, stimulate and attract private investment, and create employment opportunities for area residents in the Project Area. Goal Expand and improve the commercial and neighborhood service opportunities Goal Encourage and support public-private partnerships and citizen participation that addresses community needs and participation Goals Capitalize on existing and future financing resources and opportunities. Goal Eliminate blighting influences and remove impediments to development Goal 7 Provide the framework to restore the economic health through public and private actions. 4.1(B) OBJECTIVES The following objectives are intended to provide a framework for efforts to attain the goals outlined above: Objective I Improving the infrastructure through property acquisition, road, drainage, water, and sewer improvements in the Project Area. Objective 2 Create and implement a Downtown/Waterfront Improvement Program for the older and more historic section of the Project Area. Objective 3 Create a strong marketing program to attract new businesses, generate revenue, and change the area's image upon initiation of some of the infrastructure and downtown/waterfront area improvements. Personal\documents\lmpPlan Edited.revised.6.9.03 31 Objective 4 improve the attractiveness of Rodeo, particularly at community entranceways and in the downtown area. Objective 5 Improve the quality of community facilities available in the community. 4.1(C) PROJECTS The Agency projected a cumulative total of $1 ,835,000 in non-housing tax increment funds between 2000 and 2004, equal to 80% of gross tax increments. Since 2000, the Agency has collected $2,7.32,049 in non--housing tax increment funds. The Agency's planned programs for the Rodeo Redevelopment Project Area greatly exceed the projected tax increment revenue stream. Therefore, the Agency seeks applicable Federal, State, and other local and private funding necessary to bring these programs to fruition. See Housing Set-Aside Fund discussion for further information. The Agency proposed 14 projects for the 2000-2004 period. Following is a discussion of each project, as well as an update of the progress in implementing the program since 2000. Project 1 Downtown Waterfront Improvement Program. The County adopted the Rodeo WaterfrontlDowntown Specific Plan in May 1997, and will initiate the identified catalyst projects, either directly or through public/private partnerships, to implement the Plan. Projects may include infrastructure, facilities, and/or assistance to private sector activities. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, State and federal funds, Foundation Grants and Loans, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost. $10 million Progress since 2000: The Agency has initiated implementation of the Downtown/ Waterfront improvement program by applying for funding for environmental assessment and marina feasibility study to determine potential barriers to waterfront development. The Agency is also in conversation with East Bay Regional Park District regarding a potential agreement for the revitalization of the Rodeo waterfront. In the downtown area, the Agency has been working with local businesses to improve the street frontage through a facade rehabilitation program. To date, 13 businesses have participated in the program. Project 2 Parker Avenue Repaving and Utility Improvements, 7th Street to San Pablo Avenue. The Parker Avenue road improvements project is anticipated to begin with underground of utilities in early 2000. Personal\documents\lmpPlan Edited.revised.6.9.03 32 The undergrounding of the utilities will be funded primarily through PG&E. The road improvements on Parker Avenue will be ready for construction immediately after the undergrounding project is complete in 2001 . Parker Avenue streetscape improvements include installation of landscape median, curb, gutter, and sidewalk. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, Area of Benefit Funds, Special District Funds, and Utility Undergrounding Funds Estimated Cost: $3.5 million Progress since 2000: The design documents for the undergrounding, reconstruction, and landscape design are substantially complete. A landscape plan concept was developed through a public planning process in 2001 . Construction is anticipated to begin in late 2003 and completed in 200512006. Project 3 Unrein€orced Masonry Building Improvement Program. Provide financial assistance for commercial structure located in the downtown area in order to correct building code requirements. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, State/federal Loans and Grants, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $1 million Progress since 2000: No program to provide financial assistance to property owners of unreinforced masonry buildings has been developed. Project 4 Access and Park Improvements for Lone Tree Park. The park improvements will focus on those improvements that enhance the relationship of park functions to the downtown Rodeo area. Funding Source: East Bay Regional Park Funds and Tax Increment Revenue Estimated Cost: $1 million Progress since 2000: The access and park improvements will be addressed as part of a comprehensive revitalization plan for the waterfront. Current feasibility analysis such as environmental assessment, marina study, and the potential partnership with East Bay Regional Park District will provide the groundwork to develop a waterfront revitalization plan. Project 5 Develop and Implement a Marketing Plan for Rodeo. Personakdocuments\trnpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 33 Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing Estimated Cost: $1 million Progress since 2000: The County has retained a consultant to develop a marketing plan for the unincorporated areas in the County, including the Redevelopment Agency's project areas. The County and the Redevelopment Project Areas will share the cost of the project. Project 6 Marina/Waterfront Feasibility Analysis. The Redevelopment Agency will initiate a feasibility analysis to identify alternative uses of the marina and waterfront, and assess the economic feasibility of such uses. Development of the rodeo marina and waterfront will be a joint effort between the Redevelopment Agency, State and regional agencies, East Bay Regional Park District, and other private interests. Funding Source: East Bay Regional Park District Funds, Tax Increment Financing, Private Funding, and Federal Programs Estimated Cost: $50,000 Progress since 2000: A Strategic Planning process for the Downtown/Waterfront area was completed in 2001 . A task force comprised of community members, agency staff, regulatory agencies, and members of the development community engaged in extensive public outreach in developing the Strategic Plan. The Agency is currently implementing. Strategic Plan recommendations including up-front environmental testing, a comprehensive marina study, and pursuing an agreement for the waterfront improvements with the County and East Bay Regional Parks. Project 7 Rodeo Senior Housing Development. Construction of a 50-unit senior rental housing development is proposed in 2000. The site is a 1.1-acre parcel located at the intersection of San Pablo, Parker, and Willow Avenues. The project will provide housing for seniors with very low, low, and moderate incomes. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing, Bond Proceeds, State and Federal Funds Estimated Cost: $1 .325 million Progress since 2000: Rodeo Senior Housing Development was completed in October 2002 and occupied in November 2002. The Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 34 complex is fully occupied and houses many residents from Rodeo and surrounding communities. Project 8 P-1 Rezoning Program. The Agency will initiate the rezoning of the Rodeo Redevelopment project Area to Planned Unit Development (P-1). The rezoning will provide for consistent development of growth within the area and streamline the permitting process to encourage orderly growth. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing Estimated Cost: $50,000 Progress since 2000: The Agency has initiated the process of rezoning the Rodeo Redevelopment Project. The Agency anticipates that the rezone will be completed in late 2003. Project 9 Community Preservation-Abatement and Revolving Loan Program. Create a revolving loan program that funds community preservation and abatement activities. The area has substandard and unsafe structures, which require some level of abatement to improve health and safety conditions and clean up the community. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing Estimated Cost: $50,000 annually Progress since 2000: The Agency continues to fund a revolving loan for abatement and rehabilitation work to improve the habitability of structures within the community. Agency staff is also involved in a collaborative process with a multitude of County Departments to review existing ordinances, and create new ones where needed, to create a comprehensive approach to code enforcement and neighborhood improvement effects. Project 10 Infrastructure and Urban Design Improvements Related to the Marina/Waterfront Area. Infrastructure improvements to facilitate the revitalization of the marina area as described in the Rodeo Specific Plan. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing, Other Public Agencies, Private Local Funds, Grants from Federal, State, and Foundation Sources Estimated Cost: $1 ,000,000 Progress since 2000: The infrastructure and design improvements will be incorporated into the reuse plan for the waterfront. The Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.b.9.03 35 Agency is currently laying the groundwork to move forward on the reuse plan by applying for funds for an environmental assessment and a marina study. Project 1 1 Improvements to Existing Park Facilities. The project may include improving the multi-purpose room at Lefty Gomez Park. This project would include electrical and structural upgrades and exterior Improvements. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing, County Service Area Funds Estimated Cost: $50,000 Progress since 2000: The Agency received grant funding to place a new classroom for after school childcare and Lefty Gomez Park. The Agency worked with the community on the design review to ensure the building would be an asset to the community, and provided funds to repave and restripe Lefty Gomez Park parking lot. The facility is complete and occupied. Project 12 Rodeo Senior Center Improvements. The Agency will provide funds to improve the Rodeo Senior Center facade and to finance upgrades to the building system (i.e. electric, roof, and plumbing). Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing Estimated Cost: $50,000 Progress since 2000: The Agency recently hired a consultant team to develop a fa4ade improvement for the Senior Center. The Agency anticipates completion of the facade rehabilitation by 2004. Project 13 Weed and Seed Program. A collaborative effort of County law enforcement, social service, housing and economic development providers, Rodeo residents, local community-based organizations, and other relevant groups formed to prevent crime, empower youth, and revitalize the neighborhood. Rodeo (along with Forth Richmond) was designated as a Weed and Seed area in 1998. Funding Source: State and Federal Funds, Foundation Grants and Loans, Tax increment Revenue, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $250,000 annually Progress since 2000: The Weed and Seed Program continues to provide funding for proactive law enforcement and youth-oriented Personal\documents\impPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 36 service programs. Agency staff continues to work on the executive committee to set policy and seek additional funding for relevant Weed and Seed Program activities. Project 14 Downtown Development Catalyst. This project may include strategic land assemblage activities, identification of a master developer and public improvements. The project will be designed to proactively implement the goals and policies of the Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan. Funding Source: Tax Increment Funds, Private Funds, and Mello- Roos Bonds Estimated Cost: $20 million Progress since 2000: The Strategic Plan process identified potential catalyst projects and sites. Staff has begun working with property owners and the community to evaluate feasibility and potential. Following is a discussion of the projects added since adoption of the 2000- 2004 implementation plan: Project 15 Facade Rehabilitation Program. The Agency has developed a fagade improvement program for businesses that provides attractive financing options to encourage local businesses to make facade improvements that enhance the neighborhood character of downtown Rodeo. Businesses can take advantage of a rebate program that provides 75% of total project costs for facade improvements under $2,000 (i.e. new paint). Businesses can also take advantage of a low interest rate loan program for projects ranging from $2,000-$15,000. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenues for loan program and CDBG funds for rebate program. Estimated Cost: $150,000 Project 16 Rodeo Gateway Improvements. The Agency assisted in the financing of a Rodeo Gateway in 1996 that included a "Rodeo" sign with landscaping and organizational signs for local serving non- profits. The sign has recently been vandalized and some of the organizations are no longer in business. The Agency is assisting in capital improvements to bring the sign up to date. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenues, Funds from the R-10 Service Area Lighting and Landscaping District Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 37 Estimated Cost: $7,000 4.1'(D) ELIMINATION OF BLIGHT The proposed redevelopment strategy and identified projects will provide several public benefits, as follows: 1. The Project Area is characterized by inadequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces, and utilities, which has a damaging physical and economic impact on the Project Area. The infrastructure improvements will eliminate a serious blighting influence in the Project Area. 2. The Implementation Plan will provide improved roadways, clean up and beautification activities, open space improvements, and commercial/retail development and improvements opportunities, thereby providing a catalyst for private reinvestment in the Project Area. 3. The Implementation Plan will serve goals and objectives set forth in Part IV of the Redevelopment Plan, including goals and objectives related to: a. Facilitate New Employment Generating Land Use Development and Enhance Existing Employment Generating Land Use Area. b. Provide circulation and transportation improvements. c. Construct or Rehabilitate Public Facilities d. Provide Infrastructure Improvements. 4.2 HOUSING COMPONENT 4.2(A) POPULATION/SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE According to the 2000 Census, the Rodeo Census Designated Place (CDP), which generally approximates the Rodeo Project Area, reported 8,717 people living in 2,882 households. The majority of these individuals (76.5 percent) are in family households. The average household size is 3 persons. Median household income in the area is $60,522, which is slightly lower than the County median of $63,675. Housing Characteristics The 2000 Census reported 2,984 housing units in the Rodeo CDP. Among these units, 2,281 are single-family detached units, 82 are single--family attached, 537 are multi-family units, and the remaining 52 units are mobile homes. Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 38 Rodeo's housing stock consists principally of single-family homes (80 percent) which vary in style from 1930's bungalows to relatively new housing built in the 1960's to l 980's. The Report on the Redevelopment Plan indicated that 51% of the housing Urtit!; in the Census Tract were built prior to 1950 and about 25% were built prior to 1940. This data reflects conditions that still exist in the central part of the Project Area. A small percentage of the older housing stock is in need of some level rehabilitation. The Agency estimates that approximately five percent of the existing single-family dwellings could use some level of rehabilitation and two percent need substantial rehabilitation (costing $25,000 or more). Most of the multi-family units are public housing and are generally well maintained. The Bayo Vista public housing development containing 250 units was extensively modernized in 1991 . Level of Housing Need Excessive cost burden is a significant housing problem in the Project Area. A cost burden exists if a household pays more than 30% of gross household income for housing. According to the 2000 Census, both renter and owner households in Rodeo experience significant cost burden. Cost burden is more prevalent among renters, with 37% of renter households having housing costs in excess of 30%. Among owners in Rodeo, 25% of the households spend 30% or more of household income for housing. Residential Market Conditions According to the 2000 Census, the median home value in Rodeo was $198,900, lower than the County Median of $267,800. Median monthly gross rent in Rodeo was $790, lower than the County median of $898. 4.2(B) HOUSING REQUIREMENTS AND STRATEGIES This section updates the Housing Production Plan for the Rodeo Project Area. The Agency expects to meet its legal housing production obligations pursuant to legislation related to housing - AB 315 and AB 1290. This section discusses in detail the 'specific housing production obligations of the Agency in the Project Area. • Annual production goals for 2000 to 2004 • Projected production for 1995 to 2004 • Projected production through the life of the Project (2005 to 2030) • Affordable (Inclusionary) Housing Production • Replacement Housing Obligation Annual Housing Production Goals: 2000 to 2004 Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 39 The Agency plans to achieve the following annual housing production goals over the next five years: 2000: • Complete construction on a 58-unit single--family housing development with 15% of the units affordable for moderate-income families. The homes are located on a 6.98 acres site bounden by Willow Avenue, Parker Avenue, Seventh Street, and Rodeo Creek. • Begin construction on a 50--unit of senior rental housing development for very low and moderate- income senior households is anticipated for construction. 2001 : • Continue planning efforts for an Affordable Housing Production Strategy to meet the inclusionary redevelopment requirement of 15% affordable, including 6% very low and to evaluate programs for the production/rehabilitation of affordable housing units in the future. Evaluate the status and potential of the following program: • Assess feasibility of establishing a homebuyer assistance program; and a A rehabilitation program in Rodeo 2002: • Develop a tracking program for development production and rehabilitation in the Project Area. 2003: • Begin an analysis of infill parcels for first time homebuyer and other special needs housing for the Project Area. • if the Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan is implemented, encourage new home ownership housing production based on the Specific Plan. 2004: • if infill and Specific Plan area development potential prove feasible, initiate soliciting a developer(s) for the project(s). Projected Units: 1995 to 2004, Ten--Year Production Period Based on analysis of property valuation and building permit records from 1995 to 1999, 39 new units of housing were developed in the Rodeo Project Area. Between 1999 and 2004, the Agency projected that 108 new dwelling units would be developed in the Project Area. Approximately 50 of these units would be multifamily senior housing and the remaining 58 would be single-family units. Personal\documents\impPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 40 Actual Production since 2000: Since 2000, 110 units have been developed in the Project Area. Rodeo Senior Housing has 51 units contains 24 restricted for very low-income households, 26 restricted for moderate-income households, and 1 market-rate unit. Schuler Homes has 58 units, with 49 market-rate units and 9 moderate-income units. In addition, one single-family infill unit was constructed in the project area. This unit has no affordability restriction. No unit has been substantially rehabilitated in the Project Area since 2000. Projected Units: 2005 To 2030, Project Life Production Based on the inventory of remaining vacant developable residential land, the Agency concludes that no additional housing units can be developed within the Project Area from 2005 through the life of the Plan in 2030. Any new housing units would have to be developed on underutilized land. Affordable (Inclusionary} Housing Production The Agency has not and does not plan to directly produce or rehabilitate any dwelling units in the Rodeo Project Area. Consequently, the 15% affordable housing production obligation applies under the CRL. The Agency has found it most cost effective and administratively efficient to provide financial assistance, as necessary, to private developers (both for profit and nonprofit) and homeowners to produce and rehabilitate affordable housing, than for the Agency to act as a housing developer. The Implementation Plan identified a housing production obligation of five units, two of which must be affordable to very low-income households. Since 2040, 110 units have been developed in the Project Area, which results in an affordable housing obligation of 16 units, 6 of which must be affordable to very low-income households. Therefore, the total housing production obligation is 21 units, 8 of which must be affordable to very low-income households. Among the units developed since 2000, 24 are restricted for very low-income households and 35 are restricted for low and moderate-income households. As a result, the Agency has a surplus of 22 low and moderate--income units and 16 very low-income units. Replacement Housing Obligation No housing unit has been removed from the Project Area; therefore, the Project Area has not incurred a replacement-housing obligation. Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 41 4,2{C} AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS Based on income information from the 2000 Census, a typical household in Rodeo earns $61,522, which is slightly less than the Countywide household income of $63,375. This means that Rodeo residents cannot afford to pay as much to rent or purchase housing as most other County residents. As discussed previously, the median home price in Rodeo was $198,900, while the median rent is $898. In comparing the rents to the maximum home and rental prices in Table 4-1 , very-low, and most low-income households are unable to afford the median home price. Low-income households can afford the median rent, while moderate-income households can generally afford the median home and rental prices in Rodeo. Table 4-1 Ho�asin Affordabilit Maximum Affordable Income Levels Housin Costs Price Income Annual Affordabl Utilitie Taxes Group Income a Payment.. s & Ins. Home Rental VeryLow One Person $28,050 $701 $50 $100 $92,063 $651 Small Fam.ily $36,050 $9011 $100 $150 $108,764'. $801 Large Family $43,250 $1,0181 $1501 $200 $122,125 $931 Low One Person $44,850 $1,121 $50 $200 $145,506 $1,071 Small Family, $57,650 $1,441 $100 $250 $182,248 $1,341 Large FamilV $69,200 $1,730 $150 $300 $213,771 $1,580 Moderate One Person $67,250 $1,681 $50 $300 $222 330 $1 631 Small Family $86,500 $2,16 3 $100 $3503 $286,002 $2,063 Large FamilV 1 $103,800 $2,595,."_j $150 $400 $341,532 $2,445 4.2'{D} HOUSING SFT ASIDE FUND The primary funding source for the Agency's affordable housing activities during the Implementation Plan period will be the 20% portion of annual tax increment revenue deposited by the Agency into its Housing Fund. The history, status, and estimated level of future deposits to the Housing Fund are described below. Personal\documents\ImpPian Edited.revised.6.9.03 42 Updated Housing Set-Aside Fund Balance Table 4-2 shows the updated housing fund projections through 2004-2005. Combined with deposits made since 2000, the Agency expects to generate $943,309 in the project area through 2005. Table 4-2 Housing Fund Projections Housing Fund Year Revenues 2000-2001* $131,989 2001-2002* $190,320 2002-2003 $203,000 l 2003-2004 $206,000 2004-2005 $212,000 `rota€ $943,309 * Deposits made. History and Status From 1990 to 1999, the Agency has allocated at least 20% of the cumulative tax increment revenue to the Housing Set-Aside Fund. Over this period, the Agency has made deposits to the Housing Fund of $564,322. Housing Fund Expenditures Since 2000, the Agency has expended $997,068 in housing funds throughout the Project Area. All expenditures were used to support the development of senior housing. Approximately 49% of the funds were used to assist very low- income households while 51%was used to assist moderate-income households. 4.2(E) SPECIFIC PROJECT AREA GOALS The housing programs undertaken in the Project Area by Agency and non- Agency developers will address the goals and policies set forth in the Housing Element as described in Section 2.0 of this Mid-Term Update. The Rodeo Redevelopment Plan is designed to achieve five major goals. The fourth goal applies to housing and states: the Plan seeks to upgrade existing older residential neighborhoods through the rehabilitation of a substantial number of existing housing units, the facilitation of infill housing construction, and development of neighborhood amenities such as landscaping and parks. Objective 5 of the Redevelopment Plan states: the Agency shall assist in new affordable housing development and strengthen existing residential neighborhoods. In order to accomplish this objective, the Redevelopment Agency will: Personal`documents\lrnpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 43 • Promote, assist in financing, and provide subsidies for the development of affordable housing in the Project Area; • Acquire, assemble, prepare, and dispose of parcels for housing development; • Provide rehabilitation loans for owners of housing; • Promote, assist in financing and provide subsidies for the development of infill housing; and • Assist in the provision of adequate infrastructure to serve residential areas. The Agency also has its own goals for affordable housing activities within the Project Area. If plans to develop an affordable housing production strategy to meet the inclusionary redevelopment requirement of 15% affordable, including 6% very low--income units. It also plans to develop a tracking program for new development production in the Project Area. Personal\documents\lm pPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 44 5 PLEASANT HILL BART STATION The Agency adapted the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Redevelopment Project Area on .duly 10, 1984. An Amended and Restated Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Redevelopment Plan was adopted by Ordinance 88-58 on .duly 19, 1988. The Pleasant Hill BART Project Area consists of approximately 140 acres of land. The Project Area is generally bounded on the west by the 680 Freeway, on the east by the former Southern Pacific right-of--way, on the north by the south property line of properties fronting Coggins drive, and on the south by Jones Road. One finger extends east along the north side of Treat Boulevard to Walnut Creek Channel. Another finger extends north along a former railroad right of way to Mayhew drive. The Pleasant Hill BART Station project was explicitly designed to reduce regional traffic by locating new office and housing development next to a regional transportation hub. The master planned community provides a balance of jobs and housing. At completion, the Station Area will consist of approximately 3 million square feet of office and commercial development and over 2,200 residential units. The Pleasant Hill BART Station Area is an emerging model for the development of suburban employment/housing centers next to transportation facilities. Land Use and Development Eleven goals are identified for the Project Area: (1) Increase the concentration of high intensity employment uses and housing in the Project Area to benefit the community and to better utilize the regional transit accessibility provided by BART. (2) Integrate housing into the Project Area wherever environmental constraints or overall land use considerations do not preclude it. ( ) Provide sufficient retail, commercial, public services and public open space amenities for the Project Area. (4) Prevent preemption of land suitable for intensification by low intensity development or uses that will not contribute to increased regional and local transit usage. (5) Prevent underutilization of the Project Area land supply and a discordant development pattern by either assemblage of small parcels into functionally viable sites or cooperative planning and development by groups of contiguous property owners. (0) Achieve cooperative development actions by BART and private sector, which will more fully utilize the Project Area resources. Personal\documents\ImpP€anEdited.rev!sed.6.9.03 45 (7) Protect housing within and adjacent to the Project Area from adverse effects of intensification including noise, traffic intrusions, parking conflicts, visual incompatibilities and obstruction of sunlight. (8) Provide for the partial public recapture of value created by BART and other public investment so that these revenues can be used to support further public improvements. (9) Achieve an equitable distribution among area property owners of area- wide development costs required to facilitate intensification of uses in the Project Area. (10) Provide childcare facilities to serve the expanding population of the Project Area. (11) Provide low- and moderate-income housing as required to achieve a balance of jobs and affordable housing for the effective redevelopment of the entire Project Area, including provision of such housing in the area generally bounded by Las .Juntas Way, Coggins Drive, and Oak Road. Transportation and Circulation Six goals are identified: (1) Maximize use of and improve public transit as a means of transportation. (2) Improve, where feasible, automobile access to the BART station and other alternative transportation modes (pedestrian, bicycle, car pools, etc.) and discourage through auto traffic in the Project Area which would preempt roadway capacity needed to serve the BART facility and land uses in the Project Area. (3) Provide for safe and convenient pedestrian movement within and in and out of the Project Area. (4) Provide for BART parking facilities to levels which will avoid overflow of parked vehicles to nearby residential areas, be consistent with the objective of encouraging local transit use for BART access, and not generate traffic congestion problems which will impede attraction of transit dependent development of the Project Area. (5) Encourage reductions in long-term employee parking for commercial uses in the Project Area. Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 46 (6) Provide for the integration of proposed regional rail systems within the former Southern Pacific Railroad right of way into and through the Project Area. Personal\documents ImpPlanEdited.rev!sed.5.9.03 47 Urban Design Six goals are identified: (1) Promote an appearance which will project a positive image and have high regional and local identity. (2) Provide for an appearance that both contrasts with and complements adjoining areas. (3) Protect major stands and individual specimens of native oaks and make the trees a major design feature of the Project Area, and protect other natural environmental resources to the extent feasible. (4) Provide for a network of public open spaces (parks and urban plazas) to promote a unified sense of development and provide for other amenities in the Project Area. (5) Maintain views to Mt. Diablo and other distant but dominant natural features from the BART platform. (6) Ensure buildings and related site improvements through the Project Area are well designed and functionally and visually compatible with their surroundings. 5.1 NON-HOUSING COMPONENT The non-housing component of the implementation plan must address the following three issues: • Specific goals and objectives for the 2000-2004 period • Specific programs, including a program of activities and expenditures to be made during the time frame of the plan; and • An explanation of how the goals, objectives, programs, and expenditures will eliminate blight The mid-term update assesses the progress in implementing the goals, objectives, programs, and expenditures since 2000. 5.1(A) GOALS The goals and strategies are derived from the priorities stated in the Redevelopment Plan to promote the non-housing component of the Redevelopment Project Area. Goal l Continue access and infrastructure improvements necessary to facilitate development. Personal\documents\Imp Plan Edited.revised.6.9.03 48 Goal 2 Expand and improve public facilities. Goal 3 Encourage and support public-private partnerships that address community needs. Goal 4 Encourage and support citizen participation. Goal 5 Capitalize on existing and future financing resources and opportunities. Goal 6 Eliminate blighting influences and remove impediments to development. 5.1'(B) 0 Bj ECTIVES The following objectives are intended to provide a framework for efforts to attain the goals outlined above. Objective I Implement improvements that will promote alternative forms of access to the area from the north and determine the preferred projects. Objective 2 Complete the remaining planned infrastructure improvements through property acquisition, road, drainage, and sewer improvements in the Project Area. Infrastructure improvements are required to facilitate development, enhance appearance and safety, and to further enhance the access to the station area by alternative modes. Objective 3 Continue to undertake a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. A TDM program is necessary to reduce trip generation and to facilitate the use of public transit. Objective 4 Provide the final section of a regional pedestrian trail line. Objective 5 Encourage and facilitate the establishment of public facilities and open space amenities that are consistent with the transit-based development concept. 5.1(C) PROJECTS The following are specific projects proposed to achieve and implement the aforementioned goals and objectives. Between 2000 and 2004, the Agency projected a cumulative total of $10,978,000 in non-housing tax increment funds, equal to 809 of gross tax increments. Since 2000, the Agency has collected $13,081 ,516 in non-housing tax-increment revenue. Personal\documents\Im pPl anEdited.revised.6.9.03 49 Projects Proposed for the 2000-2004 Implementation Plan The Implementation Plan set forth the following programs for the 2000-2004 period. This section provides an update of the progress in implementing the program since 2000. Project 1 Pedestrian/Bicycle Overcrossing Program, Including The Iron Horse Trail Crossing of Treat Blvd., and A Pedestrian Crossing at Treat Blvd., and Oak Road. Additional pedestrian/bicycle links to the east and west are being evaluated for longer-term implementation. Funding Source: Tax increment Revenue, Developer Fees, Mello- Roos Proceeds, Federal and/or State Transportation funds, and Measure C funds Estimated Cost: $6 Million Progress since 2000: A community design program to determine a preferred design was completed. A supplemental web-based survey is being developed to further inform the design selection process. Final design unrelated to the aesthetic impacts has been initiated. Federal and local Measure C funds have been secured to supplement Agency funding. Project 2 Complete Construction of Iron Horse Trail Links. The project is located along the former Southern Pacific right-of-way, between Hookston and Mayhew. The project also includes business relocation. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue Estimated Cost: $500,000 Progress since 2000: Private leases have been noticed for termination. Users are vacating the property. The Agency is fulfilling all obligations for relocation assistance. Construction is expected to commence in spring 2004. Project 3 BART Property Development Assistance. The project includes construction of a BART patron replacement parking structure, public infrastructure, and public benefit facilities. Funding Source: Tax increment funds, private funds Estimated Cost: $30 million Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 s0 Progress since 2000: A major community planning program (charrette) was completed in 2001 . The results of the charrette were recently memorialized by through a rezoning of the property. Financial negotiations with BART are underway. Project 4 Green Space/Respite Improvements. Conversion of the Iron Horse Corridor in the immediate vicinity from temporary parking to a landscaped greenspace including the Iron Horse Trail. Funding Source: Park Dedication Funds, Tax Increment Revenue, and Property Owner Donations Estimated Cost: $2 million Progress since 2000: The community design program is complete, and the final design/bid documents are nearly complete. The project will proceed to implementation when BART temporary parking alternatives are determined to be sufficiently in place to allow removal of existing temporary parking where green space will be installed. Projects Added since 2000 Following is a discussion of the projects added since adoption of the 2000- 2004 implementation plan: Project 5 Las Juntas Swim Club Site Acquisition. Acquire a property adjacent to the Project Area (the former Las Juntas Swim Club site; for long-term residential reuse potential, with interim use for temporary BART patron parking. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenues, Loan from County, Lease Proceeds Estimated Cost: $2 million to acquire, $700,000 to install interim parking use 5.1(D) ELIMINATION OF BLIGHT The proposed redevelopment strategy and identified projects will provide several public benefits, as follows: 1 . The Project Area is characterized by a lack of public infrastructure and improvements necessary to permit redevelopment of the area in the appropriate manner. The infrastructure improvements will eliminate a serious blighting influence in the Project Area. Personal\documents\Im pPlanEdited,revi sed.6.9.03 51 2. This programs include an improved access and open space improvement, thereby providing a catalyst for private reinvestment in the Project Area. 3. The programs will serve goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan, including: a. Improve alternative mode access to the BART station and discourage through auto traffic in the Project Area which would preempt roadway capacity needed to serve the BART facility and land uses in the Project Area. b. Provide for safe and convenient pedestrian movement within and in and out of the Project Area. c. Provide for a network of public open spaces (parks and urban plazas) and facilities to promote a unified sense of development and provide for other amenities in the Project Area. 5.2 HOUSING COMPONENT 5.2(A) POPULATION/SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE According to the 2000 Census, the unincorporated area surrounding and including the Pleasant Hill BART project area had a population of 5,133 living in 3,086 households. More than two-thirds of households were non -family households, including more than half of all households consisting of a single person. Median household income in the area is $58,552, which is lower than the County median of$63,675. Housing Characteristics Approximately 3,300 units are located in the Pleasant Hili BART area, with more than 85% percent consisting of multi-family units. More than 70% of the units have been built since 1980. Level of Housing Need Excessive cost burden is a significant housing problem in the Project Area. A cost burden exists if a household pays more than 30% of gross household income for housing. According to the 2000 Census, both renter and owner households in Pleasant Hill BART experience significant cost burden. Cost burden is more prevalent among renters, with 36% of renter households having housing costs in excess of 30%. Among owners in the Project Area, 30% of the households spend 30% or more of household income for housing costs. Residential Market Conditions Personal documentsllmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 52 The Census reported that the median home value in the area is $373,700, which is higher than the County median of $267,800. Median gross rent in the area is $1,092, which is also higher than the County median of $898. 5.2(B) HOUSING REQUIREMENTS AND STRATEGIES This section updates the Housing Production Plan for the Pleasant Hill Project Area. The Agency expects to meet its legal housing production obligations pursuant to legislation related to housing - AS 315 and AS 1290. This section discusses in detail the specific housing production obligations of the Agency in the Project Area since adoption of the Redevelopment Plan in 1984 to the end of the Plan in 2024. Annual production goals for 2000 to 2004 Projected production over the next ten year compliance period (2005 to 2009) Projected production through the life of the Project (2009 to 2024) Affordable (Inclusionary) Housing Production • Replacement Housing Obligation Annual Housing Production Goals: 2000 To 2004 The Agency proposed the following annual housing production goals for 2000- 2004: 2000: • Complete construction of the Coggins Square Apartments (86 units). • Continue to distribute Housing Set Aside to the Park Regency Apartments for the 10th year of its 15-year annual obligation to subsidize 134 very low-income units. 2001: • Continue to distribute Housing Set-Aside funds to the Park Regency apartments for the 11 th year of its 15-year annual obligation to subsidize 134 very low- income units. • Distribute initial annual payment to the Coggins Square Apartment owner. 2002: • Continue to distribute Housing Set-Aside funds to the Park Regency apartments for the 12th year of its 15-year annual obligation to subsidize 134 very low- income units. • Continue to distribute 2nd year payment to the Coggins Square Apartment owner. 2003: Personal\documents`ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 53 • Continue to distribute Housing Set-Aside funds to the Park Regency apartments for the 13th year of its 15-year annual obligation to subsidize 134 very low-income units. • Continue to distribute 3rd year payment to the Coggins Square Apartment owner. Projected Units: 2000 to 2009, Ten-Year Production Period Between 2000 and 2009, the Agency projected that 340 new housing units could be developed in the Project Area. The Agency anticipated that all new multi-family units on the BART joint Development site will occur between 2004- 2009. The BART joint Development site is approximately 11 acres of land with a Specific Plan land use designation of mixed use. The property has been rezoned to be an integrated mixed-use project that would include residential (multi-family). An estimate of the number of units is between 274 and 446. Actual Housing Production since 2000: No assisted units were developed in the Project Area since 2000, while 54 market-rate townhouses have been developed. No unit has been substantially rehabilitated in the Project Area since 2000. Projected Units: 2009 to 2024, Project Life Production The Agency anticipates that between 274 and 446 units will be developed on the BART joint development site between 2004 and 2009. Some rehabilitation may be appropriate to maintain unit quality and affordability. Should additional funds be available, opportunities for additional new construction assistance will be evaluated. Affordable (inclusionary) Housing Production The Agency has not and does not plan to directly produce or rehabilitate any dwelling units in the Pleasant Hill BART Station Project Area. Consequently, the 15% affordable housing production obligation under the CRL applies. The Agency has found it most cost effective and administratively efficient to provide financial assistance, as necessary, to private developers (both for profit and nonprofit) and homeowners to produce and rehabilitate affordable housing, than for the Agency to act as a housing developer. The previous implementation Plan identified a 23-unit production deficit in the Pleasant Hill BART Station Project Area. The Agency has met its 6% very low- income housing production obligation and currently has a surplus of 71 units in this category, for a net surplus of 48 units, all affordable to very low-income households. Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 54 The 54 units developed in the Project area trigger an inclusionary housing obligation of 8 units, 3 of which must be affordable to very low-income households. Applying the 48-unit surplus to the current obligation of 8 units results in a surplus of 40 units, all affordable to very low-income households. Substantial Rehabili Large i LFamily $43,250 ; $1,081 $150 $200 , $122,125 $931 Low One Person $44,850 $1,121 $50 $200 $145,50=6 $1,071 Small Family $57,650 $1,441 $100 $250 $182,248 $1,341 Large Family $69,200 $1,730 $150 $300 I $213,771 $1,580 Moderate One Person I $67,250 $1,681 $50 $300 $222,330 $1,631 ! Small Fami! $86,500 $2,163 $100 , $350 $286,002 $2,063 Large 3 Family $103,800 € $2,595 $150 $400 $341,532 $2,445 5.2 (D) HOUSING SET-ASIDE FUND The primary funding source for the Agency's affordable housing activities during the Implementation Pian period will be the 20% portion of annual tax increment revenue deposited by the Agency into its Housing Fund. The history, status, and estimated level of future deposits to the Housing Fund are described below. History and Status From 1984 to 1994, the Agency has allocated at least 20% of the cumulative tax increment revenue to the Housing Set-Aside Fund. Over this period, the Agency has made deposits to the Housing Fund in the amount of $5,122,417. At the beginning of Fiscal Year 1999/00, the Housing Fund had a balance of $0. Updated Housing Fund Balance Table 5-2 provides updated projections of the housing fund deposits through 2004-2005. Combined with the deposits since 2000, the Agency expects to contribute $4,778,810 to the housing funds over the life of the Implementation Plan. Table 5-2 Housln Fund Projections Housing Fund Year Revenues 2000-2001* $772,043 2001-2002* $834,767 2002-2003 $991,000 2003-2004 $1,074,000 2004-2005 $1,107,000 Total $4,778,810 *Actual deposits Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 56 Housing Fund Expenditures Since 2000, the Agency has expended $2,532,336 in the project area. All of the funds were used to provide housing for family households. No funds were used for senior housing. Over 99% of the funds were spent on very-low income households, while less than 1%was spent on low-income households. 5.2{E} SPECIFIC PROJECT AREA GOALS The housing programs undertaken in the Project Area by Agency and non- Agency developers will address the goals and policies set forth in the Housing Element as described in Section 2.0 of this Mid--Term Update. The Redevelopment Plan states specific Agency goals and objectives for housing activities within the Project Area. In conformance with the General Plan and the Specific Plan, the following overall goals and objectives concerning housing development have been identified with respect to the Project Area: • Integrate housing into the Project Area wherever environmental constraints or overall land use considerations do not preclude it. • Protect housing within and adjacent to the Project Area from adverse effects of intensification including noise, traffic intrusions, parking conflicts, visual incompatibilities, and obstruction of sunlight. • Provide low and moderate income housing as required to achieve a balance of jobs and affordable housing for the effective redevelopment of the entire Project Area, including provision of housing in the area generally bounded by Las Juntas Way, Coggins drive, Oak Road, and Wayside Lane. Personal\documents\impPianEdited.revised.6.9.03 57 6.0 BAY POINT The Agency adopted the Bay Point (formerly "West Pittsburg") Redevelopment Project Area was with Ordinance No. 87-102 on December 29, 1987. The Project Area consists of approximately 1 ,550 acres of land. The Project Area is generally bounded on the east by the City of Pittsburg, on the south by State Route 4, on the west by Port Chicago Highway, and on the north by Suisun Bay and the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. The Project Area is largely residential with commercial strips located along the major corridors and an industrial component located at midpoint. As a generally older area of East Contra Costa County, the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area has seen little development in the last quarter century. As a result, the Project Area is characterized by many aging, deteriorating and poorly maintained structures; and inadequate and obsolete utilities, drainage, sewers and streets. The commercial areas are old and are in need of revitalization and increased investment. In accordance with CRL, the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan was designed to achieve five major goals: (1) Stimulate new industrial development in the Project Area in order that it may become a productive and attractive economic center, providing jobs for community residents and enhancing the local tax base. (2) Revitalize and expand commercial development in the area. (3) Provide major infrastructure improvements in the Project Area in order to serve the existing area residents and businesses, as well as to accommodate new residential, commercial, and industrial development. (4) Upgrade the existing residential neighborhoods through rehabilitation of a substantial number of existing housing units, the facilitation of infill housing construction, and development of neighborhood parks and infrastructure improvements. (5) Stimulate the construction of new affordable housing in the Project Area. 6.1 NON-HOUSING COMPONENT The non-housing component of the implementation plan addressed the following issues: • Specific goals and objectives for the 2000-2004 period • Specific programs, including a program of activities and expenditures to be made during the time frame of the plan; and Personal\documents\I rn pPl anEdited.revised.6.9.03 58 • An explanation of how the goals, objectives, programs, and expenditures will eliminate blight The Mid--Term Update assesses the progress in implementing the goals, objectives, programs, and expenditures since 2000. 6.1(A) GOALS The Bay Point Redevelopment Plan set forth the following goals for the Project Area: Goal 1 Stimulate the construction of new affordable housing in the Project Area Goal Upgrade the existing residential neighborhoods through rehabilitation, infill housing, new parks, and landscaping improvements. Goal 3 Provide infrastructure improvements in the Project Area to better serve existing residents and businesses, as well as to accommodate new residential, commercial, and industrial development. Goal 4 Revitalize and expand commercial development in the Project Area. Goal 5 Stimulate new industrial development in the Project Area, in order that it may become an attractive economic center, providing jobs for community residents and enhancing the tax base. 6.1(B) OBJECTIVES The Implementation Plan contained the following objectives to provide a framework for efforts to attain the goals. Objective 1 Improve the infrastructure through property acquisition, road, drainage, water, and sewer improvements in the Project Area. Objective 2 Create and implement a Specific Plan, in cooperation with the City of Pittsburg and BART, for the Bay Point BART Station Area. Objective 3 Create a strong marketing program to attract new businesses that will enhance the tax: base and create jobs, as well as change the area's image. Objective 4 Improve the attractiveness of Bay Point, particularly at community entranceways and the waterfront. Objective 5 Improve and expand the type and quality of community facilities available in the community. Personal\documents\1mpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 59 Objective 6 Expand and improve the commercial/economic development opportunities in the Project Area and create focal points to the existing commercial strips. Objective 7 Create and implement a strategy to improve the North Broadway Area. 6.1(C) PROJECTS The following are projects proposed to achieve and implement the- aforementioned goals and objectives. However, depending upon unanticipated- circumstances, the Agency may participate in other activities to most fully redevelop the Bay Point area. Included with each project is the proposed funding source, time frame in which the project is to be implemented, and estimated total project cost. Between 2000 and 2004, the Agency projected a cumulative total of $3,529,000 in non-housing tax increment funds, equal to 80% of gross tax increments. Since 2000, the Project Area has generated $5,306,521. The Agency's planned programs for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area greatly exceed the projected tax increment revenue stream. Therefore, the Agency expects to seek applicable Federal, State, and other local and private funding necessary to bring these programs to fruition. See Housing Set Aside Fund discussion for further information. Projects Proposed for the 2000--2004 Implementation Plan: Project 1 Economic Development Activities. Acquire properties for commercial uses around the BART Station Area and the western entrance to the community. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, Estimated Cost: $1 .01 million Progress since 2000: In 2001 , the Agency purchased six parcels near the BART station area. The parcels are designated for future commercial/mixed use development in the Specific Plan. Project 2 Implementation of the Bailey Road/BART Station Area Specific Plan. Upon completion of the planning process, the Agency anticipates undertaking those projects identified to facilitate the relationship of economic development activities to the BART Station Area. Activities could include land assemblage, relocation, and infrastructure improvements. Personal\documents\impPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 60 Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, State and Federal Funds, Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $5 million Progress since 2000: The Specific Plan was adopted in ,June 2002 for the unincorporated areas, and is pending adoption in the City of Pittsburg. Staff has begun implementation of the plan, including predevelopment activities for relocation of a specialized residential facility, grant writing for the Willow Pass Road Beautification Plan, and design of the Delta DeAnza Trail Gap Closure project. The Agency is drafting a Request for Qualifications/Proposals for a master developer for the Orbisonia Heights area. The Agency is also engaged in ongoing discussion with other property owners in the Specific Plan area. Project 3 Marina/Waterfront Feasibility Analysis. The Redevelopment Agency will initiate a feasibility analysis to identify alternative uses of the marina and waterfront, and assess the economic feasibility of such uses. Development of the marina and waterfront will be a joint effort between the Agency, property owners, state and regional agencies and other private interests. Funding Source: Tax increment Revenue, State and Federal Funds, Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $136,000 Progress since 2000: A waterfront design team for the community planning of the waterfront area is under contract and conducting its work, including a public outreach component. The community meetings and a draft master plan were completed in September 2002. The final plan is expected during the second quarter of 2003. Project 4 Encourage and facilitate development of designated light industrial sites. The Agency should work with the property owners to determine development potential of these industrial properties. Upon determination of development potential, the Agency should assist in providing infrastructure (i.e. road, utilities and storm drainage) to these sites. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue, Area of Benefit Funds, Collect and Convey Funds, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $1 million Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 61 Progress since 2000: The Agency is currently working with two major property owners in the industrial area of Bay Point. An application for one of the properties, which includes an industrial/business park., was submitted in December 2002. The second property owner has initiated a master plan process after encouragement and discussions with the Agency. Project 5 Evaluate Alternatives for Upgrading Public Library Services Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $150,000 Progress since 2000: At the request of the Bay Point Project Area. Committee, plans for the public library upgrades were removed from the 2001 /2002 budget. Project 6 Improve and upgrade the water distribution system. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenue and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $1 .5 million Progress since 2000: The Agency has discontinued efforts to replace the current privately--owned water distributor with a public agency. The Agency will undertake water system improvements on an area-by-area or project-by-project basis. Project 7 North Broadway Area infrastructure Program. The Redevelopment Agency allocated a total of $2 million in Fiscal Year 1997/1998 for Phase I this program under the recommendation of the Bay Point PAC. An additional $1 .4 million was allocated for the design/preliminary engineering and construction of Phase II. $1 .5 million has been allocated for Phase III and $1.3 million has been allocated for Phase IV. Funding Source: Bond Proceeds, CDBG, Tax Increment, and Assessment District/Community Facility District Funding Estimated Cost: $ 6.2 million Progress since 2000: Construction of Phase I was completed in 1999. Construction of Phase II of the North Broadway Infrastructure Program was completed in the fall of 2001 . Phases III and IV are currently undergoing design and right-of-way acquisition. Phase IV construction is a joint project between the Agency and the developer of 69 single--family residences and 49 multiple-family affordable units. Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 62 Project 8 Create and implement the North Broadway Area Revitalization Strategy. A Draft North Broadway Area Revitalization Strategy was prepared and presented to the community in August 1997. In Fiscal Year 1997/1998, the Redevelopment Agency has allocated $50,000 in capital funds towards the County's Revolving Loan Fund for abatement activities in Bay Point. In addition, a total of $600,000 in housing set-aside funds has been allocated for new housing construction and a targeted housing rehabilitation program in the North Broadway Area. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing, Bond Proceeds, HOME, CDBG, State and Federal Programs, Private Sector Funds, and Other County Programs Estimated Cost: $650,000 Progress since 2000: Construction of Phase 11 of the North Broadway Infrastructure Program was completed in the fall of 2001 . Phases Ill and IV are currently undergoing design and right- of-way acquisition. The Program also includes development of 69 single-family residences and 49 multiple-family affordable units. The Agency has designated a developer for the project Project 9 Implement a Community Funding Program. This program will provide funding for neighborhood "beautification" projects initiated by volunteer groups in Bay Point. Projects may involve vacant lot and yard and pay the group for volunteer hours spent on the project. The volunteer group can then use the money they earn to pay for their own projects or activities. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing Estimated Cost: $20,000 Progress since 2000: The program is in place and has assisted several community groups, including an elementary school PTA, the County's teenage program, and the Bay Point Pride for beautification projects throughout Bay Point. The Bay Point Pride has been the most active community group, completing such activities as painting out graffiti, painting houses on major streets, and installing landscaping. Project 10 Develop and implement a marketing plan for Bay Point. The County has retained a consultant to develop a marketing strategy and implementation plan for the unincorporated communities in Contra Costa County, including the Redevelopment Agency's five Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 63 redevelopment project areas. The County and the Redevelopment Agency will share total cost of the project. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing Estimated Cost: $10,000 Progress since 2000: The Agency has created a website that has a site selection component to promote economic development. In addition, the Agency created marketing materials for business attraction and retention. Agency staff refers businesses seeking capital to the County CABG Small Business and Micro-Enterprise Loan and Grant, Small Business Administration, Recycling Market Development Revolving Loan, and other applicable programs. Project 1 1 Initiate a Reuse Study for Shore Acres Center to evaluate the potential for commercial and residential uses at the site. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing Estimated Cost: $25,000 Progress since 2000: The Agency has retained a consultant to evaluate the commercial capacity in the Bay Point Area. The report will be completed in early 2003. Project 12 Abatement Program--Revolving Loan Fund. In Fiscal Year 1997/98, the Redevelopment Agency contributed a total of $50,000 towards the creation of a revolving loan fund. The Redevelopment Agency funds will be used to fund abatement activities in Bay Point. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing, Keller Canyon Mitigation Funds Estimated Cost: $50,000 Progress since 2000: The Agency continues to work with the Building Inspection Department to identify Code Enforcement problems and abatement opportunities for the Bay Point Area. Project 13 Light Industrial Area Feasibility Analysis. The Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Specific Plan has identified a section of the Willow Pass Road Commercial District as a potential site for light industrial area, with office space and some retail uses. The Redevelopment Agency will work with Criterion Catalyst and other property owners of industrial properties in preparing a light industrial area feasibility analysis and implementation plan. Personal\documents`ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 64 Redevelopment Agency assistance may involve planning and financing of an infrastructure program. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing, Private Contributions Estimated Cost: $50,000 Progress since 20030: The Agency has been working with two major industrial property owners in Bay Point to facilitate development of the sites. The need for a feasibility study is likely to be determined in the second quarter of 2003. Project 14 Mixed-Use, Residential/Commercial Development. Agency is proposing for new housing construction and a targeted housing rehabilitation program in the North Broadway Area. A total of 80- 120 residential units are anticipated, including market rate, single- family homes and affordable, multifamily units. Redevelopment Agency funds may be required for predevelopment, construction and/or land acquisition. Funding Source: Tax increment Financing, Bond Proceeds, HOME, CDBG, State and Federal Programs, Private Sector Funds, and Other County Programs Estimated Cost: $19.8 million Progress since 2000: The Agency has designated a developer for 69 single-family units and 49 multi--family units. The Community Development Department completed processing land use entitlements for the project. Project 15 Urban Design and Street Improvements North of State Highway 4. The Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area Specific Plan identifies the need to encourage pedestrian and bicyclist movement along the routes leading to the BART Station. The Bailey Road corridor serves as a primary entryway from the freeway and Willow Pass Road to the BART Station Area. The Specific Plan recommends street improvements that provide adequate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities, while enhancing the image and character of the Bailey Road corridor. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing, Federal and State Funds, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $900,000 Progress since 2000: A waterfront design team for the community planning of the waterfront area is under contract and conducting Personal\documents\impPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 65 its work, including a public outreach component. The community meetings and a draft master plan were completed in September 2002. The final plan is expected during the first quarter of 2003. Project 10 Willow Pass Road Neighborhood Commercial District- Urban Design and Street improvements. Willow Pass Road Neighborhood Commercial District is identified as a special district in the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area Specific Plan. The boundaries of the neighborhood commercial district are from Alves Lane to the west and Bailey Road to the east. Improvements on Willow Pass Road are intended to enhance the overall image of the area and establish a focal point for the Bay Point Community. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing, Federal and State Funds, and Private Sector Funds Estimated Cost: $850,000 Progress since 2000: The recently adopted Specific Plan provides for a commercial node at Bailey and Willow Pass Roads. The Specific Pian includes urban design amenities and standards. The Agency is pursuing grant funds to implement the Plan. Project 17 P--1 Rezoning Program. The Planned Unit (P--1) zoning district provides the opportunity for more creative and flexible design for large scale developments than would be permitted under conventional residential districts. The flexibility associated with the P-1 District includes variation in structures, lot sues, yards, and setbacks, and enables the developer to address specific needs or environmental constraints in the area. in older, developed areas where the objective is to revitalize neighborhoods through redevelopment, the P-1 process is also used to define allowable land uses and minimum development and design guidelines appropriate for the specific community. Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing Estimated Cost: $50,000 Progress since 2000: The rezoning of the Bay Point community and adoption of a development plan was approved by the Board of Supervisors in February 2003, The Agency used local community meetings to create the use, design, and development standards incorporated into the program. Projects Added since 2000 Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised�6.9.03 66 Following is a discussion of the projects added since adoption of the 2000- 2004 implementation plan: Project 18 21st Century Afterschool Learning Center. Under an interagency agreement with the County Employment and Human Services Department, the Redevelopment Agency is assisting the Mt. Diablo Unified School District in securing a portable building to be used for afterschool programs at Riverview Middle School in Bay Point. Funding Source: County Employment and Human Services Department Estimated Cost: $230,000 Project 19 Site Acquisition-Habitat for Humanity. Funds to assist Habitat For Humanity with acquiring real property for affordable housing projects. Funding Source: Tax Increment Revenues Estimated Cost: $300,000 Project 20 Housing Development Fund. Housing funds reserved for additional site acquisition and/or predevelopment funds for funded projects, or scattered site property acquisition/housing rehabilitation. Funding Source: Housing Set-Aside Funds, Housing Bond Funds Estimated Cost: $82,759 6.1(D) ELIMINATION OF BLIGHT The proposed redevelopment strategy and identified projects will provide several public benefits, as follows: 1 . The Project Area is characterized by the existence of deteriorated, dilapidated, and inadequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces, and utilities which have a damaging physical and economic impact on the Project Area. The infrastructure improvements will eliminate a serious blighting influence in the Project Area. 2. This Implementation Plan will provide improved roadways, beautification activities, open space improvements, and industrial/commercial/retail development and improvements opportunities, thereby providing a catalyst for private reinvestment in the Project Area. Personal\documents\1mpP#an Edited.revised.6.9.03 67 3. The Implementation Plan will serve goals and objectives set forth in Part IV of the Redevelopment Plan, including goals and objectives related to: a. Provide Infrastructure Improvements. b. Facilitate Commercial Development. c. Facilitate Industrial Development. 6.2 HOUSING COMPONENT 6.2(A) POPULATION/SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE According to the 2000 census, there were 21 ,534 people living in 6,525 households in the Bay Point Area. The majority of these individuals (75%) are family households and the average household size is 3.27 persons. The median household income in Bay Point is $44,951 , which is less than the County median of $65,375. Housing Characteristics According to the 2000 Census, 6,716 housing units are located in the Project Area. A majority of the units are single-family homes (71%). Nearly 65% of households in the area are owners, while 35% rent. Less than 3% of housing units are vacant. The overall condition of housing varies widely from new housing to well-maintained older single-family dwellings to dilapidated and boarded-up dwellings. The density of housing ranges from multi-family apartments to low-density single-family houses on two-acre lots in a rural setting. A majority of the units were built prior to 1970. Level of Housing Need Excessive cost burden is a significant housing problem in the Project Area. A cost burden exists if a household pays more than 30% of gross household income for housing. In Bay Point, 46% of renter households and 36% of owners spent at least 30% of their gross income on their housing. Residential Market Conditions The median value of owner occupied housing units in Bay Point in 2000 was $145,500 and median monthly rent was $721 . 6.2 (B) HOUSING REQUIREMENTS AND STRATEGIES This section updates the Housing Production Plan for the Bay Point Project Area. The Agency expects to meet its legal housing production obligations pursuant to legislation related to housing - AB 315 and AB 1290. This part of the report discusses in detail the specific housing production obligations of the Agency In Personal\documents\I m pPlanEdited.rev!sed.6.9.03 68 the Project Area since adoption of the Redevelopment Plan (the Plan) in 1987 through the life of the Plan in 2028. • Annual production goals for 2000 to 2004 • Projected production for 1995 to 2004 • Projected production through the life of the Project (2005 to 2030) • Affordable (Inclusionary) Housing Production • Replacement Housing Obligation Annual Housing Production Goals: 2000 to 2004 The Agency achieved and plans to achieve the following annual housing production goals over the next five years: 2000: • The agency continued to work on the oversight of a site remediation and the acquisition of an 8-acre site for future housing. 2001 : • The Agency exercised an option to purchase an 8-acre site in the North Broadway area, where it anticipated development of a mixed-use development, including approximately 100-120 units of multifamily and single family residential units. The Agency sponsored a community planning process for the project to determine the best use for the site. The Agency explored partnerships with non-profit and for-profit developers, for the development of the site. 2002: • Upon adoption of the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Specific Plan, new housing production will be initiated. The Specific Plan was adopted in June 2002. The Agency plans to begin development of a Specific Plan for the Bailey Road area and begin plans for future housing production based on the Specific Plan. • Agency staff assisted the Housing Authority in obtaining land use entitlements for the reconstruction of the De Anza Gardens project, involving the demolition of 84 units and the construction of 180 new units. Personal\documents\ImpPianEdited.revised.6.9.03 69 2003: • The Agency entered into a Disposition, Development and Loan Agreement with a development team for the development of 69--single-family and 52 multiple-family residential units. The Agency also sponsored the application for land use entitlements for the project. • Continue planning efforts for an Affordable Housing Production Strategy to meet the inclusionary redevelopment requirement of 15% affordable, including 6% very low and to evaluate programs for the production of affordable housing units in the future. The Agency plans to evaluate the status and potential of the following programs: • Mixed-use residential commercial development as part of a Specific Plan for the BART area. • Assemblages of property east of Bailey Road for multi-family residential housing near the proposed BART station. Action on hold pending BART Area Specific Plan adoption. ° Mortgage Credit Certificate Program: potential for expansion to more units. • Facilitate private and non-profit development of affordable housing. Continue to work with for-profit and non-profit housing developers to identify sites and develop affordable housing units in the Bay Point project area. • Create a tracking program for new development production in the Project Area. 2004: • if infill and Specific Plan area development potential prove feasible, the Agency will initiate soliciting a developer(s) for the projects(s). Projected New Units: 1995 to 2004, Ten-Year Production Period Based on analysis of property valuation and building permit records from 1995 to 1999, 162 new units of housing were developed in the Bay Point Project Area. Between 1999 and 2004, the Agency projected that a total of 190 new dwelling units would be developed in the Project Area. Planned projects from 2000 to 2004 included: • Eight acres of vacant land at Willow Pass and Fairview to be developed as mixed use with commercial/retail and a potential for 52new affordable residential units and 69 market rate units. Personakdocuments\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 70 • Up to 20 affordable units on the former Anchor Cove site west of Bailey Road. Negotiating with EBMUD for an easement across an aqueduct to increase parcel from 0.5 to 1 .5 acres. Development of this site may more logically occur with properties west of Canal Road and south of the EBMUD aqueduct, or for a small housing facility for special populations. • Small site north of Willow Pass on Solano Avenue to be developed with up to twelve residential units. • De Anza Gardens Housing Authority project involves the demolition of 84 units and the construction of 180 new affordable multiple-family units. For the 1995 to 2004 ten -year period, the Agency projected that 352 new housing units could be developed in the Project Area. The Agency anticipated that 87 of the total units produced within this time frame would be single- family and the remaining 178 units would be multi-family. Actual Production since 2000: No new units have been constructed in the Project Area since 2000. Four units have been substantially rehabilitated in conjunction with the first-time homebuyer program. These units are affordable to low income households. The Agency has completed the acquisition and rehabilitation of two multifamily properties, the 72-unit Willowbrook Apartments (15 very low income units, 57 low income units) and the 88-unit Hidden Cove Apartments (18 very low income units and 70 moderate income units). In addition, the Agency is working with the Housing Authority to demolish the 84-unit DeAnza Gardens public housing complex, located along Medanos Avenue in the Bay Point Project Area. The demolished units will be replaced with 180 new units, 127 of which will be affordable to very low-income households, while 53 will be affordable to low income households. In completing this project, either the Agency or the County must be party to an agreement restricting the rents on the units to fit the affordability breakdown. Projected New Units: 2005 to 2028, Project Life Production Bay Point has a total of about 80 acres of vacant residential land on 72 scattered sites including 16 acres zoned for mixed use as of January 2000. Many of these parcels are contiguous and offer potential for assembly into sizable building parcels. The majority of vacant residential land is north of Willow Pass Road, which has several large tracts for sizable development projects. if fully built out, there is a projected capacity for 627 new housing units through the remaining life of the Plan. About 60% would be multi-family and the rest single-family units. Roughly one half of the multi-family units would be in mixed-use developments. Personal\documents\lmpPl an Edited.revised.6.9.03 71 Based on the inventory of remaining developable residential land, the Agency estimates that 431 new dwelling units could be developed within the Project Area from 2005 until the end of the Project in 2028. These units would include 160 single-family homes and 202 multi-family units. Potential projects include: • Acquisition and development of properties located in Orbisonia Heights. • Seven potential residential development opportunities north of Willow Pass Road. Private developers would build all of these in a mix of multifamily and single family housing. • Acquisition and development of sites along Willow Pass Road west of Ambrose Community Center. • Acquisition and development of properties on Canal Road. Affordable (Inclusionary) Housing Production Since the Agency has not and does not plan to produce any housing units directly in the Bay Point Project Area, the 15% affordable housing production obligation under the CRL applies. Upon completion of planned projects through 2004, the Agency will meet its affordable production obligation as required by law. Thus, at least 15% of units produced, in aggregate, in the Project Area will be affordable to low and moderate income households, including 6% affordable to very low-income households. When units are substantially rehabilitated by the Agency in a project area, 30 percent of units must be made affordable to low and moderate-income households and 50 percent of the affordable units must be allocated for very low-income households. The Agency acquired and rehabilitated a 72�-unit and 88-unit apartment building, for a total of 160 units. Therefore, 48 units are required to be affordable to low and moderate--income households, 24 of which must be affordable to very low-income households. The Implementation Plan identified a housing production obligation of 7 low and moderate-income units, of which 3 must be very low -income units. Based on the acquisition and rehabilitation of the Willowbrook and Hidden Cove Apartments, an additional 48 units low and moderate-income units are required, 24 of which must be affordable to very low-income households. Therefore, the total inclusionary obligation is 55 units, 31 of which must be affordable to very low-income households. Personal\documentsllmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 72 Within the Willowbrook and Hidden Cove Apartments, all units are affordable to low and moderate-income households and 32 are affordable to very low- income households. In addition, upon completion of the 180-unit project to replace DeAnza Gardena, 96 net new affordable housing units will be located in the project area (180 units -84 replacement units). Among these units, 53 will be affordable to low income households and 43 will be affordable to very low- income households. Therefore, the project area will have a surplus of 201 units low and moderate-income units, 41 of which are very low-income units. Replacement Housing {obligation To date, the Agency satisfied a portion of its Section 33413 housing production requirements with the construction of Elaine Null Apartments in 1996; a 14--unit multi-family rental building located at Alves Lane and Water Street. The construction of these apartments required 12 dilapidated units housing low or moderate-income households to be demolished in 1993. The Elaine Null Apartments replaced these units with the development of six very low-income and eight low to moderate-income units. The Agency anticipates approximately ten additional units may be destroyed to accommodate the North Broadway Mixed Use Development. These units will be replaced by a new affordable housing development and other Agency assisted housing programs. The Agency is leveraging its Low and Moderate Housing Fund to provide one new 52-unit affordable housing development as part of the North Broadway Mixed Use Development, and a first time homebuyers program to assist lower income households in purchasing and rehabilitating a home. The Agency previously assisted eleven lower-income households with its initial first time homebuyer program and has assisted four low-income households through its current first time homebuyer program. As discussed, the 84-unit DeAnza Gardens public housing project will be demolished and replaced with 180 new units, 84 of which will be counted as replacement units. Therefore, no replacement housing obligation will remain. 6.2(C) AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS Based on income information from the 2000 Census, a typical household in Bay Point earns about $44,951 , which is 71% of Countywide median household income. This means that Bay Point residents cannot afford to pay as much to either rent or purchase housing as most other County residents. Even though housing in Bay Point is relatively less expensive than the County, it is still too expensive for many Bay Point residents. Table 6-1 shows the maximum affordable home and rental price for households in Contra Costa County. Based on the median housing price of $145,500 in the housing area, many low-income households can afford to purchase homes in the project area. The median rent in the project area is Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 73 $721 , which is affordable to many very-low income households. Moderate- income households are able to afford all housing in the project area. Table 6-1 Housina Affordability Maximum Affordable Income Levels Housin Costs Price Income Annual Affordabl Utilitie Taxes Group Income a Payment s & Ins. Home Rental Very Low One Person $28,050 $701 $50 $100 $92,063 $651 Small Family $36,050 $901 $100 $150 $108,764 $801 Large Family $43,250 $1 ,081 $150 $200 $122,125 $931 Low One Person $44,850 $1,121 $50 $200 $145,506 $1,071 Small Family $57,650 $1,441 $100 $250 $182,248 $1,341 Large Family $69,200 $1,730 $150 $300 $213,771 $1,580 Moderate One Person $67,250 $1,681 $50 $300 $222,330 $1,631 Small Family $86,500 $2,163 $100 $350 $286,002 $2,063 Large Family $103,800 $2,595 $150 $400 $341,532 $2,445 6.2(D) HOUSING SET-ASIDE FUND The primary funding source for the Agency's affordable housing activities during the Implementation Plan period will be the 20% portion of annual tax increment revenue deposited by the Agency into its Housing Fund. History and Status From 1987 to 1999, the Agency has allocated at least 20% of the cumulative tax increment revenue to the Housing Set-Aside Fund. Over this period, the Agency has made deposits to the Housing Fund in the amount of $973,675. As of the beginning of Fiscal Year 1998/99, the Agency's Housing Fund balance was $766,400. The Agency is currently setting aside 20% of its tax increment revenue for affordable low and moderate income housing and is undertaking various activities to stimulate the production and rehabilitation of the affordable housing stock, using both tax increment revenue and other funding sources. The Agency currently has an option to purchase an 8-acre site, where it anticipates facilitating a mixed-use development, including approximately 100-- 120 units of multifamily and single family residential units. Personal\documents\ImpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 74 The Agency has not assisted in the rehabilitation or development of housing units to date. Updated Housing Fund Projections Table 6-2 shows the projected housing set-aside deposits for the remainder of the implementation plan. Including the deposits made since 2000, the Agency expects to contribute $1 ,593,883 to the Housing Fund over the remaining years of the implementation plan. Table 6-2 Housin Fund Projections Housing Fund Year Revenues 2000-2001* $309,872 2001-2002* $352,011 2002-2003 $305,000 2003-2004 I $311,000 2004-2005 i $316,000 Total $1,593,883 *Actual deposits Housing Fund Expenditures Since 2000, the Agency has expended $1 ,771 ,721 to support the development of housing in the project area. All funds were used to support the development of family housing. Approximately 30% of the funds were spent on very low- income housing, 12% on low-income housing, and 58% on moderate-income housing. 6.2(E) SPECIFIC PROJECT AREA GOALS The housing programs undertaken in the Project Area by the Agency and non- Agency developers will address all of the goals and policies set forth in the Housing Element as described in Chapter 2.0 of this Mid-Term Update. The Redevelopment Plan sets out specific Redevelopment Agency goals and objectives for housing activities in the Bay Point Project Area. The Plan states one housing goal: to upgrade the existing residential neighborhoods through rehabilitation of a substantial number of existing housing units and the facilitation of infill housing construction. The Plan states two objectives for housing: 1) assist in affordable housing development and 2) strengthen existing residential neighborhoods. In order to accomplish these objectives, the Agency would: • Promote, assist in financing, and provide subsidies for the development of affordable housing in the Project Area; Personal\documents\lmpPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 75 _... ... ._._................................................_........................................................................_... _.................................................... • Acquire, assemble, prepare, and -dispose of parcels- for housing development; • Provide rehabilitation loans for owners of housing; • Promote, assist in financing and provide subsidies for the development of infill housing; and, • Assist in the provision of adequate infrastructure to serve residential areas. Personal\documents\impPianEdited.revised.6.9.03 76 i i0 SU.wM5={j'A1y iY ■ OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING REMENTS AB 1290 allows housing production and replacement units to be aggregated in one or more project areas. However, the agency must make a finding, based on substantial evidence and after a public hearing, that aggregation will not cause or exacerbate racial, ethnic, or economic segregation. In addition, housing expenditures by income group and on senior and family housing can also be calculated on an aggregate basis. The following discussion identifies the aggregate production surplus/deficit, housing replacement obligations, and expenditures by income group and senior/family housing. 7.1 AGGREGATED AFFORDABLE (INCLUSIONARY) HOUSING PRODUCTION 7.1(A) HOUSING PRODUCTION SURPLUS/DEFICIT Table 7-1 shows the production obligations for each Project Area as well as the aggregate production surplus. As shown in the table, all project areas have either no existing obligation or production surpluses for berth low/moderate income units and very low-income units. When the affordable housing units are aggregated, a surplus of 202 low/moderate income units and 136 very low-income units remains. Therefore, no production deficit exists on an aggregate basis. Table 7-1 Aggreq4te Housing Production Surplus/Deficit Housing Production Surplus (Deficit) Project Area Low/Mod., Very Low North Richmond 20 39 Rodeo 22 16 Pleasant Hill BART 0 40 BaV Point 160 41 Total 202 136 7.1(B) HOUSING PRODUCTION BY INCOME COMPARED TO RHND FOR LOW/MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AB 637 requires agencies to target funds to the Income groups in proportion to the total housing needs of each group during the time frame of the Implementation Plan. The intent of this legislation is to ensure that very low- income households are receiving a fair share of housing funds through redevelopment activities. Personal\documents,impPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 77 In assessing the Agency's progress on this requirement, the expenditures for very low, low, and moderate-income housing are compared to the share of housing dedicated to each income group in the Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND). As with the housing production requirements, expenditures are calculated on an aggregate basis. Table 7-2 shows the Agency expenditures as compared to the RHND. As shown, Agency expenditures far exceed the proportion of housing needs allocated to very low-income households. Based on the proportion of funds expended for very low income households, the Agency is currently meeting the minimum required expenditure for very low income households and should continue to meet the required proportion of funds expended for the remainder of the Implementation Plan. Table 7-2 Housincl Expenditures by Income Compared to RHND RHND Allocation Agency Money Expended %of Income Group # % $ ! Total Very Low 1,101 35% $3,546,548 64% Low 642 20% $327,547 3 6% Moderate 1,401 45% $1,629,011 30% Total 3,144 100% $5,503,106 100% 7.2 AGGREGATED REPLACEMENT HOUSING OBLIGATION According to the replacement housing analysis for each project area, no replacement housing obligation exists. The previous obligation for replacement housing in the North Richmond Project Area was fulfilled by the construction of the Parkway Estates and the North Richmond Senior Housing. Therefore, no aggregate replacement housing obligation exists. 7.3 AGGREGATED EXPENDITURES ON SENIOR/FAMILY HOUSING Another provision of AB 667 deals with expenditures on senior versus family housing. Under AB 637, housing funds must be spent on families in at least the same proportion as the total family population. For Contra Costa County 19 percent of households are headed by a person over 65. Therefore, only 19 percent of housing funds may be spent for senior households, while 89 percent should be spent for family housing. Table 7--3 shows the Agency's expenditures on senior and family housing since 2000. As shown, the Agency has expended 80 percent of housing funds to support the development of family housing. This proportion is nearly the same as the 81 percent of family households Countywide. Therefore, the Agency is Personal\documents\lm pPlanEdited.revised.6.9.03 78 currently meeting the obligation to develop housing for non-senior households. if the current expenditure trends continue, the Agency will continue to meet this requirement for the remainder of the Implementation Plan. Table 7-3 Aggregated Ex enditures on Senior/F mily Housing._ Percent of Housing Type Ex enditures Total Senior Housing__ $997,068 20% Family Housing $3,885, 82 80% $4,882,15 100% Total 0 Personal\documents`ImpPianEdited.revised.6.9.03 79