HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12082009 - D.2RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT report on the second and final review of the County’s adopted Housing
Element by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (State
HCD).
1.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2009/566 to make minor revisions to the County's adopted
Housing Element pursuant to the latest review comments by State HCD.
2.
AUTHORIZE the Director, Department of Conservation and Development, to
re-submit the revised Housing Element to State HCD for final determination and
certification of compliance with State housing element law.
3.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD
COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 12/08/2009 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
Contact: Patrick Roche,
DCD (925-335-1242)
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and
entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: December 8, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
D. 2
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Catherine Kutsuris, Conservation & Development Director
Date:December 8, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Report on Review of the County’s Housing Element by the California Department of Housing and
Community Development
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this report is to update the Board of Supervisors on the status of the
second and final review of the County’s adopted 2009 Housing Element by the
California Department of Housing and Community Development (State HCD). State
HCD is charged with reviewing and certifying the compliance of a city or a county
General Plan Housing Element pursuant to Government Code section 65585. State
housing element law provides for two rounds of review by State HCD (60-day review for
draft and 90-day review for final) before certification of compliance is determined. The
certification of compliance by State HCD for the County’s Housing Element will insure
that Contra Costa County remains eligible for funding through state housing programs.
The Board of Supervisors conducted a public hearing for the 2009 Housing Element
update on July 21, 2009, and under Resolution No. 2009/348 adopted the Housing
Element, as recommended by the County Planning Commission. Following the Board’s
July action, the adopted Housing Element was submitted to State HCD for final review
and certification of compliance with State housing element law. A copy of the Housing
Element adopted by the Board of Supervisors is attached as Exhibit #1 to this report.
On October 30, 2009, the Department of Conservation and Development was informed
by State HCD that the Housing Element, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors on July
21, 2009, would meet the statutory requirements of the State housing element law
provided certain minor revisions are incorporated into the element. These revisions to the
element were drafted in consultation between staff from the County and State HCD
following the County’s submittal to State HCD of the adopted Housing Element for final
review. A copy of the October 30, 2009 letter from State HCD is attached and listed as
Exhibit #2 to this report. As noted in their October 30, 2009 letter, State HCD has
indicated that the element will comply with the State housing element law when the draft
revisions are incorporated into the 2009 Housing Element and then re-submitted to State
HCD.
STATE HCD REVIEW COMMENT - DRAFT REVISIONS TO COUNTY
HOUSING ELEMENT
The draft revisions to the Housing Element involve adding new text and elaborating or
adding to the housing programs listed in the element. State HCD believes these revisions
are necessary for them to certify the County’s Housing Element in compliance with State
housing element law. The following is a summary of State HCD's latest review
comments and proposed revisions to the adopted Housing Element prepared in response
to the review:
At-Risk Units - HCD Review: Housing Element’s analysis of assisted housing
at-risk of converting to market rate should elaborate on options for transfer of
ownership to qualified entities.
Proposed Revision Per State HCD Review: Insert to Housing Element pages 6-33 to
6-34, under “E. Loss of Assisted Housing”, adding new text that lists 3 qualified
entities that might receive transfer of ownership for the at-risk units in the
Rivershore Apartments.
Licensed Residential Care Facilities - HCD Review: Housing Element needs to
discuss and explain County’s recent experience with approving licensed residential
care facilities.
Proposed Revision Per State HCD Review: Insert to Housing Element at page 6-48,
under “2. Provisions for a Variety of Housing”, under subheading “Licensed Care
Facilities:”; add text explaining recent experience in processing of land use permit
applications for residential care facilities with more than six beds .
Water & Service Providers - HCD Review: Housing Element needs to
acknowledge that pursuant to State law water and sewer service providers must grant
priority service to affordable housing projects.
Proposed Revision Per HCD Review: Insert to Housing Element at pages 6-62 to
6-63, under “2. Infrastructure and Public Service Constraints”, add new paragraph
in middle of page 63 on CA Govt. Code Sec. 65589.7, to note that water and sewer
service providers must establish priority procedures and grant priority water and
sewer service to developments with affordable units and local jurisdiction must
make Housing Element immediately available to them.
Emergency Shelters - HCD Review: Housing Element program to establish zoning
district where emergency shelters will be allowed without conditional use permit
pursuant to S.B. 2 must clarify that development standards will be the same as those
within the selected district.
Proposed Revision Per HCD Review: Insert to Housing Element at page 6-108,
under “Housing Programs, Review and Update of Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinance”, add language to the description of the 5-year Program Objective to
clarify that development standards for emergency shelter will be the same as those
within the selected zone (C: Commercial District) where a shelter can be
established without conditional use permit.
Extremely Low Income Housing - HCD Review: Housing Element should add
new category to the Housing Program to address need for development of housing
for extremely low income households and add Extremely Low Income as a category
to the element’s quantified 5-year objectives.
Proposed Revision Per HCD Review: Insert to Housing Element text at pages 6-103
to 6-104, “Housing Affordability”, to add new program entitled “Extremely Low
Income Housing Development Assistance”; insert to Housing Element, at page
6-111, Table 6-41: Housing Implementation Programs Summary, new item 19.a
“Extremely Low Income Housing”, under the subheading “Housing Affordability”;
and, insert Extremely Low Income category into Table 6-42: Quantified Five-Year
Objectives, at page 6-113.
North Richmond Specific Plan - HCD Review: The preparation of a Specific Plan
to establish new residential neighborhood in North Richmond should be added as a
new Housing Program to the Housing Element.
Proposed Revision Per HCD Review: Insert to Housing Element at page 6-106,
under “Provision of Adequate Residential Sites”, new program item entitled
“NORTH RICHMOND SPECIFIC PLAN”. Insert to Housing Element, page 6-111,
Table 6-41, Housing Implementation Programs Summary, new item 23.a, “North
Richmond Specific Plan”, under the sub-heading “Provision of Adequate Housing
Sites”.
Accessible Housing - HCD Review: Housing Element should elaborate on
provisions for housing persons with special needs and procedures to provide
reasonable accommodations and add reasonable accommodation as new housing
program category.
Proposed Revision Per HCD Review: Insert new paragraph to Housing Element at
page 6-102 under heading “ACCESSIBLE HOUSING”, to indicate County will
formalize procedures to facilitate housing for persons with special needs and
remove constraints to such housing development and document these reasonable
accommodations procedures; insert to Housing Element at page 6-110 under Table
6-41: Housing Implementation Programs Summary: Special Needs Housing, to add
15 (a) “Reasonable Housing Accommodation” as new program under sub-heading
“Special Housing Needs”.
Attached for the Board’s consideration are inserts to show where the revisions to the
element would be made based on State HCD review comments as referenced in their
October 30, 2009 letter (see inserts listed under Exhibit #3). A report was presented to
the County Planning Commission on December 1, 2009 on these draft revisions to the
adopted Housing Element.
The Department does not believe the draft revisions substantially modify or alter the
goals, policies, programs, or implementation measures in the Housing Element adopted
by the Board of Supervisors on July 21, 2009. The draft revisions proposed are minor in
nature, and are intended to provide further clarification or elaboration; and, based on
consultation with State HCD, should provide assurance that the element will be certified
in compliance with State housing element law. The Department recommends the Board
adopt the draft revisions to the adopted Housing Element as presented in this report and
authorize the Director to re-submit the revised Housing Element to State HCD for their
final determination and certification of compliance with State housing element law.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
There are potential negative consequences for Contra Costa County if the Housing
Element is not revised pursuant to State HCD’s latest review and re-submitted for final
determination and certification of compliance with State housing element law. These
potential negative consequences include:
The County could become ineligible or non-competitive for grant funding by the
state for housing programs, and possibly future transportation program funding.
The County could become vulnerable to lawsuits for failure to comply with State
law mandating an update of the Housing Element. It is noted that several
jurisdictions throughout the state have been successfully sued by housing advocates
and/or the home building industry for either inadequacies with their Housing
Element or failure to comply with timely submittal of their Housing Element to State
HCD. The City of Pleasanton was recently sued by the State Attorney General for
failure to adopt and implement its Housing Element.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2009/566
Exhibit #1: Adopted Housing Element
Exhibit #2: Comment letter from State HCD, dated Oct. 30, 2009
Exhibit #3: Draft Revision to Housing Element, Inserts #1-7
6. HOUSING ELEMENT
6-i
6. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HOUSING ELEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
6.1 Introduction 6-1
A. Community Context 6-1
B. Role and Content of Housing Element 6-4
C. Data Sources 6-5
D. Public Participation 6-5
E. Relationship to the General Plan 6-7
6.2 Housing Needs Assessment 6-8
A. Population and Employment Trends 6-8
B. Household Characteristics 6-14
C. Housing Stock Characteristics 6-17
D. Special Housing Needs Analysis 6-24
E. Loss of Assisted Housing 6-33
F. Future Housing Need 6-38
6.3 Housing Constraints 6-40
A. Market Constraints 6-40
B. Governmental Constraints 6-41
C. Environmental, Infrastructure, and Public Service Constraints 6-59
6.4 Housing Resources 6-63
A. Availability of Sites for Housing 6-63
B. Financial Resources 6-69
C. County Administrative Resources 6-75
D. Local Affordable Housing Developer Capacity 6-76
E. Opportunities for Energy Conservation and Reducing 6-78
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
6.5 Housing Accomplishments 6-84
A. Evaluation of Accomplishments under Adopted Housing Element 6-84
B. Housing Production in Previous RHNA Period 6-89
6.6 Housing Plan 6-90
A. Housing Goals and Policies 6-90
B. Related Plans 6-94
C. Housing Programs 6-95
Figure 6-1 6-2
Figure 6-2 6-47
Figure 6-3 6-52
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-1
6. HOUSING ELEMENT
6.1 INTRODUCTION
The development and preservation of housing is important to all the people within
Contra Costa County. To plan for the development of adequate housing for all
income segments, a housing element is prepared as a part of the General Plan. This
document constitutes the Housing Element, which specifically addresses housing
needs and resources in the County unincorporated areas. Section 6.1, Introduction
of this Element reviews the geographic areas covered by the Contra Costa County
Housing Element, the purpose and content of the Element, the public participation
process undertaken to assist in the development of the Element, and its
relationship with the rest of the General Plan.
A. Community Context
1. County Geography
Established in 1850, the County of Contra Costa is one of nine counties in the San
Francisco Bay Area. The County covers 733 square miles and extends from the
northeastern shore of San Francisco Bay easterly to San Joaquin County. The
County is bordered on the south and west by Alameda County and on the north by
Suisun and San Pablo Bays. The western and northern communities are highly
industrialized, while the inland areas contain a variety of urban,
suburban/residential, commercial, light industrial and agricultural uses.
Contra Costa County is comprised of large unincorporated areas and the cities and
towns of Antioch, Brentwood, Clayton, Concord, Danville, El Cerrito, Hercules,
Lafayette, Martinez, Moraga, Oakley, Orinda, Pinole, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill,
Richmond, San Pablo, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek. The unincorporated areas
include the following communities: Alamo, Bayview-Montalvin Manor, Bay Point,
Bethel Island, Blackhawk, Briones, Byron, Canyon, Contra Costa Centre, Crockett,
Diablo, Discovery Bay, East Richmond Heights, El Sobrante, Kensington, Knightsen,
Mountain View, North Richmond, Pacheco, Rodeo, Rollingwood, Tara Hills, and Vine
Hill. The incorporated cities and towns are separate political entities; the
unincorporated areas are within the land use jurisdiction of the County government.
The Housing Element covers unincorporated areas.
The County is large and diverse. It encompasses several housing sub-markets,
which are determined by a combination of topography, historical development
patterns, and social and economic phenomena. In general, the County can be
divided into three primary subregions -- West, Central, and East. West County is
urbanized with a developed industrial base. Central County is a developed
urbanized area with extensive office and light industrial development. East County
has historically been primarily agricultural but is now experiencing considerable
residential development. Figure 6-1 illustrates the geographic relationship between
the cities and towns and the unincorporated areas. This Housing Element is
concerned with the housing needs, constraints, resources, and solutions for the
unincorporated areas.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-2
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-3
2. County Residents
The 2007 population estimate by the U.S. Census Bureau indicates that Contra
Costa County is home to approximately 1,019,640 residents, making it the ninth
most populous county in California. Several cities experienced significant population
growth during the last decade. In particular, the City of Brentwood’s population
doubled since 2000, experiencing a growth of 117 percent. Other communities with
significant growth include San Ramon (32 percent), Oakley (29 percent, and
Hercules (25 percent). The unincorporated areas of the County had a population of
173,573 in 2008, representing an increase of 14 percent since 2000 according to
the California Department of Finance. Countywide growth was 11 percent during
the same period. Residents have been attracted to Contra Costa County primarily
due to the availability of rapid transit, close proximity to major employment centers
in Oakland, San Francisco, and the Silicon Valley, as well as employment growth
within the County along the I-680 corridor and Tri-Valley area. The relatively
affordable housing prices in the County compared to other Bay Area counties also
contribute to the population growth.
Like the rest of the Bay Area, the County has become more ethnically diverse in
recent decades. The number and proportion of Hispanic and Asian residents have
increased considerably, according to the 2000 Census.1 The number of families is
also growing in the County, indicating the continued need to provide adequate
affordable housing, including first-time homebuyer and move-up housing
opportunities.
Contra Costa County has one of the fastest growing work forces among Bay Area
counties, with growth in its employment base driven primarily by the need to
provide services to an increasing local population. Nevertheless, the number of
white-collar jobs has increased in the County due to the decentralization of office-
related employment to the County from other parts of the region, particularly San
Francisco. However, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) expects that
Contra Costa County will continue to provide “bedroom communities” for the
workforce of other Bay Area counties. The County is expected to gain nearly 9,700
more employed residents than jobs between 2000 and 2030.
3. County Housing Market
Single-family homes are the predominant housing type in the County. This is
especially true in the unincorporated areas, where single-family dwellings comprise
80 percent of the housing stock. Multi-family units account for 14 percent of the
housing units, while the remaining 6 percent are mobile homes. Although home
prices are more affordable in Contra Costa County than in most areas in the Bay
Area, housing affordability is still an important issue affecting many residents in the
County. A significant number of lower- and moderate-income households spend
more than one-third of their incomes.2 This level of housing payment is typically
considered as burdensome to lower- and moderate-income households and
suggests that income growth has not kept pace with the increase in housing costs.
1 While the number of Black residents has increased, its proportion of the County population remains slightly over 9%.
2 The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has established five income categories based on
County median family income (MFI). Extremely low-income households are those earning income up to 30% of the County
MFI. Very low-income households are those earning income up to 50% of the County MFI. Low-income households are
those earning 51 to 80% of the County MFI. Combined, the very low- and low-income households are referred to as
lower-income households. Moderate-income households are those earning 81 to 120% of the County MFI. Above
moderate households are those earning more than 120% of the County MFI.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-4
Neighborhood and housing quality is another issue in unincorporated County areas.
About 60 percent of the housing stock in unincorporated areas is thirty years or
older, the age when most homes begin to have major repair or updating needs. In
particular, significant housing rehabilitation needs have been identified in the Bay
Point, Montalvin Manor, North Richmond, and Rodeo redevelopment project areas.
The County has experienced a tenfold increase in foreclosure activity between 2006
and 2008, with foreclosures impacting nearly one out of every ten homes in some
communities. In addition, foreclosed homes accounted for 50 percent of the homes
sold in December 2008. The median price in December 2008 was 50 percent below
its December 2007 level. However, some of the decline is a result of market mix –
far fewer homes above the jumbo loan limit of $417,000 sold in 2008 compared
with 2007. Forecasts indicate that it could be as late as 2010 before this trend
ends. Also, 2008 was the worst year in more than 50 years for new housing starts
in Contra Costa County. Single family starts dropped 64 percent from the previous
year, although multi-family starts held steady. Nevertheless, the County continues
to plan for new construction and works to facilitate new development, including
affordable housing.
Contra Costa County is faced with various important housing issues: preserving and
enhancing the affordability of housing for all segments of the population; providing
new types of housing in response to changing demographic trends; maintaining and
improving the quality of the housing stock; and achieving a balance between
employment and housing opportunities. This Housing Element provides policies and
programs to address these and other related issues.
B. Role and Content of Housing Element
The Housing Element of the General Plan has two
purposes:
(1) to provide an assessment of both
current and future housing needs and
constraints in meeting these needs; and
(2) to provide a strategy that establishes
housing goals, policies, and programs.
This Housing Element represents Contra Costa County’s long-term commitment to
the development and improvement of housing with specific goals for the short term,
2009-2014. This Element identifies strategies and programs that focus on:
(1) provide adequate housing sites;
(2) encourage and facilitate a variety of housing types;
(3) assist in the provision of affordable housing;
(4) remove or mitigating governmental and other constraints to housing
investment;
(5) preserve and improving housing and neighborhoods;
(6) promote fair and equal housing opportunities; and
(7) encourage energy conservation
The availability of housing is of
vital statewide importance, and
the early attainment of decent
housing and a suitable living
environment for every Californian
is a priority of the highest order.
-- California Government Code,
Section 65580
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-5
The Housing Element consists of the following major components:
o An introduction reviewing the purpose and scope of the Element (Section
6.1);
o An analysis of the County’s demographic profile, housing characteristics,
and existing and future housing needs (Section 6.2);
o A review of potential market, governmental, and environmental
constraints to meeting the County’s identified housing needs (Section
6.3);
o An evaluation of the land, financial, and organizational resources available
to address the County’s identified housing needs goals (Section 6.4);
o A strategy to promote energy conservation (Section 6.5);
o An evaluation of accomplishments under the adopted Housing Element
(Section 6.5); and
o A statement of the Housing Plan to address the County’s identified
housing needs, including housing goals, policies and programs (Section
6.6).
C. Data Sources
Various sources of information are used to prepare the Housing Element. Data from
the 2000 Census on population and housing are used to a large extent in the
Element. Although dated, the 2000 Census remains the most comprehensive and
widely accepted source of information until the 2010 Census is available. Where
possible, data from the 2006 American Communities Survey by the U.S Census
Bureau has been incorporated in the Element. Several data sources are used to
update the 2000 Census and supplement limited 2000 Census information:
o Demographic and housing data provided by the Association of Bay Area
Governments and the State Department of Finance;
o Housing market information, such as home sales, rents, and vacancies, is
updated by surveys and property tax assessor's files;
o Public and nonprofit agencies are consulted for data on special needs
groups, the services available to them, and gaps in the system.
D. Public Participation
The County encourages the participation of residents and local agencies in the
process of identifying housing needs and formulating housing policies and
programs. During the development of the Housing Needs Assessment (Section 6.2),
the County consulted with and/or obtained information from a variety of
organizations serving low- and moderate-income persons and those with special
needs. These agencies are referenced throughout the document.
In preparation of the Housing Element, opportunities are provided for the public to
help shape the County’s housing goals, policies, and strategies. Two publicly
noticed study sessions for the Planning Commission were held to discuss housing
needs and community concerns and discuss programs and policies, respectively.
Over 300 groups and individuals were notified of the study sessions, including
representatives from the following general categories:
o Board of Supervisors/County departments
o County cities and towns
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-6
o Other local, State, and federal government agencies and special districts,
including water and sewer districts
o Transportation committees
o Municipal Advisory committees
o School districts
o Libraries
o Housing developers/advocates
o Real estate associations
o Interfaith groups
o Social service agencies
o Interested individuals
o News media
Specific agencies were contacted directly to encourage participation in the study
sessions. Private citizens and representatives from for-profit and non-profit housing
developers and service agencies attended the study sessions. A diverse outreach
effort was carried out through electronic and conventional means. A web page was
specifically created for the Housing Element update. A list of all scheduled focus
group and public meetings was displayed on the website. Copies of presentations
given at meetings were also provided on the website as well as a draft of the most
current Housing Element. Public notices informing the public about the meetings
were distributed in English and Spanish to at least 74 different Bay Area
organizations and displayed at various public buildings. Public input received has
been incorporated into the Draft Element for review by the State Department of
Housing and Community Development (HCD).
In addition, County staff spoke on the Draft Housing Element at meetings of the
following groups:
o Mental Health Commission
o Area Agency on Aging
o Bay Point, Contra Costa Centre, El Sobrante, Pacheco, and Rodeo
Municipal Advisory Committees
o Mobile Home Advisory Committee
o Contra Costa Interagency Council on Homelessness
o Contra Costa for Every Generation
Comments included affirmation of the need for housing appropriate for different
special needs populations. Specifically, the Contra Costa County Advisory Council
on Aging provided their Best Practice Development Guidelines for Multi-family,
Senior Housing Projects. In addition, the Contra Costa Interagency Council on
Homelessness stressed the need for permanent supportive housing for homeless
individuals and families.
To adopt the Housing Element, public hearings were held before the Planning
Commission and will be held before the County Board of Supervisors. Notices were
published in local newspapers in advance of each hearing and copies of the Draft
Element were made available for public review at selected County government
offices and on the County website at www.ccreach.org.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-7
E. Relationship to the General Plan
The 2009-2014 Housing Element is a key component of the County’s General Plan.
The County of Contra Costa adopted its General Plan in 1991, which includes the
following elements: Land Use; Growth Management; Transportation and
Circulation; Housing; Public Facilities/Services; Conservation; Open Space; Safety;
and Noise.
Table 6-1
Housing Related Goals by Element
General Plan Goals by Element
Housing Element Goals LU GM T&C PF/S C OS S N
Goal 1
Maintain and improve the quality of the
existing housing stock and residential
neighborhoods in Contra Costa County.
3-C
3-L
11-A
Goal 2
Preserve the existing affordable housing
stock in Contra Costa County.
3-L 9-C
Goal 3
Increase the supply of housing with a
priority on the development of affordable
housing.
3-B
3-E
3-K
3-L
5-H 7-D
Goal 4
Increase the supply of appropriate and
supportive housing for special needs
populations.
3-D
3-K
3-L
5-K 7-A
7-cx
7-cy
Goal 5
Improve housing affordability for both
renters and homeowners.
3-L
Goal 6
Provide adequate sites through
appropriate land use and zoning
designations to accommodate the
County’s share of regional
housing needs.
3-A
3-D
3-E
3-F
3-K
3-L
4-A 5-H 7-B
7-D
7-AA
8-B
8-C
8-D
8-H
8-T
9-B
9-C
10-A
10-C
10-E
10-F
10-G
10-H
10-J
11-C
Goal 7
Mitigate potential governmental
constraints to housing development and
affordability.
3-L 4-B 5-E 7-B
7-J
7-K
7-T
7-U
8-B
8-C
9-B
9-C
Goal 8
Promote equal opportunity for all
residents to reside in the housing of
their choice.
3-B
3-D
3-K
3-L
5-K
LU = Land Use Element GM = Growth Management Element
T&C = Transportation and Circulation PF/S = Public Facilities/Services Element
C = Conservation Element OS = Open Space Element
S = Safety Element N = Noise Element
The Housing Element builds upon the other existing General Plan Elements and is
consistent with the goals set forth in those elements. The Housing Element goals
should be interpreted and implemented consistent with other General Plan goals. A
consistency matrix identifying the related goals is provided above. For each housing
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-8
goal presented in this Housing Element, the related goals in each General Plan
Element are identified by number. For example, Goal 3-D in the Land Use Element
calls for “[the provision of] a range and distribution of land uses that serve all social
and economic segments of the County and its subregion.” This Land Use Element
goal is consistent with the intent of Housing Element Goals 4, 6, and 8 relating to
the provision of a range of housing choices to all social and economic segments of
the population
The County will ensure consistency between General Plan elements so that goals
and policies introduced in one element are consistent with other elements. If it
becomes apparent that over time, changes to any element are needed for internal
consistency, such changes will be proposed for consideration by the Planning
Commission and County Board of Supervisors.
6.2 HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Section 6.2, Housing Needs Assessment presents and analyzes the demographic,
socioeconomic, housing characteristics, and market data of unincorporated county
to determine the nature and extent of housing needs for current and future
residents.
The data sources used to compile the Housing Needs Assessment includes the 2000
Census, the 2006 American Community Survey (ACS) conducted by the U.S.
Census Bureau, the California State Department of Finance, and supplemented with
current market data and secondary sources of information. During the preparation
of this Housing Element, the foreclosure and credit crisis have created some
economic uncertainty that may have substantial impacts on the data presented,
especially related to housing and job growth. Discussions on the potential impact
are included whenever possible.
A. Population and Employment Trends
1. Population Trends
Contra Costa County is the ninth most populous county in California, with
approximately 1,051,674 residents per the 2008 California Department of Finance.
The availability of rapid transit; close proximity to Oakland and San Francisco;
relatively affordable housing prices in the County; and development of new
employment centers along the I-680 corridor and Tri-Valley, among other factors
have attracted 102,858 new residents to the County (11 percent increase). The
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) projects that the County will have
1,061,900 residents by 2010 and 1,107,300 by 2015.
The California Department of Finance (DOF) estimated the population of the
unincorporated area of Contra Costa County was 173,573, representing an increase
of 14.4 percent since 2000. This level of growth is higher than that experienced by
the County as a whole and by many of the incorporated cities and towns. There is a
significant discrepancy between the DOF estimate and ABAG’s projections. For
example, ABAG’s Projections 2007 estimated the unincorporated portion of Contra
Costa County would have 165,550 people by 2010 and increase to 179,050 by
2020. This represents a difference in statistical modeling each agency uses and the
differences are exacerbated due to the time gap since the last census count.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-9
Regardless of the model used, it is clear that Contra Costa County has undergone
significant growth since 2000 and is anticipated to continue attracting new
population in the foreseeable future. In Table 6-2 on the following page, the
population and population projections for unincorporated areas of the County is
shown by sub-area.
The growth in East County is due to significant development within the Discovery
Bay community since 2000 as well as recent and proposed development
surrounding the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART station sub-area. Infill development and
high density transit-orientated development (TOD) contribute to Central County’s
growth. West County’s high growth areas include redeveloped land near the
Richmond Parkway and infill development in existing communities. The current
market conditions may slow the projected growth if developers and homebuyers are
unable to secure financing.
Table 6-2
Population Growth Trends
Jurisdiction 2000 Projected
2010
Projected
2020
Projected Percent Change
between 2000 and 2020
Unincorporated Sub-Areas
East 41,891 47,896 57,465 +37.2%
Central 59,462 64,030 66,914 +12.5%
West 50,337 53,634 54,682 +8.6%
Total Unincorporated* 151,690 165,550 179,050 +18.0%
Cities and Towns 797,126 896,350 977,950 +22.7%
Total County 948,816 1,061,900 1,157,000 +21.9%
Sources: 2000 Census, Projected 2010 estimated provided by Association of Bay Area Governments refined by
CCC Department of Conservations and Development.
When looking at the demographic profile of the unincorporated area as a whole, it is
very similar to the entirety of Contra Costa County. However, the various
unincorporated communities vary significantly in terms of key demographic
characteristic such as racial/ethnic composition, age, and sex. Table 6-3 on the
following page shows race and ethnicity for the County, the total unincorporated
area, and the Census Designated Places (CDP) within the County.
The difference in racial/ethnic composition between Diablo (92 percent white) and
Rollingwood (20 percent white) illustrates the differences between the various
communities. Communities in the affluent areas (Alamo, Blackhawk, Diablo and
Kensington) and communities in east County (Discovery Bay, Bethel Island, and
Clyde) tend to have a higher percentage of white population. The communities of
Rollingwood, Bay Point and Montalvin Manor have the highest percentage of
Hispanic persons. Rollingwood also has a large Asian population along with the
communities of Tara Hills and Contra Costa Centre. The communities with the
largest number of Black/African American populations include Rodeo, Tara Hills, and
East Richmond Heights.
Likewise, the median age and age composition varies significantly between the
unincorporated areas and are somewhat correlated with race/ethnicity populations
due to cultural differences. A community’s current and future housing needs are
determined in part by the age characteristics of residents. Typically, each age group
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-10
has distinct lifestyles, family type and size, incomes, and housing preferences. As
people move through each stage of life, their housing need and preferences also
change. As a result, evaluating the age characteristics of a community is important
in determining the housing needs of residents.
Table 6-4 on page 11 provides the age characteristics of residents in
unincorporated communities and the County as a whole in 2000. As shown, the age
composition of the unincorporated area residents is very similar to Countywide,
however there is significant differences in the unincorporated communities.
Table 6-3
Race and Ethnicity in Contra Costa County
Geography Percent
White
Percent
Hispanic or
Latino
Percent
Asian
Percent Black
or African
American
Other*
Contra Costa County
Total 57.9% 17.7% 10.8% 9.2% 4.4%
Unincorporated Total 63.1% 16.6% 9.0% 7.0% 4.3%
Alamo CDP 87.3% 3.9% 6.0% 0.5% 5.9%
Bay Point CDP 32.3% 38.6% 11.0% 12.2% 4.8%
Bayview-Montalvin
Manor CDP 34.6% 35.2% 13.7% 11.7% 4.0%
Bethel Island CDP 84.9% 8.8% 1.0% 1.4% 2.9%
Blackhawk-Camino
Tassajara CDP 74.3% 3.9% 16.7% 2.2% 3.3%
Byron CDP 64.3% 25.9% 2.2% 4.4% 5.6%
Clyde CDP 76.4% 11.4% 6.1% 0.6% 4.1%
Contra Costa Centre
(Waldon CDP) 72.1% 6.2% 15.7% 2.0% 3.5%
Crockett CDP 79.2% 11.6% 2.6% 3.1% 0.9%
Diablo CDP 92.0% 3.5% 2.9% 0.6% 3.6%
Discovery Bay CDP 82.5% 10.4% 1.8% 1.7% 6.3%
East Richmond Heights
CDP 58.7% 10.7% 10.7% 13.7% 6.2%
El Sobrante CDP 54.0% 15.6% 12.2% 12.0% 3.7%
Kensington CDP 79.9% 3.5% 10.5% 2.5% 6.2%
Knightsen CDP,
California 67.1% 26.5% 0.2% 0.0% 5.0%
Mountain View CDP 76.9% 14.5% 1.7% 1.9% 3.1%
Pacheco CDP 75.9% 11.8% 7.0% 2.1% 4.7%
Port Costa CDP 87.1% 6.9% 1.3% 0.0% 6.0%
Rodeo CDP 45.2% 17.1% 15.9% 15.9% 5.0%
Rollingwood CDP 20.0% 42.2% 23.8% 9.0% 4.7%
Tara Hills CDP 43.1% 23.9% 14.1% 14.2% 6.4%
Vine Hill CDP 65.1% 24.1% 2.2% 2.1% 4.3%
* Include American Indian, Native Alaska, Native Hawaiian, other Pacific Islanders, 'other' race, and
persons of two or more races
A high proportion of young adults generally indicates a need for rental units and
first-time homebuyer or first move-up opportunities, including condominiums, town
homes, or single-family homes. Middle age residents typically occupy larger homes
and are usually at the peak of their earning power. Senior residents in Contra Costa
County are mostly homeowners and typically occupy single-family homes.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-11
Nationwide trends, however, indicate that as the baby boom generation ages, the
demand for move-down housing or specialized residential developments, such as
assisted living facilities or active adult communities will grow.
Table 6-4
Age Percentage in Contra Costa County
Geography Median
Age
Percent
of < 5
Percent of
School
Aged
Percent of
College
Aged
Percent
of Young
Adult
Percent of
Middle
Aged
Percent of
Seniors
Contra Costa
County 36.4 6.97% 19.57% 7.72% 30.58% 23.86% 11.31%
Total
Unincorporated N/A 6.58% 19.53% 6.98% 29.34% 26.54% 11.02%
Unincorporated Communities
Alamo CDP 43 6.26% 21.34% 3.94% 21.93% 34.37% 12.15%
Bay Point CDP 29.1 9.71% 23.52% 10.47% 32.97% 17.22% 6.12%
Bayview-
Montalvin CDP 34.4 6.41% 22.48% 9.13% 28.40% 22.24% 11.33%
Bethel Island
CDP 48.5 3.03% 12.89% 4.63% 24.13% 34.39% 20.93%
Blackhawk-
Camino
Tassajara CDP 41.4 5.69% 23.33% 4.76% 24.04% 35.77% 6.41%
Byron CDP 30.6 5.90% 29.15% 9.06% 28.17% 18.78% 8.95%
Clyde CDP 37.2 5.76% 21.04% 5.62% 37.61% 24.06% 5.91%
Contra Costa
Centre (Waldon
CDP) 34.8 3.64% 5.88% 8.71% 49.78% 18.86% 13.13%
Crockett CDP 42.4 4.20% 14.31% 5.92% 30.56% 30.06% 14.97%
Diablo CDP 45.8 4.76% 22.06% 3.85% 17.11% 38.56% 13.66%
Discovery Bay
CDP 38.7 6.86% 17.64% 4.42% 33.05% 29.47% 8.56%
East Richmond
Heights CDP 42.4 4.92% 14.09% 5.63% 29.79% 31.04% 14.54%
El Sobrante
CDP 37.6 6.23% 18.48% 7.32% 31.04% 25.17% 11.75%
Kensington CDP 47.1 4.94% 12.72% 3.06% 25.41% 31.73% 22.14%
Knightsen CDP 38.6 5.57% 21.84% 7.08% 27.29% 26.60% 11.61%
Mountain View
CDP 34.7 7.05% 19.21% 8.27% 36.95% 20.71% 7.82%
Pacheco CDP 40.5 5.56% 14.91% 6.54% 30.15% 26.70% 16.14%
Port Costa CDP 45.7 3.88% 11.64% 4.74% 28.02% 37.50% 14.22%
Rodeo CDP 34.9 7.36% 21.98% 8.83% 27.67% 23.94% 10.21%
Rollingwood
CDP 29.9 8.55% 24.72% 10.55% 29.76% 17.38% 9.03%
Tara Hills CDP 35.5 6.55% 19.54% 8.59% 31.19% 23.18% 10.95%
Vine Hill CDP 33.8 6.87% 20.06% 9.17% 33.07% 22.94% 7.88%
2. Employment Trends
Employment has an important impact on housing needs. Different jobs and income
levels determine the type and size of housing a household can afford. Employment
growth in the region also typically results in an increase in housing demand,
particularly in areas that function as a “bedroom community.”
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-12
Contra Costa County has one of the largest job growth rates among Bay Area
counties, with growth in its employment base driven primarily by the need to
provide services to an increasing local population. The number of white-collar jobs
has also increased in the County due to the decentralization of office-related
employment to the County from other parts of the region, particularly San
Francisco. The job growth combined with the County’s historic industrial,
governmental, and agricultural employment base yields a total of 379,310 jobs in
2005, with 41,270 in the unincorporated County according to ABAG.
ABAG anticipates that Contra Costa County will add approximately 69,810 new jobs
between 2010 and 2020, with the largest growth sectors in the service sector as a
total of 35,860 new jobs (an increase of 19.1 percent) are added. Within this
sector, the professional and managerial services and the health/education services
will experience the largest growth with a 21.5 percent and 19.7 percent increase,
respectively. The information sector will also experience a significant growth by
adding about 4,000 new jobs (19.3 percent growth).
Geographically, the largest job growth will occur in Concord (11,960 new jobs),
Richmond (9,090 new jobs), Pittsburg (7,800 new jobs), and San Ramon (7,770
new jobs) during 2010-2020 period. In all of these areas, the greatest job growth is
projected to be in the finance and professional service sector.
Manufacturing, transportation and wholesale sector will continue to grow, especially
in the Richmond area (1,870 new jobs, an increase of 14.3 percent). Both the
Pittsburg (1,540 new jobs, an increase of 31.5 percent) and Concord (1,070 new
jobs, an increase of 10.6 percent) areas will also experience growth in
manufacturing, transportation, and wholesale. Retail job growth is anticipated to
grow in the areas of Concord (1,490 new jobs, an increase of 16.2 percent),
Antioch (1,230 new jobs, an increase of 29.0 percent), and Pittsburg (1,180 new
jobs, an increase of 38.4 percent).
Tremendous job growth (in terms of percentage) is expected for East County – in
particular the Oakley (56.4 percent), Brentwood (47.5 percent), and Rural East
Contra Costa County (42.6 percent) areas because of the small job base that
currently exist in these communities.3 By 2020, ABAG projects nearly 23,000 new
jobs in the East County area with the most gain in the financial and professional
services (44.6 percent increase) as well as the health/education and recreational
service sector (39.1 percent increase).
Despite the anticipated increase in new employment, the County will remain a
‘bedroom community’ that supports the employment centers of other Bay Area
counties. ABAG expects this situation to continue, indicating the County will add
nearly 19,000 more employed residents than jobs between 2010 and 2030.
Table 6-5 on page 13 shows the types of occupations held by residents in
unincorporated areas and the County as a whole. As of 2000, the two largest
occupational categories were managerial/professional and sales/technical/
administrative. These categories accounted for 39.6 percent and 28.4 percent of
employed residents in the County’s unincorporated areas, respectively. Relatively
3 Rural East Contra Costa County includes Discovery Bay, Bethel Island, Byron, Knightsen, and other small rural
communities in the eastern part of the County.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-13
higher paying jobs are in both categories, except for certain sales positions,
translating into higher incomes for the residents engaged in these activities.
Table 6-5
Employment Profile
Unincorporated County Total County Occupations of Residents Persons Percent Persons Percent
Managerial/Professional 28,456 39.6% 149,156 39.3%
Sales, Technical, Admin. 20,400 28.4% 113,274 29.8%
Service Occupations 9,687 13.5% 50,612 13.3%
Production/Crafts/Repair 6,672 9.3% 33,669 8.9%
Operators, Fabricators, Labor 6,220 8.7% 32,277 8.5%
Farming, Forestry, Fishing 342 0.5% 595 0.2%
Total 71,774 100% 379,583 100%
Source: 2000 Census
Contra Costa County’s major employers include finance, government, medical, and
heavy industry as shown in Table 6-6. There are also significant service sector jobs.
Wages range from the low end in food service (approximately $18,000 to $46,000
annually) to the high wages of managers and engineers (over $145,000 annually 4).
Medical service jobs range from the low wages of health care support ($22,000 to
$60,000 annually) to physicians (over $145,000 annually).
Table 6-6
Major Employers
Employer Name Location Industry
Bank Of The West Walnut Creek Banks
BART Richmond Transit Lines
Chevron Corp San Ramon Oil Refiners (Manufacturers)
Chevron Global Downstream LLC San Ramon Petroleum Products (Wholesale)
Military Ocean Terminal Complex (CNWS) Concord Federal Government-National Security
Contra Costa County Martinez Government Offices-County
Diablo Valley College Pleasant Hill Schools-Universities & Colleges Academic
Doctor's Medical Center San Pablo Hospitals
John Muir Health Walnut Creek Hospitals
John Muir Health Foundation Walnut Creek Hospitals
John Muir Medical Center Concord Hospitals
John Muir Physical Rehab Concord Rehabilitation Services
Kaiser Permanente Medical Center Martinez Health Plans
Kaiser Permanente Medical Center Walnut Creek Hospitals
PMI Mortgage Insurance Co Walnut Creek Insurance-Mortgage
City of Richmond Richmond Government Offices-City, Village & Twp
San Ramon Regional Medical Center San Ramon Hospitals
Shell Oil Products Co Martinez Oil Refiners (Manufacturers)
Shell Oil Products Co Martinez Service Stations-Gasoline & Oil
St Mary's College-California Moraga Schools-Universities & Colleges Academic
Sutter Delta Medical Center Antioch Hospitals
Tesoro Petroleum Pacheco Oil Refiners (Manufacturers)
US Veterans Medical Center Martinez Hospitals
USS-POSCO Industries Pittsburg Steel Mills (Mfrs)
Source: California Employment Development Department
4 Wage information is from California Labor Market Information, Occupational Statistics Survey. This source provides wage
information up to $145,000 per year.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-14
Based on the 2000 Census, a total of 567,384 Contra Costa County residents were
in the labor force, with the unemployment rate estimated at 4 percent. According to
the State Employment Development Department, the unemployment rate in the
County was 5.8 percent in May of 2008 and 6.7 percent in September of 2008. This
increase is due to recent market conditions and the economic downturn. Table 6-7
shows the estimated unemployment rate by census designated place. Some
communities are experiencing significant unemployment rates exceeding 10 percent
including Bay Point, Bayview/Montalvin Manor, Crockett, Knightsen, and
Rollingwood.
Table 6-7
Unemployment Rate
Area Name Labor Force Number Rate
Contra Costa County 532,400 35,500 6.7%
Alamo CDP 7,800 200 2.9%
Bay Point CDP 11,100 1,400 13.0%
Bayview/Montalvin Manor CDP 2,400 300 12.0%
Bethel Island CDP 1,300 200 11.7%
Blackhawk CDP 5,400 200 3.6%
Byron CDP 400 0 3.7%
Clyde CDP 400 0 3.9%
Crockett CDP 2,200 300 12.6%
Diablo CDP 500 0 1.7%
Discovery Bay CDP 5,200 200 4.1%
East Richmond Heights CDP 2,100 200 7.7%
El Sobrante CDP 6,700 300 5.0%
Kensington CDP 2,900 100 2.6%
Knightsen CDP 500 100 12.2%
Mountain View CDP 25,600 1,300 4.9%
Pacheco CDP 2,200 100 6.4%
Port Costa CDP 100 0 4.9%
Rodeo CDP 81,500 3,900 4.7%
Rollingwood CDP 1,300 200 14.6%
Tara Hills CDP 3,000 200 7.5%
Vine Hill CDP 1,900 200 8.9%
Walden CDP (Contra Costa Centre) 3,800 100 1.8%
Source: California Employment Development Department, September, 2008.5
B. Household Characteristics
Income level and cost burden are key factors in determining the type of housing
needed by the residents of unincorporated Contra Costa County. This section details
the various household characteristics affecting housing needs. The Census defines a
“household” as any group of people occupying a housing unit, which may include
single persons living alone, families related through marriage or blood, or unrelated
persons that share living quarters. Persons living in retirement or convalescent
homes, dormitories, or other group living situations are not considered households.
Household characteristics are important indicators of the type and size of housing
needed in a community.
The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) publishes
area median incomes on an annual basis. The goals of the Housing Element are
5 Monthly sub-county data are derived by multiplying current estimates of county-wide employment and unemployment by
the respective employment and unemployment shares (percentages) in each sub-county area at the time of the 2000
Census.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-15
specific to accommodate the needs of all households across all income groups. The
median income for a Contra Costa household of four in 2008 is $86,100. Table 6-8
shows income levels for extremely-low, very-low, low, and moderate incomes.
Contra Costa County and cities have an estimated 67,814 households 6 (20 percent
of total households) with incomes less half of the median income. Of those, 35,274
have incomes less than 30 percent of the area median (extremely-low income). The
State Department of Finance estimates that 67,177 households lived in the
unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County in 2008. Generally, the
unincorporated County reflects the income distribution of the County as a whole.
Therefore, the unincorporated County is estimated to have 6,700 extremely low
income households.
Table 6-8
2008 Income Levels
Household size Extremely-low Very-low Low Moderate
1 $18,100 $30,150 $46,350 $ 72,300
2 $20,700 $34,450 $53,000 $ 82,600
3 $23,250 $38,750 $59,600 $ 93,000
4 $25,850 $43,050 $66,250 $103,300
5 $27,900 $46,500 $71,550 $111,600
The distribution of the County’s households by type can be inferred from the 2000
Census since it is the most contemporary Census data available. As shown in Table
6-9, the majority of households in the unincorporated areas are families (71.4
percent). Single persons comprise 21.8 percent of households, while 6.7 percent of
households were unrelated persons living together (“Other”).
Table 6-9
Median Household Income
Census Designated
Place (CDP)
Median Household
Income as % of County
Median#
East
Bay Point 70.6%
Bethel Island 70.0%
Discovery Bay 141.2%
West
Bayview/Montalvin Manor 79.7%
Crockett 76.3%
East Richmond Heights 90.3%
El Sobrante 75.8%
Kensington 146.4%
Rodeo 95.0%
Tara Hills 88.5%
Central
Alamo 215.3%
Blackhawk 242.8%
Pacheco 72.0%
Vine Hill 95.6%
Source: CCC Dept. of Conservation and Development
6 Data is from State of the Cities Data Systems: Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Data, 2000.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-16
1. Existing Households by Income and Tenure
Income level varies significantly by location in Contra Costa County. As shown in
Table 6-9, Alamo and Blackhawk in Central County are very high-income areas,
with their respective household incomes more than double the County median in
1999. Discovery Bay and Kensington also had higher median household incomes
than the County as a whole. Lower-income unincorporated areas include Bay Point,
Bethel Island, and Pacheco. All three communities had a median income of less
than 80 percent of the County median. Not surprisingly, these communities also
have a relatively high concentration of lower-income households based on HUD
data. While not included in the CDP data, North Richmond is also known to have a
high proportion of very low-income households. Income is the most important
factor affecting the housing opportunities available to a household, determining the
ability to balance housing costs with other basic necessities of life. Housing choices,
such as tenure (owning versus renting) and location of residence are very much
income-dependent.
In the unincorporated County, approximately 12.5 percent of the households are
extremely low income as defined by HUD (households earning 30 percent or less of
median family income (MFI). ABAG projects an increase in population of 7.5 percent
between 2010 and 2020. Presuming extremely-low households continue to be 12.5
percent of the population, then by 2020 there will be 9,414 extremely-low income
households in the unincorporated area. This represents an increase of 657
households. Approximately one-half (or 329 households) of this increase will be
within this Housing Element planning period. The RHNA allocation sets the goal for
the County of 815 very-low income units. The need for housing affordable to
extremely-low income households is at least one-half (408) of these units. Table 6-
10 shows the breakdown of households in the unincorporated county by income and
tenure.
Table 6-10
Housing by Tenure and Income
Housing Type Extremely Low Income Very Low Income All Incomes
Rental 2,984 5,155 14,702 (21%)
Ownership 5,773 13,083 55,181 (79%)
Total 8,757 (12.5%) 18,238 (26.1%) 69,883 (100%)
Source: US Census data compiled by HUD
2. Overpaying for Housing
Due to the high cost of housing in the Bay Area, many households overpay for
housing. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD), households should spend less than 30 percent of their income on housing,
including utilities, taxes, and insurance. However, nearly a third of the households
(31.6 percent) in Contra Costa County have a cost burden of more than 30 percent.
Approximately 12 percent have a cost burden of 50 percent or more. On the
following page, Table 6-11 on the following page outlines the cost burden of
households by income and tenure.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-17
C. Housing Stock Characteristics
This section of the Housing Element addresses various housing characteristics and
conditions that affect the living environment of residents. Housing factors evaluated
include housing stock and vacancy rates, tenure, age and condition, housing costs
and affordability, and overcrowded households.
1. Housing Type and Tenure
In 2000, single-family homes and multi-family dwelling units comprised
approximately 80 percent and 14 percent of the housing stock, respectively.
Countywide, single-family homes and multi-family units accounted for 73 percent
and 25 percent of the housing stock, respectively. According to the 2000 Census,
the homeownership rate in unincorporated areas was 73 percent, which is higher
than the Countywide rate of 69 percent. Table 6-12 summarizes various
characteristics of the housing stock in unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County.
Table 6-11
Cost Burden by Tenure
Cost Burden more than 30% Cost Burden more than 50% Renters Owners Total Renters Owners Total
Total Households 38.4% 28.6% 31.6% 17.4% 9.7% 12.1%
Household income less
than 30% MFI 75.7% 71.7% 74.2% 57.6% 56% 57%
Household income between
31% and 50% AMI 70.9% 58.8% 64.9% 24.8% 35.7% 30.1%
Household income between
51% and 80% AMI 43.5% 51.9% 48.3% 6.4% 19.3% 13.9%
Household income greater
than 81% AMI 9.1% 19.8% 17.5% 1% 2.8% 2.4%
Data source: 2000 Census data compiled by HUD
Table 6-12
Housing Stock in 2008
Housing Type Number of Units % of Total
Single-Family 52,454 80%
Detached 49,686 76%
Attached 2,768 4%
Multi Family 11,329 14%
2-4 Units 2,640 4%
5+ Units 8,689 10%
Mobile Homes/Other 3,394 6%
Total Units 67,177 100%
Vacancy Rate 4.14% (2,781 units)
Sources: State Department of Finance, 2008.
2. Vacancy Rates
Vacancy rates are a useful indicator of the housing market’s overall health and
ability to accommodate new residents within the existing housing stock. Table 6-13
on page 18 outlines vacancy rates by tenure according to the 2000 U.S. Census.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-18
The actual vacancy rate is likely higher than either the Department of Finance or
the U.S. Census estimates due to the increase of foreclosures and the credit crisis.
A recent report on Housing Vacancies and Homeownership by the U.S. Census
Bureau indicates a significant jump nationwide in vacancy rates. In the western
region, the 2008 third quarter (Q3) vacancy rate for rentals is estimated at 7.6
percent (up from 6.8 percent in 2007 Q3) and the vacancy rate for ownership units
is estimated at 2.8 percent (up from 2.5 percent in 2007 Q3). The 2006 American
Community Survey indicates the countywide vacancy rate in 2007 was 7.6 percent
with the rental vacancy rate at 8.1 percent and the homeowner vacancy rate at 2.7
percent. Based on the 2000 Census, the unincorporated County had a slightly
higher vacancy rate than the overall County vacancy rate. The increase can mostly
be attributed to a higher percentage of recreational/occasional use units located in
unincorporated areas of the County such as Bethel Island and Discovery Bay.
Table 6-13
Vacancy Rates by Tenure
Housing Type Total Units % of
Total
Total Vacant Units 2,376 4.15%
For rent only 415 0.72%
For sale only 427 0.75%
Rental/Sold – not occupied 374 0.65%
Seasonal/occasional use 971 1.70%
other 189 0.33%
Sources: 2000 U.S. Census
3. Housing Age and Condition
Housing age is an important indicator of housing condition within a community
because like any other tangible asset, housing is subject to gradual physical or
technological deterioration over time. If not properly and regularly maintained,
housing can deteriorate and discourage reinvestment, depress neighboring property
values, and eventually impact the quality of life in a neighborhood. Thus
maintaining and improving housing quality is an important goal for the County.
A general rule in the housing industry is that structures older than 30 years begin
to show signs of deterioration and require reinvestment to maintain their quality.
Unless properly maintained, homes older than 50 years require major renovations
to remain in good working order. Table 6-14 on the following page provides a
breakdown of the housing stock in unincorporated areas of the County by the year
built.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-19
Table 6-14
Housing Age-Year Built by Tenure
Year Built Number of Units % of Total Units
Less than 30 years old 19,199 35.0%
Owner 14,192 25.9%
Rental 5,007 9.1%
Between 30 and 50 years old 16,375 29.8%
Owner 11,794 21.5%
Rental 4,581 8.3%
More than 50 years old 19,296 35.2%
Owner 14,325 26.1%
Rental 4,971 9.1%
Total Occupied Units 54,870 100.0%
Source: 2000 Census, data is provided by occupied units only. Note the percentage of total units does not
include any units built since 2000.
Based on the data above, there is a strong likelihood that many homes will require
reinvestment or renovations to ensure the housing stock is maintained in good
working order. Both the County Redevelopment Agency and the Building Inspection
Division have identified areas of the County that may be in need of rehabilitation
assistance including Bay Point, Bethel Island, Byron, Clyde, Crockett, El Sobrante,
Montalvin Manor, North Richmond, Rodeo and Vine Hill (near Martinez).
Redevelopment Agency funds may be used to rehabilitate housing stock within the
redevelopment areas and the County Building Inspection Division (BID) currently
offers the Neighborhood Preservation Program, which provides zero and low-
interest loans for the rehabilitation of housing owned and occupied by lower-income
households in the unincorporated areas. Additionally, the County Housing Authority
offers the Rental Rehabilitation Program that provides low-interest loans for the
rehabilitation of rental housing occupied by lower-income households.
4. Housing Costs & Affordability
The cost of housing is directly related to the extent of housing problems in a
community. If housing costs are relatively high in comparison to household income,
there will be a correspondingly higher prevalence of housing cost burden and
overcrowding. This section summarizes the cost and affordability of the housing
stock to County residents.
Sales and Rental Survey
Home sales prices vary significantly by location in Contra Costa County. For
instance, the 2007 median price of a single-family ranged from a low of $415,000
in Richmond to a high of $1.8 million in Diablo. However, in September 2008,
median prices ranged from a high of $1.1 million in Alamo to a low of $200,000 in
Bay Point/Pittsburg. Home prices are generally higher in the Central sub-region
than in the East and West sub-regions. As indicated in Table 6-15 on the following
page, both cities and unincorporated communities in the Central sub-region had
very high median home sales prices. In particular, the 2007 median single-family
home sales prices in Alamo and Diablo were in excess of $1.2 million. Homes are
relatively more affordable in the East and West sub-regions, with the exception of
selected communities. For example, the unincorporated community of Discovery
Bay had median sales prices well above most of its neighbors in the East. Similarly,
home prices in the City of El Cerrito were noticeably higher than that in nearby
communities in the West.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-20
Condominiums or townhomes are typically more affordable than single-family
homes and represent alternative homeownership opportunities, especially for low-
and moderate-income households.
According to data compiled by RealData, Inc. (June, 2008), apartment rental rates
are relatively high and continuing to rise in Contra Costa County. The average gross
monthly unfurnished rent (excluding utility costs) in the unincorporated County was
$1,430 in June 2008, representing an increase of 5 percent since June 2007. Like
home sales prices, rental rates also vary by size and location of the units, as
indicated in Table 6-16. Countywide, the average rent ranged from $936 for a 1-
bedroom to $2,237 for a 2-bedroom in Central County. Geographically, the lowest
average rent was recorded in unincorporated Bay Point ($909), while the highest
was in the Contra Costa Centre ($2,480).
As of June 2008, the vacancy rate for apartment units in Contra Costa County was
4.4 percent, as compared to 4.1% for the Bay Area as a whole. This vacancy rate is
anticipated to decrease as families leaving foreclosed homes create additional
demand for rentals.
Table 6-15
2007 and 2008 Median Single-family Home Sales Prices
Jurisdiction 2008 2007
East
Bay Point* $219,000 $470,000
Bethel Island N/A $575,000
Byron/Discovery Bay $170,000 $562,000
Central
Alamo $1,300,000 $1,430,000
Blackhawk* $952,000 $997,500
Diablo $2,056,250 $1,800,500
Pacheco* $389,000 $250,000
Contra Costa Centre* $500,000 $569,000
West
Crockett N/A $450,000
El Sobrante $349,000 $505,000
Kensington* $850,000 $634,500
North Richmond* $135,000 $430,000
Rodeo $273,000 $457,000
Montalvin Manor/Tara Hills* $233,000 $445,000
Source: Dataquick, 2008.
* These unincorporated Communities share a zip code with the adjacent city. Data is provided by zip code.
Table 6-16
Apartment Rents
Type: Bedroom (BR) Region 1 BR 2 BR 3 BR Overall Average Rent
East $936.00 $1,074.00 $1,313.00 $1,108.00
Central $1,582.00 $2,237.00 $ - $1,910.00
West $1,148.00 $1,395.00 $ - $1,272.00
Countywide Average $1,222.00 $1,569.00 $1,313.00 $1,430.00
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-21
5. Housing Affordability by Household Income
Housing affordability can be inferred by comparing the cost of renting or owning a
home in the County with the maximum affordable housing costs to households at
different income levels. Taken together, this information can generally show who
can afford what size and type of housing and indicate the type of households most
likely to experience overcrowding or a burden on housing cost.
The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) conducts annual
household income surveys nationwide, including Contra Costa County, to determine
the maximum affordable housing payments of different households and their
eligibility for federal housing assistance. In evaluating affordability, the maximum
affordable price refers to the maximum amount that could be afforded by
households in the upper range of their respective income category. Households in
the lower end of each category can afford less in comparison. Table 6-17 shows the
annual income for extremely-low, very-low, low, and moderate-income households
by household size and the maximum affordable housing payment based on the
State and federal standards of 30 percent of household income. Cost assumptions
for utilities, taxes, and property insurance are also shown.
From the income and housing cost figures in Table 6-17, the maximum affordable
home price and rent are determined. The affordable housing prices and rents can
be compared to current market prices for single-family homes, condominiums, and
apartments to determine what types of housing opportunities a household can
afford.
Table 6-17
Housing Affordability Matrix (2008)
Income Group Income Levels Monthly Housing Costs Maximum Affordable
Price
Annual
Income
Affordable
Payment
Utilities
Own/Rent
Taxes &
Insurance Ownership Rental
Extremely Low
One Person $18,100 $452 $169/$ 62 $78 $37,480 $390
Small Family $23,250 $581 $235/$ 96 $111 $54,432 $482
Large Family $27,900 $698 $319/$124 $141 $67,835 $574
Very Low
One Person $30,150 $754 $169/$ 62 $184 $74,804 $692
Small Family $38,750 $969 $235/$ 96 $239 $101,443 $873
Large Family $46,500 $1,162 $319/$124 $284 $125,448 $1,038
Low
One Person $46,350 $1,159 $169/$ 62 $266 $127,706 $1,097
Small Family $59,600 $1,490 $235/$ 96 $353 $169,642 $1,394
Large Family $71,550 $1,789 $319/$124 $432 $207,464 $1,665
Moderate
One Person $72,360 $1,809 $169/$ 62 $467 $224,124 $1,747
Small Family $93,000 $2,325 $235/$ 96 $600 $288,066 $2,229
Large Family $111,600 $2,790 $319/$124 $720 $345,680 $2,666
Notations:
1. Small Family = 3 persons; Large Families = 5 or more persons
2. Monthly affordable rent based upon payments of no more than 30% of household income
3. Property taxes and insurance based on averages for the region.
4. Affordable home price is based on down payment of 10%, annual interest of 7%, a 30-year mortgage, and
monthly payment of 30% of gross household income.
Note: Maximum affordable home prices are for illustrative purposes only, and not to be used for determining
specific program eligibility.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-22
Extremely Low-Income Households: Extremely low-income households earn 30
percent or less of the County median family income. Given housing costs in Contra
Costa County, extremely low-income households cannot afford any homes or
apartments at market rate. Affordable housing for such households is generally
limited to housing offered by the Housing Authority of Contra Costa County and
non-profit housing providers. The County Board of Supervisors adopted a policy
requiring housing developed with County subsidy to target some units to be
affordable to extremely-low income households. The County HOME and CDBG
subsidized projects generally have 10 percent of the units at this level. However,
some of the extremely-low income households are homeless or at risk of
homelessness. These households are generally under-employed or living on social
security income. Even apartment rents that are affordable to the top of the
extremely-low income limit are out of reach for this group. Therefore, the County
provides additional housing opportunities through public housing, housing choice
vouchers, HUD Shelter + Care, and Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) rental
subsidy programs.
Very Low-Income Households: Very low-income households earn 50 percent or
less of the County median family income. Given the relatively high costs of single-
family homes and condominiums in the County, the housing choice of very-low
income households is generally limited to the rental housing market. Buyers in this
income group have very limited options, but may be able to purchase mobile homes
or small condominiums.
Average apartment rents in the County are as follows: $1,222 for a one-bedroom
unit, $1,569 for a two-bedroom unit (with one bath), and $1,313 for a three-
bedroom apartment.7 After deductions for utilities, a very-low income household
can only afford to pay between $692 and $1,038 in rent per month, depending on
the household size. In practical terms, this means that a one-person household
cannot afford an average priced one-bedroom without overpaying or doubling up.
Based on the range of rental rates shown in Table 6-16 (page 20), a small number
of one-bedroom units may be affordable to very low-income households. However,
most rental units are out of reach for a small family (2 to 4 persons). The problem
is exacerbated for larger families (5+ persons).
Low-Income Households: Low-income households earn 80 percent or less of the
County’s median family income. The maximum affordable home price for a low-
income household ranges from $127,706 for one-person to $207,464 for a five-
person family. Based on the sales data presented in Table 6-15 (page 20), low-
income households cannot afford the median sales price for a home. However,
some older homes and condominium units, especially in areas with a high rate of
foreclosures may be affordable to this income group.
After deductions for utilities, a low-income household can afford to pay between
$1,097 and $1,665 in rent each month, depending on household size. One-person
and small family households can theoretically afford a one-bedroom unit in selected
communities, although the supply of such units may be limited. Large families can
afford some two-bedroom units. However, such families are likely to overpay
7 There were no three-bedroom apartments in the review of apartment buildings with 100+ units in the central or west
area of the unincorporated County. Rents are significantly higher in Central County. Had there been three-bedroom units
in the subject properties in Central County, the average three-bedroom rent would have likely been greater than the
average two-bedroom rent.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-23
and/or double up to afford housing. Central County remains largely unaffordable to
low-income households.
Moderate-Income Households: Moderate-income households earn 81 percent to
120 percent of the County’s median family income. The maximum affordable home
price for a moderate-income household ranges from $224,124 for a one-person
household, to $345,680 for a five-person family. Moderate income families may be
able to afford nearly half of the homes on the market. With a maximum affordable
rent payment of between $1,747 and $2,666 per month, moderate-income
households can afford many of the apartment units listed for rent.
6. Overcrowded Households
In order to avoid extraordinary housing costs, many lower income households rent
smaller apartments or live with friends or relatives to economize on housing costs.
For the purposes of this report, overcrowding is defined as households with more
than one occupant per room.
While the percentages of households that are overcrowded are not significantly
different in the unincorporated portion of Contra Costa County compared to the
County as a whole, there are some communities with a high percentage of
overcrowding. These communities include unincorporated areas of San Pablo
(Rollingwood and Montalvin Manor) and Bay Point. The SF3 census report indicates
that for the entire County, 4.2 percent of owner households and 14.7 percent renter
households are overcrowded in their homes. The unincorporated County
demographics are generally fairly consistent with the countywide figures. Therefore,
approximately 2,317 owner households and 2,162 renter households are
overcrowded. County finance programs support the development of multi-family
housing with three and four bedroom units.
Table 6-18
Overcrowded Households in Unincorporated Contra Costa County
Community
Number of Overcrowded
Households
Percent Overcrowded
Total Contra Costa County 9,948 4.17%
Total Unincorporated 1,840 4.56%
Alamo 21 0.43%
Bay Point 606 14.41%
Bayview-Montalvin 203 16.79%
Bethel Island 7 0.80%
Blackhawk-Camino Tassajara 6 0.19%
Byron 11 4.91%
Clyde 7 3.37%
Contra Costa Centre 7 0.90%
Crockett 13 1.44%
Diablo 0 0.00%
Discovery Bay 33 1.11%
East Richmond Heights 33 2.94%
El Sobrante 82 2.85%
Kensington 8 0.43%
Knightsen 20 8.97%
Mountain View 0 0.00%
Pacheco 51 4.02%
Port Costa 0 0.00%
Rodeo 81 4.30%
Rollingwood 211 38.43%
Tara Hills 162 12.48%
Vine Hill 56 7.73%
Source: 2000 Census
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-24
D. Special Housing Needs Analysis
Certain groups have greater difficulty in finding decent, affordable housing due to
their special needs and/or circumstances. Special circumstances may be related to
one’s employment and income, family characteristics, disability, and household
characteristics, among others. As a result, certain segments of residents in Contra
Costa County may experience a higher prevalence of lower income, housing cost
burden, overcrowding, or other housing problems.
“Special needs” groups include the following: senior households, mentally and
physically disabled persons, large households, single-parent households (female-
headed households with children in particular), homeless persons, and agricultural
workers. This section provides a detailed discussion of the housing needs facing
each particular group as well as programs and services available to address their
housing needs.
Determining the housing issues of special need groups is easier than defining the
magnitude. The 2000 Census is the most current data available and the primary
source used to estimate the size of a particular group. Recent information from
service providers and government agencies is used to supplement the 2000 data.
Table 6-19 summarizes the special needs groups residing in unincorporated areas
of the County.
Table 6-19
Special Needs Groups
Special Needs Group
Persons
Households
% of Unincorporated
County
Seniors (65 years and older) 11,130 18.9%
Owners 9,362 15.9%
Renters 1,768 3.0%
Disabled (16 years and older) 25,065 19.0%(1)
Single Parent Households 4,526 10.6%
Large Households 6,918 12.6%
Owners 4,782 8.7%
Renters 1,943 3.5%
Agricultural Workers 342 2%(2)
Homeless Persons 4,800 0.04%
Source: 2000 Census
(1) Percent of total persons 16 years and older, employment estimates for persons 16-64 years old
(2) Percent of total employed persons
** May represents an undercount—please refer to discussion on the homeless on page 30.
1. Senior Households
Senior households have special housing needs primarily due to three major
concerns –physical disabilities/limitations, income, and health care costs. According
to the 2000 Census, 18.9 percent (11,130) of households in the unincorporated
areas of Contra Costa County were headed by seniors, defined as persons 65 years
and older. Countywide, there were 67,152 elderly households (20 percent). Some
of the special needs of seniors are as follows:
• Limited Income - Many seniors have limited income available for health and
other expenses. Because of their retired status, one out of three elderly
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-25
households (33 percent) in Contra Costa County earns extremely low or very
low-income.8
• Disabilities - Of the senior population Countywide, 39.6 percent have a
disability limitation. Over 80 percent of elderly households (9,362) in the
unincorporated areas were homeowners in 2000. Because of physical and/or
other limitations, senior homeowners may have difficulty in carrying out
regular home maintenance or repair activities.
• Cost Burden - Because of the limited supply of affordable housing and their
limited income, 31.9 percent of senior households in the County experience
housing cost burden.9 The prevalence of housing cost burden varies
significantly by tenure: 25.9 percent of homeowners and 57.5 percent of
renters.
Various programs can address the special needs of seniors, including but not limited
to congregate care, supportive services, rental subsidies, shared housing, and
housing rehabilitation assistance. For the frail elderly, or those with disabilities,
housing with architectural design features that accommodate disabilities can help
ensure continued independent living. Elderly with mobility/self-care limitations also
benefit from transportation alternatives. The Contra Costa County Advisory Council
on Aging has adopted Best Practice Development Guidelines for Multi-Family Senior
Housing projects. These guidelines provide a framework to help guide the planning,
design, and review of new senior housing developments in the County. The
guidelines are an information tool for local community groups, architects, planners,
and developers. Senior housing with supportive services can be provided for those
who require assistance with daily living.
Social and supportive services are available in Contra Costa County through various
agencies and organizations, including (but not limited to): the County Area Agency
on Aging, Older Adults Clinics, Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center, Health
Insurance Counseling and Advocacy Program, and John Muir Senior Services
Program. The County Area Agency on Aging, in particular, offers information
services for seniors on a variety of topics, including: health, housing, nutrition,
activities, help in home, employment, legal matters, transportation, financial or
personal problems, paralegal advice, day activities for the disabled, and health
screening.
2. Disabled Persons
Physical, mental, and/or developmental disabilities may prevent a person from
working, restrict one’s mobility, or make it difficult to care for oneself. Thus,
disabled persons often have special housing needs related to potentially limited
earning capacity, the lack of accessible and affordable housing, and higher health
costs associated with a disability. Some residents suffer from disabilities that
require living in a supportive or institutional setting.
The 2000 Census defines four types of disabilities: sensory, physical, mental, and
self-care limitations. Disabilities are defined as mental, physical or health conditions
that last over six months.
8 Extremely low is defined as below 30% of area median family income. Very low is between 30% and 50% of area
median family income.
9 Lower- and moderate-income households that spend more than 30% of their incomes on housing costs (including
mortgage or rent, utilities, taxes, and insurance) are typically considered as overpaying for housing, experience a housing
cost burden.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-26
According to the Census, a total of 25,065 persons with disability resided in the
unincorporated County areas, representing approximately 19 percent of the
population 16 years of age or older. The unemployment rate of persons with
disabilities is significantly higher than the total population with 46.6 percent of
disabled residents over 16 years old not employed.
In 2000, an estimated 140,147 persons (16 years and above) Countywide had
some form of disability related to work, mental, mobility, or self-care limitations.
The Regional Center of the East Bay estimated in 2000 that there were over 3,000
individuals in the County with developmental disabilities. Persons with
developmental disabilities may have communication and learning disorders and
may lack basic life skills.
The living arrangement of disabled persons depends on the severity of the
disability. Many live at home independently or with other family members. To
maintain independent living, disabled persons may need assistance. This can
include special housing design features for the disabled, income support for those
who are unable to work, and in-home supportive services for persons with medical
conditions among others. Services are typically provided by both public and private
agencies.
As shown in Table 6-20, 38 licensed community care facilities are located in the
unincorporated areas, including 1 small family home, 10 group homes, 26 elderly
residential facilities and 1 adult day care. The majority of care facilities are for the
elderly, reflecting the special needs of senior residents, especially those with
disabilities.
Independent Living Resource (ILR), an area non-profit organization, provides
information and referral, attendant referral, advocacy, housing assistance, and peer
counseling services for persons with disabilities. ILR also offers advocacy services,
which aim to maintain or increase access to services, benefits, and other social
services and advises clients regarding their rights under Section 504 of the federal
Rehabilitation Act of 1972 for disabled individuals. ILR’s housing referral services
assist clients by maintaining a registry of accessible, adaptable, affordable
apartments and houses, information on how to adapt a living environment to a
Table 6-20
Licensed Community Care Facilities
Type of Facility Facilities Capacity (beds)
Small Family Home1 1 4
Group Home2 10 56
Adult Day Care3 1 15
Elderly Residential4 26 163
Total 38 238
Notes:
1. Small family homes provide care to children in licensee’s own homes.
2. Group homes provide specialized treatment for persons under age 18.
3. Adult day care facilities provide care for adults with various disabilities or disorders.
4. Elderly residential facilities provide care for persons age 60 and above.
Source: Contra Costa County Consolidated Plan
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-27
disabled individual's needs, and assistance in obtaining a low-income housing
subsidy.
However, ILR reports that there is a scarcity of appropriate housing for persons
with disabilities. They report that there is a need for more accessible, adaptable,
and affordable housing. The County requires that all newly constructed housing
using federal funds include five percent of the units to be accessible to the
physically impaired and an additional two percent accessible to hearing and vision
impaired. Federally funded rehabilitation projects must include accessibility
improvements to the extent practicable. Due to the non-standard design and
construction requirements, accessible units are more expensive to construct. In
addition, the disabled tenants generally have incomes well below the extremely-low
income limits. Therefore, they need extremely-low rents or rent subsidies. The
combination of higher construction costs and lower rent revenues require greater
subsidies to provide these units. Housing choice is further limited because to
mitigate the higher construction costs and lower rents, developers typically want to
provide only one-bedroom units. This makes it difficult for a disabled individual with
a live-in care giver, or a family unit, to find suitable housing.
The managers of both new and rehabilitation projects affirmatively outreach to
organizations such as ILR to advertise vacancies. Even with these efforts, there is
still a shortage of housing affordable to those whose income is limited to state and
federal assistance programs. The County’s Neighborhood Preservation Program
makes accessibility improvements to owner-occupied homes.
The County has provided HOME funds to several projects in the unincorporated
County for disabled populations. The most recent project, ABC Apartments, was
provided a significant reduction in the parking standard to help facilitate the
development. The County Health Services Department, in cooperation with the
Department of Conservation and Development (DCD), has provided Mental Health
Services Act (MHSA) funds to three projects. All three happen to be located in
cities, but still help to address a countywide need.
Transportation service for persons with disabilities is available through County
Connection Link made available by the Central Contra Costa Transit Authority.
Under this program, door-to-door, dial-a-ride paratransit services are offered to
individuals with disabilities. Transportation services are also provided by WestCat
and Tri-Delta Transit Services.
3. Single-Parent Households
Because of their relatively lower incomes and higher living expenses, single-parent
households are more likely to have difficulty finding affordable, decent, and safe
housing. These households often require special consideration and assistance as a
result of their greater need for affordable housing, accessible day care/childcare,
health care, and other supportive services necessary to balance the needs of their
children with work responsibilities.
An estimated 4,526 single parent families lived in the unincorporated areas of the
County in 1990, representing 10.6 percent of all families (2000 Census).
Countywide, there were a total of 28,252 single parent families, comprising 11.6
percent of all families in the County. Single mother families still represent the
majority (75 percent) of all single parent families countywide, with an increasing
number of single fathers struggling to balance work and child care. Within
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-28
unincorporated areas, approximately 25.3 percent of single-female headed
households and 15.4 percent of single-male headed households with children lived
in poverty in 2000, compared to just 3.7 percent of married-couple families with
children. Supportive services for single mothers are available through various non-
profit organizations in the County, including Brighter Beginnings, Pregnancy Center
of Contra Costa, and Mount Diablo Adult Education, among others.
Battered women with children comprise a sub-group of female-headed households
that are especially in need. In Contra Costa County, the largest agency serving
battered women is STAND! Against Domestic Violence. STAND! houses 300
battered women and 350 children in Contra Costa annually, and offers a variety of
services to victims of domestic violence, including a crisis line, a 24-bed emergency
shelter, a transitional housing center, legal advocacy, employment assistance, and
a batterer’s treatment program.
The County’s “Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence” Initiative (Zero Tolerance) is a
multi-jurisdictional partnership designed to reduce domestic violence, family
violence, and elder abuse in Contra Costa County. The Initiative objectives are
implemented through a comprehensive, coordinated, and community-wide
approach that interrupts the progressive cycle of violence. The Initiative develops
and delivers direct services through its partners and advances policy change. Zero
Tolerance is a collaborative effort among many disciplines:
o Superior Court of California, Contra Costa County
o Office of the Sheriff
o Office of the District Attorney
o Office of the Public Defender
o Employment and Human Services (including Children & Family Services,
Workforce Services, and Adult Protective Services [APS])
o Probation Department
o Health Department (e.g., APS, and Alcohol and Other Drugs)
And the following community service providers:
o STAND! Against Domestic Violence
o Bay Area Legal Aid
o Community Violence Solutions
4. Large Households
Large households are defined as those consisting of five or more members. These
households comprise a special need group, because of the often limited supply of
adequately sized, affordable housing units in a community. In order to save for
other basic necessities such as food, clothing and medical care, it is common for
lower-income large households to reside in smaller units, which frequently results in
overcrowding. An estimated 6,918 large households resided in the unincorporated
areas in 2000, 28.1 percent (1,943) of which were renter households. Countywide,
there were a total of 43,359 large households, of which 31.3 percent were renters.
The housing needs of large households are typically met through larger units. As of
2000, the unincorporated areas in the County had 30,405 owner-occupied and
3,893 renter-occupied large units (with three or more bedrooms) that could
accommodate large households. However, many of these units are single-family
homes and are expensive; they are not likely to be occupied by lower-income
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-29
renter households. Therefore, overcrowding is more prevalent among large renter
households.
To address overcrowding, communities can provide incentives to facilitate the
development of affordable apartments with three or more bedrooms to meet the
needs of large households. Oftentimes, the shortage of large rental units can be
alleviated through the provision of affordable ownership housing opportunities, such
as condominiums coupled with homeownership assistance and self-help housing
(through Habitat for Humanity and other similar organizations). Also, Section 8
rental assistance provided by the Housing Authority of Contra Costa County
(HACCC) can enable large families to rent units they otherwise cannot afford.
The HACCC currently manages 447 public housing units for families in the
unincorporated areas. With a total of 250 units for families, Bayo Vista in Rodeo is
the largest public housing development in the unincorporated areas.
5. Agricultural Workers
Agriculture has been an important, but recently declining industry in Contra Costa
County. In 2006, the total gross value of agricultural products and crops was $86.9
million, a significant drop since 1997 when the gross value was estimated at $95.2
million. Approximately 54 percent of land Countywide is allocated to farmlands and
harvested cropland (County Department of Agriculture). According to the 2002
Census of Agriculture, 592 farms were operating in Contra Costa County, the
majority of which were less than 50 acres in size.
Agricultural workers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary incomes are
earned through permanent or seasonal agricultural labor. Permanent farm laborers
work in the fields, processing plants, or support activities on a generally year-round
basis. When workload increases during harvest periods, the labor force is
supplemented by seasonal labor, often supplied by a labor contractor. For some
crops, farms may employ migrant workers, defined as those whose travel distance
to work prevents them from returning to their primary residence every evening.
Determining the true size of the agricultural labor force is problematic because the
government agencies that track farm labor do not consistently define farmworkers
(e.g., field laborers versus workers in processing plants), length of employment
(e.g., permanent or seasonal), or place of work (e.g., the location of the business
or field).
According to the 2002 Agricultural Census, 2,604 workers were employed on farms
in Contra Costa County. Of these persons, 1,529 or 29 percent were residents in
the unincorporated areas. A Statewide study of migrant and seasonal farmworkers
completed in 2000 estimated that 2,470 migrant and seasonal farmworkers were
working in Contra Costa County, with an estimated 700 in unincorporated County.
(Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker Enumeration Profiles Study -- California, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, 2000). Based on discussions with
various agencies, the County understands that the majority of the farmworker
population in the unincorporated areas consists of resident-households requiring
permanent affordable housing rather than migratory workers with seasonal housing
needs.
Farmworkers are generally considered to have special housing needs because of
their limited income and the often unstable nature of their employment (i.e., having
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-30
to move throughout the year from one harvest to the next). While no local survey is
available which documents the specific housing needs of farm labor in Contra Costa
County, Statewide surveys provide some insight into the demographic
characteristics and housing needs of farmworkers. Among the major findings are:
o Limited Income - Farmworkers typically earn very low incomes. According to
the Rural Community Assistance Corporation, three-quarters of California’s
farmworkers earned less than $10,000 a year in 2000. Only one out of seven
earned more than $12,500 annually.
o Overcrowding - Because of their very low incomes, farmworkers have limited
housing options and are often forced to double up to afford rents. A
Statewide survey indicates that overcrowding is prevalent and a significant
housing problem among farmworkers (The Parlier Survey, California Institute
for Rural Studies, 1997).
o Substandard Housing Conditions - Many farmworkers live in overcrowded
conditions and substandard housing, including informal shacks, illegal garage
units, and other structures generally unsuitable for occupancy (The Parlier
Survey, 1997).
The provision of adequate housing for farmworkers and their families is a rising
concern in the State. Under the County’s Zoning Code, farm labor housing is
permitted in the agricultural zoning districts (A-2, A-3, A-4, A-20, A-40, and A-80)
subject to a land use permit.
To meet the housing needs of farmworkers, the County has provided CDBG and/or
HOME funding for various developments in East County that provide affordable
homeownership opportunities for extremely low and very low-income households,
including many farmworker families. These projects include Via de Guadelupe,
Najara Estates, Colonia Santa Maria, Marsh Creek Vista, Arroyo Seco, and Villa
Amador totaling 339 units. The County recognizes the importance of providing
affordable housing to the farmworker population.
6. Homeless Persons
The County Health Services Department (HSD) develops plans and programs to
assist the homeless throughout Contra Costa County. In 2004, the County adopted
the “Ending Homelessness in Ten Years: A County-Wide Plan for the Communities
of Contra Costa County” (Ten Year Plan). Through the Ten Year Plan, the County
has adopted a “housing first” strategy, which works to immediately house a
homeless individual or family rather than force them through a sequence of
temporary shelter solutions. The Ten Year Plan further deemphasizes emergency
shelters by supporting “interim housing” as a preferred housing type. Interim
housing is very short-term and focuses on helping people access permanent
housing as quickly as possible. Services provided in interim housing include housing
search assistance and case management to help address immediate needs and
identify longer-term issues to be dealt with once in permanent housing.
The Contra Costa Inter-jurisdictional Council on Homelessness (CCICH) is charged
with providing a forum for communication about the implementation of the Ten
Year Plan and providing advice and input on the operations of homeless services,
program operations, and program development efforts in Contra Costa County.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-31
The Ten Year Plan estimated 15,000 people in Contra Costa County experience an
episode of homelessness annually. It further estimated that on any given night,
4,800 people are homeless, i.e., living on the streets or in temporary
accommodations, such as an emergency shelter. More than three-quarters of them
are members of a family, including nearly 7,000 children. Additionally, many others
are at risk of becoming homeless, especially very low-income households who are
overpaying for housing and struggling to make ends meet. However, in January
2007, the County Homeless program staff in coordination with CCICH conducted a
count of homeless people and families. This count identified 2,408 sheltered
homeless individuals. An additional 1,749 individuals were without shelter. Only 93
of these individuals were counted in the unincorporated County. Due to the
transient nature of homeless people and the sometimes difficult to determine
borders between the cities and County, it is difficult to determine with any precision
exactly how many of the homeless people are from, or sleeping in, the
unincorporated County. It is likely that the number of unsheltered homeless in the
unincorporated County is higher than the number reported in the count. A revised
estimate that is proportional to the ratio of the unincorporated population to the
total County population results in approximately 300 unsheltered homeless
individuals in the unincorporated County on any given night.
Consistent with the Ten Year Plan, the County will prioritize the use of its limited
housing development resources to support permanent housing affordable to those
with extremely-low, very-low and low incomes. Table 6-21 is a listing of the major
housing facilities for the homeless in Contra Costa County. These facilities serve a
variety of homeless persons, including battered women and children, mentally
and/or physically disabled persons, individuals recovering from substance abuse,
and needy families.
Under the County’s Zoning Code, emergency shelters and transitional housing
designed to meet the needs of those who are homeless or formerly homeless are
permitted in all residential zones subject to a land use permit. In addition, these
facilities are allowed in most commercial and industrial districts with a land use
permit. (See the discussion on programmed changes to the zoning code to
accommodate emergency shelters and transitional housing ‘by-right’ in Section 6.3,
Housing Constraints).
Table 6-21
Contra Costa Homeless Facility Inventory
Facility Name Region Target Population
Total Year-
Round
Beds
Interim Housing (Emergency Shelters)
Bay Area Crisis Nursery Richmond Single men & women 20
Calli House Youth Shelter Richmond Transition-age youth 6
Concord & Brookside Adult
Interim Housing
Concord and
Richmond Single men & women 175
East County Shelter Antioch Single men & women 20
Emergency Shelter Richmond Families with children 75
Family Emergency Shelter Concord Families with children 30
Rescue Mission Richmond Families with children 150
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-32
Table 6-21
Contra Costa Homeless Facility Inventory
Facility Name Region Target Population
Total Year-
Round
Beds
Rollie Mullen Center Confidential Domestic Violence 24
Shepherd’s Gate Mixed 30
Winter Nights Shelter Various Mixed 0
Transitional Housing
Appian House: Youth Richmond Transition-age youth 6
Deliverance House Families with children 12
East County Transitional Housing Antioch Families with children 70
MOVE Confidential Domestic Violence 28
Next Step Central County Mixed 7
Pittsburg Family Center Pittsburg Families with children 32
Pride and Purpose House Richmond Children 6
Project Independence Richmond Mixed 25
Prop 36 Housing Scattered Site Single men and women
REACH Plus Scattered Site Mixed 128
San Joaquin II Richmond Families with children 20
Transitional Housing Richmond Mixed 44
Transitional Housing Children 5
Permanent Housing
ACCESS Scattered Site Single men and women 30
Aspen Court Central County HIV/AIDS 2
Casa Barrett West County Single men and women 6
Casa Lago Antioch Single men and women 13
Casa Verde Single men and women 11
Garden Parks Apartments Pleasant Hill HIV/AIDs, Small families 28
Idaho Apartments Richmond Single men and women 28
Maple House Concord Single men and women 5
Mary McGovern House Concord Single men and women 6
Project Coming Home Scattered Site Single men and women 40
Shelter Plus Care Scattered Site Mixed 318
Sunset House Pittsburg Single men and women 8
Transitional Housing Partnership Scattered Site Mixed 37
Walter’s Way House Concord Single men and women 12
West Richmond Apartments Richmond Single men and women 4
Source: Contra Costa County Interagency Council on Homelessness, 2008.
As a means to help meet the special needs of the homeless, the Contra Costa Crisis
Center operates a 24-hour homeless hotline that connects homeless individuals and
families to resources available in the County. Through the Center, homeless
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-33
persons are given emergency motel vouchers, provided free voice mail boxes, and
referred to local programs that offer housing, job training, substance abuse
treatment, mental health counseling, emergency food, health care, and other
services.
HSD provides emergency and transitional shelter as well as supportive services
designed to enable homeless persons to achieve greater economic independence
and a stable living environment. HSD coordinates the activities of and provides staff
support to CCICH, which consists of representatives from local jurisdictions,
homeless service providers, advocacy and volunteer groups, the business and faith
communities, residents at large, and previously or currently homeless persons.
E. Loss of Assisted Housing
Affordability covenants and deed restrictions are typically used to maintain the
affordability of publicly assisted housing, ensuring that these units are available to
lower and moderate-income households in the long term. Every year, the County
faces the risk of losing some of its affordable units due to expiration of covenants
and deed restrictions. As the tight housing market continues to put upward
pressure on market rents, property owners are more inclined to discontinue public
subsidies and convert the assisted units to market rate housing.
The previous Housing Element identified Byron Park as at-risk for conversion to
market rate housing. The owners of this property refinanced using tax-exempt
bonds thereby maintaining its affordability. The property is now in the Walnut Creek
city limits and is no longer included on the list of projects in the unincorporated
County. Rivershore Apartments are at-risk of converting to market rate within the
next 10 years.
Rivershore Apartments is a 245 unit apartment complex in Bay Point. In exchange
for assistance through the County tax-exempt bond program, the development
allocates 49 affordable units for low income families. The affordability restriction on
Rivershore Apartments is set to expire in 2017. The analysis below provides the
options for preserving and/or replacing the affordable units in Rivershore.
Preservation and Replacement Options: To maintain the existing affordable
housing stock, the County must either preserve the existing assisted units or
replenish the affordable housing inventory with new units. Depending on the
circumstances of at-risk projects, different options may be used to preserve or
replace the units. Preservation options typically include: 1) transfer of project to
non-profit ownership; 2) provision of rental assistance to tenants using non-federal
funding sources; 3) tax-exempt bond refinancing; and 4) purchase of affordability
covenants. With regard to replacement, the most direct option is the development
of new assisted multi-family housing units. These options are described below,
specifically in relation to the preservation/replacement of at-risk units in
Rivershore.
1) Transfer of Ownership: Transferring ownership of an at-risk project to a non-
profit housing provider is generally one of the least costly ways to ensure that the
at-risk units remain affordable for the long term. By transferring property
ownership to a non-profit organization, low-income restrictions can be secured for
55 years and the project would become potentially eligible for a greater range of
governmental assistance. Because it is not possible to only acquire the 49
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-34
affordable units in Rivershore, the estimated market value is calculated for all 245
units in the project, as indicated in Table 6-22:
Table 6-22
Market Value of At-Risk Project
Project Information Total
1- bedroom units 44
2- bedroom units 145
3- bedroom units 56
Total Units 245
Annual Operating Costs $ 1,513,365
Annual Gross Income $ 3,184,476
Net Annual Income $ 1,671,111
Estimated Market Value $23,395,554
Market value for project is estimated with the following assumptions:
1. Estimated market rents: 1-bdrm - ; 2-bdrm - ; 3-bdrm.
2. Vacancy rate is 5%.
3. Annual operating expenses is estimated to be $ 6,177 based on information from Bay Area Local Initiatives Support Coalition Operating Cost Database. An estimate of expenses as 40% of revenue would yield an annual income of $2 million.
4. Market value = Annual net project income x multiplication factor.
5. Industry standard multiplication factor for a building in moderate condition is 14.
Current market value for the units is estimated on the basis of the project’s
potential annual income, and operating and maintenance expenses. As indicated
above, the estimated market value of the 245 units is $23.4 million.10
2) Rental Assistance: Rental subsidies using non-federal (State, local or other)
funding sources can be used to maintain affordability of the 49 at-risk units. These
rent subsidies can be structured to mirror the federal Section 8 program. Under
Section 8, HUD pays the difference between what tenants can pay (defined as 30
percent of household income) and what HUD estimates as the fair market rent on
the unit.
The feasibility of this alternative is highly dependent on the availability of non-
federal funding sources necessary to make rent subsidies available and the
willingness of property owners to accept rental vouchers if they can be provided.
Currently, the market rents at Rivershore are between 13 percent and 22 percent
below the maximum restricted rents. Therefore, no rent subsidies are needed to
maintain affordability.
3) Tax-Exempt Bond Refinancing: An effective way to preserve the affordability of
the 49 low-income restricted units in Rivershore under the bond program is to
refinance the remaining mortgage on the project. When refinanced, the project
would be required by the 1986 Tax Reform Act to commit its 20 percent low-income
units for the greater of 15 years or as long as the mortgages are outstanding. The
costs to refinance the project would include the difference in interest rates on the
remaining debt between the previous and renegotiated loan packages, an issuance
cost to be paid up front by the County, and administrative costs. To provide the
property owner with an incentive to refinance, the County could offer to refinance
the project with a new tax-exempt bond issue at an interest rate lower than the
rate on the initial bond. Other assistance, such as rehabilitation loans or grants,
may also be available.
10 This market value is estimated using basic assumptions and is intended as an indicator of the magnitude of costs
involved; in no way does it represent the actual market value of Rivershore Apartments.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-35
4) Purchase of Affordability Covenants: Another option to preserve the affordability
of the at-risk project is to provide an incentive package to the owner to maintain
the project as affordable housing. Incentives could include writing down the interest
rate on the remaining loan balance, and/or supplementing with a Section 8 subsidy
received to market levels. The feasibility of this option depends on whether the
complex is too highly leveraged. By providing lump sum financial incentives or on-
going subsidies in rents or reduced mortgage interest rates to the owner, the
County can ensure that some or all of the units remain affordable.
5) Construction of Replacement Units: The construction of new low-income housing
units is a means of replacing the at-risk units should they be converted to market-
rate units. The cost of developing housing depends upon a variety of factors,
including density, size of the units (i.e. number of bedrooms), location, land costs,
and type of construction. The average construction cost for a rental residential unit
is approximately $300,000 (including land costs), based on assessments from
recent multi-family developments in the County. Based on this estimate, it would
cost approximately $14.7 million to develop 49 new assisted units should
Rivershore convert to market rate.
Cost Comparisons: The transfer of ownership of Rivershore to non-profit housing
providers is a means for preserving the at-risk units. However, the high costs of
acquiring the property (approximately $23.4 million due to the need to acquire all
245 units in the property) may prevent such a transfer. While there is not currently
a need for rental subsidies required to preserve the 49 assisted units, long-term
affordability of the units cannot be ensured. Other financial incentives may also be
necessary to convince property owners to maintain the affordable units. The option
of constructing 49 replacement units is relatively costly and potentially constrained
by a variety of factors, including growing scarcity of multi-family residential land,
rising land costs, and community opposition.
The County should continue to monitor the rents at Rivershore and be prepared to
work with the owners to refinance the project with a new tax-exempt bond issue at
a lower interest rate in exchange for extended affordability terms if market rents
increase above the affordable rents. This is likely the best option to preserve the at-
risk units in Rivershore. The County has past experience with this approach and
considers it to be an effective means to preserve affordable housing units. A key
program in this Housing Element is to monitor the status of and preserve the
affordable units in Rivershore and other publicly assisted projects in the
unincorporated areas.
Table 6-23
Inventory of Assisted Rental Housing
Project Name Total
Units
Assisted
Units
Household
Type
Funding
Source(s)
Expiration of
Affordability
ABC Apartments
462 Corte Arango, El Sobrante 9 9 Disabled Section 811;
HOME 2042
Alves Lane
300 Water Street, Bay Point 14 13 Family LIHTC, RDA,
HOME 2050
Aspen Court Apartments
121 Aspen Drive, Pacheco 12 11
Disabled
with
HIV/AIDS
Sections 8 and
811; HOPWA 2039
Bayo Vista
2 California Street, Rodeo 250 250 Family HACCC (Public
Housing) N/A
Bella Monte Apartments 52 51 Family LIHTC, tax-exempt 2060
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-36
Table 6-23
Inventory of Assisted Rental Housing
Project Name Total
Units
Assisted
Units
Household
Type
Funding
Source(s)
Expiration of
Affordability
2420 Willow Pass, Bay Point bonds, RDA, HOME;
CDBG
Carquinez Vista Manor
1212 Wanda Street, Crockett 36 35 Seniors HUD Section 202;
HOME 2056
Coggins Square Apartments
Contra Costa Centre
1316 Las Juntas Way, Walnut Creek
87 86 Family RDA; HOME;
CDBG; LIHTC 2055; 2060
Community Heritage Senior Apts.
1555 3rd St., North Richmond 52 52 Senior
Section 202;
RDA; HOME;
CDBG
2040; 2060
Creekside Terrace
5038 San Pablo Dam Road
El Sobrante
57 56 Family Sections 8, 236,
& 241
May 2013;
October 2028
De Anza Gardens
205 Pueblo Avenue, Bay Point 180 178 Family LIHTC 2058
El Sobrante Silvercrest
4630 Appian Way, El Sobrante 50 49 Senior
(62+)
Sections 8 & 202;
CDBG January 2024
Elaine Null Court
112 Alves Lane, Bay Point 14 14 Disabled RDA; HOME;
LIHTC
September 2050;
September 2055
Hidden Cove Apartments
2901 Mary Anne Lane, Bay Point 88 88 Family County tax-
exempts bonds 2058
Hilltop Commons
15690 Crestwood Dr., San Pablo 324 65 Family County tax-
exempt bonds 2056
Las Deltas
1601 N. Jade St., No. Richmond 76 71 Family HACCC (Public
Housing) N/A
Las Deltas Annex #1
1601 N. Jade St., No. Richmond 90 75 Family HACCC (Public
Housing) N/A
Las Deltas Annex #2
1601 N. Jade St., No. Richmond 60 51 Family HACCC (Public
Housing) N/A
Mission Bay (Willow Pass) Apts.
1056 Weldon Lane, Bay Point 120 48 Family County tax-
exempt bonds 2039
Park Regency
3128 Oak Road, Walnut Creek 892 134 Family
County tax-
exempt bonds;
RDA
2033
Rivershore Apartments
1123 Shoreview, Bay Point 245 49 Family County tax-
exempt bonds 2017
Rodeo Gateway Apartments
710 Willow Avenue, Rodeo 49 48 Seniors Section 202;
RDA; HOME 2056
Villas at Monterasso
100 Casablanca Terrace, Danville 96 95 Family County tax-
exempt bonds 2060
Willowbrook Apartments
110 Bailey Road, Bay Point 72 72
Disable/
Senior
(62+)
Sections 8 & 221;
County tax-
exempt bonds
2032
Sources: Department of Conservation and Development, Contra Costa County, 2008;
RDA: Redevelopment Agency HACCC: Housing Authority of Contra Costa County
HOME: Home Investment Partnership Act funds HOPWA: Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS
LIHTC: Low Income Housing Tax Credit CDBG: Community Development Block Grant
N/A: Not available as of this writing
The remaining 19 projects in Table 6-23 have affordability covenants that will begin
to expire in 2017. The County has a strong history of refinancing projects with
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-37
expiring use contracts and preserving the affordable units. Following is a general
discussion of preservation or replacement options.
Preservation and Replacement Options: To maintain the existing affordable
housing stock, the County must either preserve the existing assisted units or
replenish the affordable housing inventory with new units. Depending on the
circumstances of at-risk projects, different options may be used to preserve or
replace the units. Preservation options typically include: 1) transfer of project to
non-profit ownership; 2) provision of rental assistance to tenants using non-federal
funding sources; 3) tax-exempt bond refinancing; and 4) purchase of affordability
covenants. With regard to replacement, the most direct option is the development
of new assisted multi-family housing units.
1) Tax-Exempt Bond Refinancing: An effective way to preserve the affordability of
low-income use restricted units in the tax exempt bond program is to refinance the
remaining mortgage on the project. When refinanced, the project would be required
by the 1986 Tax Reform Act to commit its 20 percent low-income units for 55
years. The costs to refinance the project would include the difference in interest
rates on the remaining debt between the previous and renegotiated loan packages,
an issuance cost to be paid up front by the County, and administrative costs. To
provide the property owner with an incentive to refinance, the County could offer to
refinance the project with a new tax-exempt bond issue at an interest rate lower
than the rate on the initial bond. Other assistance, such as rehabilitation loans or
grants, may also be available.
2) Transfer of Ownership: Transferring ownership of an at-risk project to a non-
profit housing provider is generally one of the least costly ways to ensure that the
at-risk units remain affordable for the long term. By transferring property
ownership to a non-profit organization, low-income restrictions can be secured
indefinitely and the project would become potentially eligible for a greater range of
governmental assistance. A transfer of this type would be based on the current
market value for the units, which is estimated on the basis of the project’s potential
annual income, and operating and maintenance expenses.
3) Rental Assistance: Rental subsidies using non-federal (State, local or other)
funding sources can be used to maintain affordability of at-risk units. These rent
subsidies can be structured to mirror the federal Section 8 program. Under Section
8, HUD pays the difference between what tenants can pay (defined as 30 percent of
household income) and what HUD estimates as the fair market rent on the unit.
The feasibility of this alternative is highly dependent on the availability of non-
federal funding sources necessary to make rent subsidies available and the
willingness of property owners to accept rental vouchers if they can be provided.
4) Purchase of Affordability Covenants: Another option to preserve the affordability
of the at-risk project is to provide an incentive package to the owner to maintain
the project as affordable housing. Incentives could include writing down the interest
rate on the remaining loan balance, and/or supplementing the Section 8 subsidy
received to market levels. The feasibility of this option depends on whether the
complex is too highly leveraged. By providing lump sum financial incentives or on-
going subsidies in rents or reduced mortgage interest rates to the owner, the
County can ensure that some or all of the units remain affordable.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-38
5) Construction of Replacement Units: The construction of new low-income housing
units is a means of replacing the at-risk units should they be converted to market-
rate units. The cost of developing housing depends upon a variety of factors,
including density, size of the units (i.e. number of bedrooms), location, land costs,
and type of construction. The average construction cost for a rental residential unit
is approximately $300,000 (including land costs), based on assessments from
recent multi-family developments in the County.
A key program in this Housing Element is to monitor the status of and preserve the
affordable units in publicly assisted projects in the unincorporated areas.
F. Future Housing Need
Future housing need refers to the share of the region’s housing growth that has
been allocated to a community. In brief, ABAG calculates future housing need based
upon projected household growth, plus a certain amount of units needed to account
for normal and appropriate level of vacancies and the replacement of units lost to
conversion or demolition.
In allocating the region’s future housing needs to jurisdictions, ABAG is required to
take the following factors into consideration pursuant to Section 65584 of the State
Government Code:
o Market demand for housing
o Employment opportunities
o Availability of suitable sites and public facilities
o Commuting patterns
o Type and tenure of housing
o Loss of units in assisted housing developments
o Over-concentration of lower-income households
o Geological and topographical constraints
In 2008, ABAG developed its regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) based on
both existing need and projected need for housing. ABAG published the San
Francisco Bay Area Housing Needs Plan 2007-2014 which explains in detail the
process to allocate the Bay Area regional housing need of 214,500. This document
provides regional demographic information as well as detailed information on the
RHNA process. Between 2007 and 2014, the County’s assigned RHNA assumes that
the total number of households will increase steadily.
Table 6-24 on page 39 provides a breakdown of the County’s share of future
regional housing needs by four income categories: very low, low, moderate, and
above moderate. As indicated, the share of regional housing needs allocated to the
unincorporated areas is a total of 3,508 new units over the 2007-2014 planning
period. Through this Housing Element, the County is required to demonstrate the
availability of adequate sites to accommodate these projected new units.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-39
Table 6-25 shows the breakdown of future regional needs by income for all cities
and unincorporated areas in Contra Costa County. Over the 2009-2014 period, the
total housing need for the County is determined to be 27,072 new units. The
housing needs allocation varies from a low of 151 new units in Clayton to a high of
3,508 new units in the unincorporated areas. Aside from the unincorporated areas,
communities that will absorb much of the region’s projected future housing growth
are the cities of Brentwood (2,705), Concord (3,043), Richmond (2,826), and San
Ramon (3,463).
Table 6-25
Total Housing Need by Income –
Contra Costa County and Cities
Jurisdiction Very Low Low Moderate Above
Moderate
Total RHNA
Allocation
Antioch 516 339 381 1,046 2,282
Brentwood 717 435 480 1,073 2,705
Clayton 49 35 33 34 151
Concord 639 426 498 1,480 3,043
Danville 196 130 146 111 583
El Cerrito 93 59 80 199 431
Hercules 143 74 73 163 453
Lafayette 113 77 80 91 361
Martinez 261 166 179 454 1,060
Moraga 73 47 52 62 234
Oakley 219 120 88 348 775
Orinda 70 48 55 45 218
Pinole 83 49 48 143 323
Pittsburg 322 223 296 931 1,772
Pleasant Hill 160 105 106 257 628
Richmond 391 339 540 1,556 2,826
San Pablo 22 38 60 178 298
San Ramon 1,174 715 740 834 3,463
Walnut Creek 456 302 374 826 1,958
Unincorporated 815 598 687 1,408 3,508
Total 6,512 4,325 4,996 11,239 27,072
Source: ABAG, 2008.
Table 6-24
Share of Regional Housing Needs
Income Group 2001 Income
Percentage
2009 Income
Percentage
2009 RHNA
Allocation
Very Low 20% 23% 815
Low 12% 17% 598
Moderate 26% 20% 687
Above Moderate 42% 40% 1,408
Total 100% 100% 3,508
Source: ABAG, 2008.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-40
6.3 HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
The provision of adequate and affordable housing opportunities is an important
goal of the County. However, a variety of factors can constrain the development,
maintenance, and improvement of housing. These include development costs,
government constraints, lack of infrastructure, and environmental issues. This
section addresses these potential constraints that affect the supply of housing in
the unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County.
In evaluating the residential growth potential based on development on vacant and
underutilized sites in the unincorporated areas, the County has undertaken a
parcel-by-parcel review of the available sites within the Urban Limit Line (ULL).
Realistic development potential is assessed, taking into account the market trends,
development standards, environmental constraints, and infrastructure and public
facility/service constraints discussed in this section. The residential development
potential is presented in Section 4 of this Housing Element.
A. Market Constraints
Land costs, construction costs, and market financing contribute to the cost of
housing development, and can potentially hinder the production of new housing.
Although many constraints are driven by market conditions, jurisdictions have some
leverage in instituting policies and programs to address such constraints. The
section below analyzes these market constraints as well as the activities that the
County undertakes to mitigate their effects.
1. Development Costs
Construction costs vary widely according to the type of development, with multi-
family housing generally less expensive to construct than single-family homes.
However, wide variation within each construction type exists depending on the size
of the unit and the number and quality of amenities provided.
In addition to construction, the price of land is also one of the largest components
of housing development costs. Land costs may vary depending on where the site is
in the County (Central County is significantly more expensive than portions of East
and West County), whether the site is vacant or has an existing use that must be
removed. Similarly, site constraints such as environmental issues (i.e. steep slopes,
soil stability, seismic hazards or flooding) can also be a major factor in the cost of
land.
Based on a development cost study dated April 30, 2008 by tbd consultants, the
average cost to construct an apartment unit in the unincorporated areas is
approximately $280,000 (including the cost of land). The estimated average
development cost of a single-family home is approximately $170,000 per bedroom
or $550,000 for a 2,200 square foot home. The cost will vary significantly
depending upon the quality of materials used, the size of the unit and lot, the
location, as well as the number and quality of amenities provided.
A reduction in amenities and the quality of building materials (above a minimum
acceptability for health, safety, and adequate performance) could result in lower
prices. In addition, prefabricated factory-built housing may provide for lower priced
housing by reducing construction and labor costs. Another factor related to
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-41
construction costs is the number of units built at one time. As the number
increases, costs generally decrease as builders benefit from economies of scale.
Another key component is the price of raw land and any necessary improvements.
The high demand for residential development keeps land cost relatively high
throughout the Bay Area. In the unincorporated areas, residential land costs vary
from $12 to $25 per square foot for raw land depending on the site and the area.11
As it has done in the past, the County Redevelopment Agency can continue to
support the development of affordable housing by writing-down the cost of land on
Agency-owned property in exchange for affordability controls.
2. Home Financing
The availability of financing affects a person’s ability to purchase or improve a
home. In 2003, 2004, and especially 2005, lenders provided an increasing number
of subprime loans. In 2006 and 2007, borrowers started to default on those loans.
In 2008, lenders significantly tightened their lending standards. As of this writing,
lending standards are extremely tight and it is difficult for all but the most credit
worthy buyers to get mortgage loans.
Specific housing programs such as first-time homebuyer programs or other
mortgage assistance programs can be a useful tool providing help with down
payment and closing costs, which are often significant obstacles to home ownership
for lower income and minority groups.
B. Governmental Constraints
Local policies and regulations can impact the price and availability of housing and,
in particular, the provision of affordable housing. Land use controls, site
improvement requirements, fees and exactions, permit processing procedures, and
other factors may constrain the maintenance, development and improvement of
housing. This section discusses potential governmental constraints as well as
policies that encourage housing development in the unincorporated areas of Contra
Costa County.
1. Land Use Controls
The Land Use Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan sets forth the
policies for guiding development. These policies, together with existing zoning
regulations, establish the amount and distribution of land allocated for different
uses within the unincorporated areas of the County. As described in Table 6-26 on
page 42, the General Plan has four residential designations for single-family
dwellings and seven designations for multi-family uses, permitting a varying level of
density for rural and urban residential uses.
Residential Development Standards
The County regulates the type, location, density, and scale of residential
development primarily through the Planning and Zoning Code. Zoning regulations
are designed to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of
residents as well as implement the policies of the County General Plan. The Zoning
Code also serves to preserve the character and integrity of existing neighborhoods.
11 Land cost estimates based on the Contra Costa County Inclusionary Housing In Lieu Fee Study, dated October 16, 2007
by David Paul Rosen & Associates
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-42
Table 6-27 summarizes the most pertinent residential standards for single-family,
while Table 6-28 (page 43) summarizes residential multi-family housing standards
including those for mobile homes and mobile home parks. In each table, zone
districts are grouped by the General Plan land use category in which they are
permitted (i.e. Very Low, Low, Medium, and High).
Table 6-26
Residential Land Use Categories
Zoning District(s) General Plan Land
Use Designation Consistent Possible1
Density
(du/ac) Residential Type(s)
Single-Family Residential
Very Low (SV) R-40, R-65,
R-100
P-1, A
Districts 0.2 – 0.9 Detached single-family homes
consistent with rural lifestyle
Low (SL) R-15, R-20,
R-40
P-1, A
Districts 1.0 – 2.9 Detached single-family homes on
large lots
Medium (SM) R-10, R-12,
R-15
P-1, A
Districts 3.0 – 4.9 Detached single-family homes on
moderate-sized lots
High (SH) R-6, R-7, R-
10, D-1
P-1, A
Districts 5.0 – 7.2 Detached single-family homes and
duplexes on smaller lots
Multiple-Family Residential
Low (ML) R-6, D-1, T-
1, M-6, M-9 P-1 7.3 – 11.9 Single- or two-story duplexes,
condos, town houses, and apts.
Medium (MM) T-1, M-9, M-
12, M-17 P-1 12.0 – 21.9 Larger-size condominiums and
apartments, one- or two-stories
High (MH) M-17, M-29 P-1 22.0 – 29.9 Multi-story condos and apts.
Very High (MV) M-29 P-1 30.0 – 44.9 Multi-story apt. and condo
complexes with smaller units
Very High-Special (MS) P-1 45.0 – 99.9 Multi-story apartment complexes
with smaller units
Congregate Care-Senior
Housing (CC) P-1 N/A Senior housing with shared
facilities
Mobile Home (MO) T-1 P-1 1.0 – 12.0 Mobile homes
Note 1. The zoning districts listed in this column could be found consistent with the General Plan designation under
certain circumstances depending upon the specific use that is proposed.
Source: Contra Costa County General Plan, Land Use Element, 2005-2020.
Table 6-27
Single-Family Residential Development Standards
General Plan Land Use Category & Zone District
Very Low Low Medium High Development
Standard R-100 R-65 R-40 R-20 R-15 R-12 R-10 R-7 R-6 D-1
Max. Density
(du/ac) 0.4 0.67 1.1 2.2 2.9 3.6 4.4 6.2 7.2 10.9
Min. Lot Area
(sq. ft.) 100,000 65,000 40,000 20,000 15,000 12,000 10,000 7,000 6,000 8,000
Min. Lot Size
(ft.)
200 x
200
140 x
140
140 x
140
120 x
120
100 x
100
100 x
100 80 x 90 70 x
90
60 x
90
80 x
90
Front Yard (ft.) 30 25 25 25 20 20 20 20 20 20
Side Yard (ft.) 30 20 20 15 10 10 10 5 5 10
Aggregate Side
Yard 60 40 40 35 20 20 20 15 15 20
Rear Yard (ft.) 30 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
Max. Bldg. Ht.
(stories)
2.5
35 ft.
2.5
35 ft.
2.5
35 ft.
2.5
35 ft.
2.5
35 ft.
2.5
35 ft.
2.5
35 ft.
2.5
35 ft.
2.5
35 ft.
2.5
35 ft.
Parking Req.
(space/unit) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Source: Contra Costa County Planning and Zoning Code, November 2008.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-43
Single-Family Residential Development Standards
Given the diversity of residential areas in the County, the minimum lot size for
single-family homes ranges from 6,000 to 100,000 square feet, translating to
densities of seven dwelling units per acre (du/ac) down to less than one dwelling
unit per acre. The maximum height limit for single-family homes is two and half
stories (or 35 feet in height), while setbacks vary by lot size.
The D-1 zone permits two-family or duplex units such as town homes to be located
on an 8,000-square-foot parcel, while the R-6 zone permits more than one
detached dwelling on a parcel so long as the lot size does not exceed 6,000 square
feet per dwelling unit.
Multi-Family Residential Development Standards
Multi-family units are permitted in all M zones, providing densities ranging from 6
du/ac to 29 du/ac. Mobile homes and mobile home parks are permitted in T-1
zones. In addition, the lower density multi-family zones permit the development of
single-family units. This often results in the development of detached single-family
homes on small lots (3,000 – 4,000 sq. ft.). The P-1 or Planned Unit District
provides flexible development standards to promote very high density
development, while the General Plan Mixed-Use category enables the County to
provide residential units in conjunction with commercial uses. Both of these are
described in more detail later in this section.
Table 6-28
Multi-Family Residential Development Standards
General Plan Land Use Category & Zone District
Low/Medium High Very
High
Very
High -
Special
Development
Standard
T-1a M-6 M-9 M-12 M-17 M-29 P-1
Max. Density (du/ac) 12 6 9 12 17 29 Vb
Min. Lot Area (sq. ft.) 2,500d 7,200 4,800 3,000 2,500 1,500 V
Min. Lot Size (ft.) 40 x 90 varies varies varies varies varies V
Front Yard (ft.) 20 25 25 25 25 25 V
Side Yard (ft.) 5 20 20 20 20 20 V
Rear Yard (ft.) 15 20 20 20 20 20 V
Lot Coverage (%) N/A 25 25 25 25 35 V
Max. Bldg. Height
(stories or feet) 20 30 30 30 30 30 V
Parking Req.
(space/unit) 2 c c c c c V
Notes:
a T-1 Zone District for mobile homes and mobile home parks.
b V = Variable, dependant upon Planning Commission approval.
c Dependent upon type of unit, refer to Table 6-29, Parking Requirements.
d 2,500 sq. ft. for mobile home park lots (mobile park requires 3-acre minimum area).
Source: Contra Costa County Planning and Zoning Code, November 2008.
The Zoning Code uses maximum height, lot area, and lot coverage regulations to
ensure the quality of multi-family development. The maximum height limit in most
multi-family zones is 30 feet; however, in the P-1 zone the permitted height may
be higher subject to Planning Commission approval. Lot coverage is typically limited
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-44
to 25 percent though this increases to 35 percent in the M-29 zone. The
development standards in the T-1 zone are similar to those of the single-family
zones; however, the lot size and lot area are smaller.
Parking Standards
The County’s parking requirements for residential districts vary by housing type,
the number of units, and parking needs. Table 6-29 outlines the County’s parking
requirements for different housing types. Single-family units are required to have
two spaces per dwelling, which may be open or covered. Similar to single-family
units, the requirement for mobile homes, duplexes, or town homes is two spaces
per unit.
Table 6-29
Parking Requirements
Residential Type Required Spaces
Single-family 2 covered or open spaces
Duplex or Town House 2 covered or open spaces
Multi-Family Unit (Apt. or Condo)1
Studio 1 space + ¼ space for guests2
One-bedroom 1 ½ spaces + ¼ space for
guests2
Two or more bedrooms 2 spaces + ¼ space for guests2
Mobile Home 2 covered or open spaces
Second Unit 3 spaces for the entire lot3
Notes:
1 Half of the multi-family spaces shall be covered.
2 Curb parking along the property’s street frontage may be used to satisfy the guest parking requirements.
3 This includes the spaces that are already required for the principal residence. The exception under Ordinance Code Section 84.4-1202 shall not apply Off-street parking may be permitted in a driveway.
Source: Contra Costa County Planning and Zoning Code, November 2008.
The number of parking spaces required for multi-family apartment units and
condominiums ranges from one space for a studio to two spaces for units with two
or more bedrooms. To accommodate guests, an additional one-quarter parking
space must be provided per unit. Residential lots that contain second units are
required to have three spaces in order to provide the required parking for the
primary residence as well as parking for the second unit. In most cases the three-
space requirement would include the two spaces already required for the single-
family home on the lot. In the case of second units, the driveway may also be used
for parking provided that the space is outside of the yard setback areas. Since the
County does not require enclosed parking, cost reductions can be achieved by
providing open spaces to fulfill the parking requirements. Furthermore, multi-family
developments can utilize curbside parking along the property’s street frontage to
fulfill part of the parking requirements for guest parking.
In order to facilitate the development of housing projects at locations that
encourage public transit use, the County has set forth a maximum amount of
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-45
parking permitted rather than a minimum. This has been done at the mixed-use
development at the Contra Costa Centre and is also proposed at a transit-oriented
development in Bay Point.
Flexibility in Development Standards
The County offers mechanisms that facilitate the provision of a diversity of housing
types. These mechanisms provide greater flexibility with regard to residential
development standards than in conventional residential zone districts. Such
mechanisms include the planned unit district (P-1) and density bonuses, described
in more detail below.
Planned Unit District: The Planned Unit District (P-1) provides the opportunity for
more imaginative and flexible design for large-scale residential developments than
would be permitted in the conventional residential districts. The use of the P-1
district is intended to promote the diversification of buildings, lot sizes, and open
spaces to produce an environment in harmony with surrounding existing and
potential uses. The flexibility associated with the P-1 District includes variation in
structures, lot sizes, yards, and setbacks and enables the developer to address
specific needs or environmental constraints in an area. The final plan for a planned
development is subject to approval by the County Planning Commission. The P-1
designation is applicable to all residential districts.
Using the P-1 designation, increased residential densities can be achieved. Density
of up to 44.9 du/ac can be achieved in the P-1 district if the underlying General
Plan designation is Very High Density Residential. The density can be increased up
to 99 du/ac if the underlying General Plan designation is Very High Density –
Special Residential.
Between 2001 and 2007, the County P-1 District was applied to a variety of
residential developments, including some affordable housing projects.
Currently, a few unincorporated communities in the County are entirely zoned P-1
as a means of facilitating residential and other types of development in these areas.
The general direction of the County is to encourage P-1 zoning in unincorporated
areas, where it is appropriate in relation to the community’s setting.
Mixed-Use Developments: The County General Plan Land Use Element includes a
category for mixed-use developments in the unincorporated areas. This category
has enabled the County to create unique projects that combine residential uses
such as apartments or condominiums with commercial and other uses. Such
developments provide needed housing in close proximity to key services such as
transportation. The development at the Contra Costa Centre is a prime example of
this. Other instances of mixed-use in County unincorporated areas include the Bay
Point Willow Pass Corridor and the Parker Avenue downtown area in Rodeo. The
mixed-use category offers the County greater flexibility by providing needed
housing in urban areas close to important services, where larger residential units
are not appropriate.
Density Bonus: In accordance with State law and the County’s Residential Density
Bonus Ordinance, Contra Costa County provides density bonuses to qualified new
housing projects. Specifically, the developer must have: (1) at least ten percent of
the total units affordable to low-income households; (2) at least five percent of the
total units affordable to very-low-income households; or (3) at least ten percent of
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-46
a planned development as moderate income housing or (4) as senior housing.
Affordability must be maintained for at least 30 years. If these conditions are met,
the developer is entitled to a density bonus of between 5 and 35 percent of the
maximum density permitted in the underlying zone plus one to three incentives
(e.g., modified standards, regulatory incentives, or concessions) of equal financial
value based upon land costs per dwelling unit. The County has utilized density
bonuses to facilitate the development of affordable housing.
Inclusionary Housing: Residential developments of five or more units must
provide 15 percent of the development as affordable housing. Compliance options
include on-site development, off-site development, land conveyance, payment of
in-lieu fees, and use of transfers or credits between developers or developments.
The Inclusionary Housing Ordinance includes a mitigation measure by providing
developers a 15 percent density bonus in exchange for providing the affordable
units.
In general, the requirements and standards of the County do not act as a constraint
to the development of affordable housing. A wide array of affordable rental housing
has been constructed in the County to address this need including several recent
projects (e.g., Bella Monte Apartments, and Bella Flora Homes). The overriding
constraint to affordable housing development is the high land costs, availability of
financing, neighborhood opposition or NIMBYism, and other market factors. To
mitigate this constraint, the County has been proactively pursuing affordable
housing opportunities through the use of subsidies. Figure 6-2 on the following
page illustrates the affordable housing projects financed by the County and located
in the unincorporated County. As demonstrated later in Section 5, Housing Plan, the
County will continue to work with both for-profit and non-profit developers to
actively encourage affordable housing development.
2. Provisions for a Variety of Housing
Housing element law specifies that jurisdictions must identify adequate sites to be
made available through appropriate zoning and development standards to
encourage the development of various types of housing for all economic segments
of the population. This includes single-family housing, multi-family housing, factory-
built housing, mobile homes, emergency shelters, and transitional housing among
others. Table 6-30 on page 48 summarizes the housing types permitted within the
primary residential zones in the County unincorporated areas.
In addition to the residential districts identified in the Land Use Element, several
other zone districts permit limited residential development. These include the less-
intensive agricultural districts (A-2), which permit one single-family dwelling unit
per lot. Residential development is also permitted in the Interchange Transitional
District and in most commercial/business and industrial districts (N-B, CM, C-B, L-I,
and H-I) subject to a land use permit. In the Residential Business District and the
General Commercial District, single-family homes and duplexes are permitted by
right; however, multi-family developments require a land use permit.
The County offers a diversity of housing types that are available for all economic
segments of the community as well as more vulnerable members of the
community, including those earning lower income, seniors, disabled households,
farm workers, and the homeless, among others. These include multi-family units,
second units, mobile homes, and other more affordable housing opportunities.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-47
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-48
Table 6-30
Housing Types Permitted by Zone District
Single Family Zone Districts Housing Types
Permitted R-100 R-65 R-40 R-20 R-15 R-12 R-10 R-7 R-6 D-1
Residential Uses
Single-family detached P P P P P P P P P P
Single-family attached P
Second units c c c c c c c c c c
Mobile/Mfg. homes P P P P P P P P P
Special Needs
Housing
Transitional housing c c c c c c c c c c
Emergency shelter c c c c c c c c c c
Residential care (≤6
beds) P P P P P P P P P P
Residential care (>6
beds) c c c c c c c c c c
Multi-Family Zone Districts1
Residential Uses M-29 M-17 M-12 M-9 M-6 P-1 T-1
Multi-family (3 or
more) P P P P P P
Duplex/Townhomes P P P P P P
Mobile/Mfg. homes P
Mobile home parks P
Second Units c c c c c c
Special Needs
Housing
Transitional housing c c c c c c
Emergency shelter c c c c c c
Residential care (≤6
beds) P P P P P P
Residential care (>6
beds)
c c c c c c
Note: 1. Single family attached and detached units are also permitted in the lower density multi-
family zones (M-6, M-9, and M-12)
Source: Contra Costa County Planning and Zoning Code, November 2008.
P = Permitted c = subject to a Land Use Permit
Multi-Family Units: The Zoning Code permits multi-family housing opportunities
in the multi-family zones (M-29, M-17, M-12, M-9, and M-6) by right. Densities
range from 6 units per acre to 29 units per acre. Densities of up to 99 units per
acre are permitted in the Planned Unit District (P-1). Approximately 14 percent of
the County housing stock consists of multi-family residences. Contra Costa County
offers a wide variety of affordable multi-family units for lower income households
and persons with special needs, such as seniors, the disabled, and those with
HIV/AIDS.
Licensed Care Facilities: The Zoning Code permits licensed residential or
community care facilities with six or fewer beds in all residential zones by right.
Those facilities with more than six beds require a land use permit. A total of 38
licensed community care facilities with over 238 beds are located in the
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-49
unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. In addition, several other residential
projects provide housing for persons with disabilities as shown in Table 6-21.
Second Units: Second units are designed to provide an opportunity for the
development of small rental units as one way of providing affordable housing for
low- and moderate-income individuals and families as well as seniors and the
disabled. Second units are permitted in all residential zone districts subject to a
land use permit. The second unit must not exceed 1,000 square feet and must
provide complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. Second units
may be rented or leased, but they must conform to the standards that are
applicable to residential construction in the zone in which the unit is located.
Mobile/Manufactured Homes: Mobile homes and manufactured housing offer an
affordable housing option to many low- and moderate-income households and are
permitted in all single-family residential zoning districts. In addition, mobile homes
are permitted in several commercial and industrial districts subject to a land use
permit. The Contra Costa County Planning and Zoning Code also permits mobile
home parks in the T-1 district. Currently, approximately 2,659 mobile homes are
located in mobile home parks in the unincorporated area of the County.
Farmworker Housing: The County is home to a variety of agricultural uses, many
of which are located in the southern and eastern areas of the County. Based on a
statewide study of migrant and seasonal farmworkers in 2000, an estimated 2,470
migrant and seasonal farmworkers work in Contra Costa County, of which
approximately 700 are estimated to work in the unincorporated areas of the
County. The Zoning Code permits farm labor housing for seasonal workers in the
agricultural districts (A-2, A-3, and A-4) subject to a land use permit. Allow
agricultural employee housing to be permitted by-right (without a conditional use
permit) in single family zones for less than six persons and agricultural zones with
no more than 12 units, or 36 beds, consistent with Health and Safety Code 17021.5
and 17021.6. Approximately 45,000 acres within the ULL are zoned for agricultural
use and an additional 312,000 acres outside the ULL are designated for agriculture,
open-space, wetlands, parks, and other non-urban uses. The majority of
agricultural land is located in the eastern portion of the County and has a General
Plan designation of Agricultural Lands (AL) or Agricultural Core (AC).
Emergency Shelters, Transitional and Permanent Supportive Housing:
Emergency shelters and transitional housing designed to meet the needs of those
who are homeless or formerly homeless are permitted in all residential zones
subject to a land use permit. In addition, these facilities are permitted in most
commercial and industrial districts with a land use permit. The purpose of the land
use permit is to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, and not to
constrain their development. The land use permit for an emergency shelter and a
transitional housing facility requires only an administrative review unless the
decision is appealed. If the administrative decision is appealed, a hearing on the
permit may be held before the Zoning Administrator or the County Planning
Commission, as necessary.
In 2009, the County will amend the zoning code to allow homeless shelters ‘by-
right’ in at least one zoning district. The C: General Commercial District will be the
zoning district to be amended consistent with the requirement of S.B. 2, and this
zoning text amendment will be complete by June 30, 2010. The C: General
Commercial District is appropriate because there is sufficient land designated within
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-50
this zoning district in all three regions of the County (West, Central, and East).
There are 100 parcels totaling 181 acres zoned under the C: General Commercial
District throughout the unincorporated area. Prospectively, emergency shelter
facilities would be allowed ‘by-right’ in the C: General Commercial District, which as
noted above is well distributed in the unincorporated area in all three regions of the
County, and would serve the homeless population without creating an over
concentration in any one area of the County. The areas zoned under the C: General
Commercial District are generally well served by transit and are located near
services and other amenities in order to serve the homeless population. The
unincorporated County has approximately 300 persons without night time shelter.
Shelters would likely be no larger than 75 beds. The County’s existing 75 bed
homeless emergency shelter in Concord is approximately 16,000 square feet and
has a capacity for 100 beds. Assuming a 75 bed shelter needs to be 15,000 square
feet, the County would potentially need 4 emergency shelters totaling 60,000
square feet to address the unmet need. The 181 acres in the unincorporated area
of Contra Costa County zoned under the C: General Commercial District should be
sufficient to address the potential need for emergency shelters to accommodate
300 homeless persons.
Any text amendment will likely include specific requirements in order to provide
certainty to the applicant and maintain compatibility with the surrounding
neighborhood. Following is an example of the requirements that may be
incorporated:
o The maximum number of beds or persons permitted to be served nightly
by the facility;
o Off-street parking based on demonstrated need, but not to exceed
parking requirements for other residential or commercial uses in the same
zone;
o The size and location of exterior and interior onsite waiting and client
intake areas;
o The provision of onsite management;
o The proximity of other emergency shelters, provided that emergency
shelters are not required to be more than 300 feet apart;
o The length of stay;
o Lighting;
o Security during hours that the emergency shelter is in operation.
In addition, the County will revise the zoning code to clarify that transitional
housing and supportive housing are treated as residential uses.
The zoning code currently does not mention single room occupancy (SRO)
developments. The zoning code will be revised to include SROs. Development
standards and permit procedures will be developed to facilitate the development of
SROs.
In general, emergency shelters and permanent supportive housing should be
accessible to the population in need and near public transit, employment and job
training opportunities, community facilities, and services. Concentrations of
CalWORKS participants may be used as an indicator of where emergency and
permanent supportive housing may be most needed. Typically, people on public
assistance are most vulnerable to becoming homeless in the case of an economic
recession or cuts in public assistance. Areas with concentrations of CalWORKS
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-51
participants and good access to transit, employment, and services would be
appropriate for the siting of emergency and permanent supportive housing. In
siting such facilities, the County will pay special attention to issues of neighborhood
impaction.
Several emergency shelters and transitional housing facilities for the homeless are
located in Contra Costa County. Table 6-21 in the previous section identifies the
major temporary, transitional, and permanent housing facilities for the homeless
and formerly homeless in the County.
(See discussions on the County’s Housing First strategy contained in Section 6.2,
Housing Needs.)
3. Growth Management Program
Growth management programs facilitate well-planned development and ensure that
the necessary services and facilities for residents are provided. Furthermore, the
planning and land use decisions associated with growth management intend to
enhance housing opportunities by concentrating housing in urban areas close to
jobs and services, rather than in sprawling developments that may threaten
agricultural land and open space. However, a growth management program may
act as a constraint if it prevents a jurisdiction from addressing its housing needs.
In 1988, Contra Costa County residents approved Measure C, which increased sales
tax by one half cent to fund transportation projects. In response to growing
concerns about traffic impacts of new development and the lack of necessary
funding for infrastructure development and improvements, the measure also
included a growth management component. Measure C-1988 requires each
jurisdiction to adopt a Growth Management Element as part of its General Plan.
In 1990, Contra Costa residents expressed their concerns regarding new
development threats to the environment by approving Measure C-1990. This
measure applies to the unincorporated County and restricts urban development to
35 percent of the land in the County. The remaining 65 percent of the land is
preserved for agriculture and open space.
Growth Management Element – Measure C 1988
As part of the 1990-2010 General Plan, the County developed the Growth
Management Element to address the requirements of Measure C-1988. The Element
includes adopted level of service (LOS) standards for traffic for particular types of
land uses and performance standards to be maintained through capital projects for
fire protection, police, parks, sanitary facilities, water, and flood control. These
performance standards are designed to ensure that new developments provide their
fair share of the cost of infrastructure, public facilities, and services. As a result,
new developments must demonstrate that the level of service and performance
standards identified in the Element will be met.
65/35 Land Preservation Plan & Urban Limit Line – Measure C 1990
The 65/35 Land Preservation Plan and the Urban Limit Line (ULL), adopted in 1990,
was intended to concentrate development in areas most suitable for urban
development. As mentioned above, urban uses are permitted on 35 percent of the
land in the County. Certain types of land are identified in the Measure as not being
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-52
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-53
appropriate for urban development such as prime agricultural land, open space,
wetlands, or other areas unsuitable for urban development because of
environmental or other physical constraints.
The ULL established a boundary setting apart land that is suitable for urban
development from that which is not. The purpose of the ULL is to limit potential
urban encroachment by prohibiting the County from designating any land located
outside the ULL for an urban land use. Voters in Contra Costa County approved
Measure L in November 2006 establishing an updated Urban Limit Line, extending
the term of the Urban Limit Line to 2026, and enacting new procedures requiring
voter approval to expand the Urban Limit Line by greater than 30 acres.
Implementation of Measure C 1988 and 1990 has not prevented the County from
meeting its housing obligations. Instead, the Growth Management Program has led
to a coordinated planning effort that has provided a mechanism to support and
enhance housing development throughout the County. This has been achieved
through pro-rata fees and the concentration of development, which has enabled the
County to provide the needed services, facilities, and infrastructure at a lower cost
to residents and developers than could be achieved through unmanaged and
sprawling development. Section 4 of this Housing Element demonstrates the
County’s ability to accommodate its share of regional housing growth on
residentially designated land within the ULL.
4. Site Improvements & Development Fees
Site Improvements
Site improvements are an important component of new development and include
water, sewer, circulation, and other infrastructure needed to serve the new
development. Contra Costa County requires the construction of reasonable on-site
and off-site public improvements as condition of approval for residential (major)
subdivisions as permitted by the Subdivision Map Act. Typical improvements
required include:
o Grading and improvement of public and private streets serving the
subdivision according to adopted design standards (see Table 6-31 on page
54 for a summary of roadway design standards);
o Storm drainage and flood control facilities within and outside the subdivision
(when necessary) to carry storm water runoff both tributary to and
originating within the subdivision;
o Public sewage system improvements according sewer service district
standards and direct sewage system connection to each lot;
o Public water supply system improvements according to water service district
standards to provide adequate water supply and direct water system
connection to each lot;
o Fire hydrants and connection of the type and location as specified by the
relevant fire service district;
o Public utility distribution facilities including gas, electric, telephone and cable
television necessary to serve each lot;
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-54
o Local transit facilities, such as shelters, benches, bus turnouts, park-n-ride
lots for larger residential subdivisions.
Specific standards for a residential subdivision’s on-site and off-site improvements
must be in accordance with the County’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance Code,
Flood Control and Drainage Ordinance Code, and Subdivision Ordinance Code.
Additionally, the County may require dedication of land for public use, such as
roadways and parks. Dedicated rights-of-way for roadways must be designed,
developed, and improved according to the County’s Roadway Design Criteria as
summarized in Table 6-31.
Table 6-31
Roadway Design Standards
Roadway Type Right-of-Way Curb to Curb Median Sidewalk Area
Parkways 136 ft. 106 ft. 14 ft. n/a
Major Arterial 126 ft./136 ft. 106 ft. 14 ft. 8 ft.
Arterial / Industrial
Collector
84 ft. 64 ft. n/a 8 ft.
Industrial Collector 68 ft. 48 ft. n/a n/a
Minor Arterial /
Major Collector
60 ft. 40 ft. n/a 8 ft.
Minor Collector 56 ft. 36 ft. n/a n/a
Source: Contra Costa County Public Works Department, Standard Plans, 3/27/2009
It can be reasonably inferred that the costs for the construction of on-site and off-
site improvements under the County’s residential subdivision process does have an
impact on housing supply and affordability.
Development Fees
The County requires the payment of fees for off-site extension of water, sewer and
storm drain systems, and traffic signals. The developer is also required to construct
all internal streets, sidewalks, curb, gutter, and affected portions of off-street
arterials. New residential construction will either occur as infill, where infrastructure
is already in place or in planned unit districts, where the provision of adequate
public services and facilities may be required as conditions for project approval.
Development impact fees such as capital facility fees (e.g. charges for schools and
parks) and service connection fees (e.g. sewer and water connections) are
identified in Table 6-32 on the following page. Appendix A provides detailed
information on the County’s development and planning/processing fees by housing
type. Sub-area analysis is provided in the Appendix to illustrate the differential in
fee amounts by area.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-55
Table 6-32
Development Impact Fees
Unincorporated Areas
WEST CENTRAL EAST SINGLE FAMILY
HOME FEES North
Richmond Rodeo Pacheco Alamo
Bay
Point
Discovery
Bay
Permit/Plan Processing
Fees $4,153 $4,073 $4,175 $5,131 $4,073 $5,279
Capital Facilities Fees $30,637 $25,807 $19,682 $55,179 $33,552 $35,440
Service Connection Fees $7,129 $9,703 $16,761 $5,014 $9,509 $1,100
TOTAL $41,919 $39,583 $40,618 $65,324 $47,134 $41,819
Assumptions: Single family 2,000 sq. ft. home with 400 sq. ft. attached garage, wood frame.
Source: Contra Costa County- Dept. of Conservation and Development, Building Insp. Div. Fee Estimator
Program and information provided by Special Districts, December 2008.
WEST CENTRAL EAST
MULTI-FAMILY
APARTMENT FEES North
Richmond Rodeo Pacheco Alamo
Bay
Point
Discovery
Bay
Permits/Processing Fees $28,610 $28,583 $28,685 $28,685 $28,583 $28,586
Capital Facilities Fees $380,375 $351,300 $415,675 $780,725 $505,500 $560,650
Service Connection Fees $85,800 $150,025 $11,988 $32,800 $62 $62
Fees on Carport $2,608 $2,608 $2,608 $2,608 $2,608 $2,608
TOTAL $497,393 $532,516 $458,956 $844,818 $536,753 $591,906
TOTAL PER UNIT FEES $19,896 $21,301 $18,358 $33,793 $21,470 $23,676
Assumptions: Prototypical multi-family residence. Assume a 20,000 square foot apartment building with 25
units.
Five 3-bedroom units, 10 2-bedroom units, Ten 1-bedroom units. 46 off-street parking stalls in a carport.
One structure, 2-story, and wood frame.
Source: Contra Costa County- Dept. of Conservation and Development, Building Insp. Div. Fee Estimator
Program and information provided by Special Districts, December 2008.
The County also collects fees from developments to cover the costs of planning and
processing permits. Processing fees and deposits are calculated based on average
staff time and material costs required to process a particular type of case. The
average cost of planning and processing fees is also summarized in Table 6-32.
Planning and processing fees, combined with costs for the required site
improvements, add to the cost of housing. The average planning and processing
fees for a typical single-family home and for a typical 25-unit multi-family complex
have been calculated.12 The typical overall cost of both development impact fees
for site improvements and processing fees totals range from $39,583 to $65,324
for a single family home built in the unincorporated area of the County and from
$18,358 to $33,793 per apartment unit. These costs vary by unincorporated region
of the County as shown in Table 6-32.
12 A typical single family residence consists of a 2,000 square foot wood frame residence with an attached 400 sq. ft.
garage. A typical multi-family apartment complex consists of one 20,000 square foot apartment building with 25 units and
includes 5 three-bedroom units, 10 two-bedroom units, and 10 one-bedroom units. The complex also includes a 46-space
carport.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-56
Requiring developers to construct site improvements and/or pay fees toward the
provision of infrastructure, public facilities, services, and processing will increase
the cost of housing.13 While these costs may impact housing affordability, these
requirements are deemed necessary to maintain the quality of life desired by
County residents, and are consistent with the goals of the County General Plan.
In certain circumstances the County can reduce development impact fees,
processing fees, or modify development standards for projects that address specific
needs in the community. The Redevelopment Agency has done this for high-priority
public purpose projects, including affordable housing. For example, the County
facilitated the development of the Bella Monte project, which is a 52-unit apartment
affordable rental development in Bay Point, with reductions in processing fees and
development standards (e.g. parking requirements). Such mechanisms ensure that
the cost of site improvements do not unduly constrain the production of new
affordable housing.
If a developer owns the property, then either the developer’s profit and/or the price
of the housing will be adjusted depending on the cost of fees and site
improvements. In order to cover increasing costs, the developer might have to
reduce its profit. Or, if the market supports higher prices, the developer might raise
the rents or sales prices of the new housing. If the cost of fees and improvements
are excessive, and the market does not support higher prices, then the
development will not be feasible. If the developer is seeking to purchase land, then
the purchase negotiations will be impacted by the total cost of development. The
developer will try to pay less for the land to keep a higher profit and/or lower
housing costs.
In recognition that the 2008-2009 economic recession has had a particularly severe
impact on housing construction, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No.
2009-14 on June 9, 2009 to allow the deferral of certain development fee payments
for new residential development through December 31, 2011 that are within the
Board’s control. As previously noted, there are development fees collected at
building permit issuance by the County for other agencies or special districts, and
these fees are not affected by the ordinance. The development fees that are
affected by the ordinance include: area of benefit traffic impact fees, child care
fees, inclusionary housing fees, park impact fees, and police service fees. Such
fees have been collected at the time of building permit issuance. This ordinance
enables the housing developer to defer the payment of these development fees to
the final inspection for a dwelling unit, to when the certificate of occupancy for
dwelling unit is issued, or, to close of escrow for a dwelling unit. It is believed the
deferral of these development impact fees will ease the home builder’s cash flow
requirements and should make a difference between moving forward on
construction on a housing project, rather than waiting until the market clearly turns
around. To the extent that development fees constrain housing development, this
ordinance will provide approximately two and half years on deferral fee payment
during which time conditions in the economy, and in particular the housing market,
should stabilize.
13 A substantial and growing portion of development fees assessed on new residential development is related to capital
facilities and service connection fees collected a building permit stage by the County for Special Districts. Special District
governing bodies establish and set these fees. The County is not involved in determining the fee amount; it only collects
the fee for the Special District at issuance of building permits and then passes on the fee revenue to the Special District.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-57
5. Development Permit Procedures
Development review and permit processing are necessary steps to ensure that
residential construction proceeds in an orderly manner. However, the time and cost
of permit processing and review can be a constraint to housing development if they
place an undue burden on the developer.
The County can encourage needed investment in the housing stock by reducing the
time and uncertainty involved in obtaining development permits. Pursuant to the
State Permit Streamlining Act, governmental delays can be reduced by: (1) limiting
processing time in most cases to one year, and (2) by requiring agencies to specify
the information needed to complete an acceptable application.
Two levels of review are involved with residential development. The first level
involves the review of conformance with the County General Plan and State
environmental requirements. If the site is not designated for residential
development under the General Plan, an amendment to the General Plan is
required. The second level of review requires that the site have the appropriate
zoning for the type and amount of residential development identified in the project;
otherwise a zone change is needed. Changing a site to a Planned Unit District
includes both rezoning and a preliminary development plan. Single-family
developments often require subdivision map approval while multi-family
developments require a development plan. Depending on the size, scope, and
location, the application and processing times for a residential development project
are as follows:
Table 6-33
Development Review Time Frames
Development Permit/Review Process Time Frame
Rezoning 6 to 12 months
Use Permits 3 to 4 months
Development Plans 3 to 4 months
Minor Subdivisions 4 to 6 months
Major Subdivisions 6 to 12 months
Variances 2 months
Source: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development.
It should be noted that it is the experience of Contra Costa County that larger
residential subdivisions (100 units or more) often take up to 12 months or more to
complete approvals and processing. This is because such applications for residential
development proposals invariably require an Environmental Impact Report. The
length of time to finalize the Environmental Impact Report depends greatly on the
size, scope, and location of the residential development project, environmental
issues under review, and the extent of public comment received on the Draft
Environmental Impact Report.
Overall, the County has taken several steps to expedite processing, reduce costs,
and clarify the process to developers and homeowners. The County has rezoned
many of the parcels in its redevelopment project areas as P-1 or Planned Unit
Development districts in order to facilitate a faster, more streamlined permit
process. Furthermore, in August 1990, the County established the Application and
Permit Center. The Center is designed to make permit processing quicker and
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-58
easier by enhancing coordination of permitting services. The County also offers a
voluntary Pre-application Review. Developers and homeowners can meet with staff
to determine the permits necessary and the cost and review time involved. More
importantly, residential developments under 100 units that are allowed by zoning
need not be reviewed by the Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors; rather
they are reviewed by the Zoning Administrator. The County makes all efforts to
process applications in an expedient manner.
6. Building Codes and Enforcement
Contra Costa County has adopted the Uniform Building Code and the Uniform
Housing Code, which establish standards and require inspections at various stages
of construction to ensure code compliance. The County’s building code also requires
new residential construction to comply with the Federal American with Disabilities
Act, which specifies a minimum percentage of dwelling units in new developments
that must be fully accessible to the physically disabled. Although these standards
and the time required for inspections increase housing production costs and may
impact the viability of rehabilitation of older properties that are required to be
brought up to current code standards, the intent of the codes is to provide
structurally sound, safe, and energy-efficient housing.
The County’s Code Enforcement Section, which is part of the Building Inspection
Division, is responsible for enforcing both State and County regulations governing
the maintenance of all buildings and properties. The Section handles complaints
and inspections in the unincorporated areas of the County and also provides
services to several cities and towns, including Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Pittsburg,
and Clayton, and a portion of the City of Richmond.
Code Enforcement staff handle approximately 100 cases per month. Most of the
complaints deal with property maintenance, substandard housing issues, and
abandoned vehicles. To facilitate the correction of code violations or deficiencies,
Code Enforcement works closely with the Building Inspection Division and other
County agencies. Code Enforcement staff routinely refer homeowners to the
County’s rehabilitation loan and grant programs including the Neighborhood
Preservation Program. Apartment owners are referred to the County Housing
Authority (HACCC) for information on their rental rehabilitation program. The
Division also refers homeowners, mobile home owners, and apartment owners to
the County’s Weatherization Program. This program offers minor home repairs,
water heaters, stoves, insulation and other improvements for housing units in the
County.
7. Rental Inspection Program
On July 26, 2005, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance
No. 2005-17 establishing the Residential Rental Inspection Program (RRIP). The
ordinance was established to proactively identify blighted and deteriorated housing
stock and ensure the rehabilitation or abatement of housing that does not comply
with State and local building, electrical, fire and plumbing code standards. The
ordinance also promotes the safety and preservation of all single and multiple-
family residential rental units and enhances the quality of life for residents of the
County. This program is mandatory.
The Ordinance mandates inspection of all rental units including Single Family
homes, Residential Hotels and Section 8 housing. Under this new Ordinance, rental
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-59
units and their premises are to be inspected over a five-year cycle. If a unit is in full
compliance with applicable codes and standards, it will not be inspected for the next
five years. If on the other hand a unit is determined to pose a substantial threat to
health and safety, it will be placed on a bi-annual inspection cycle.
C. Environmental, Infrastructure, and Public Service Constraints
Environmental factors and a lack of necessary infrastructure or public services can
constrain residential development in a community by increasing costs and reducing
the amount of land suitable for housing construction. This section summarizes and
analyzes the most pertinent constraints to housing in Contra Costa County.
1. Environmental Constraints
Environmental Constraints related to seismic activity, geology/topographical,
flooding potential, or other environmental issues can impact the cost associated
with the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing. A more detailed
discussion is contained in the Safety Element of the County General Plan. The
discussion below summarizes the most pertinent environmental constraints.
Seismic Constraints
Contra Costa County is divided by several fault systems that divide the County into
several large blocks of rock. These faults include the San Andreas, Hayward,
Calaveras, Franklin, Concord, Antioch, and Greenville faults. Based on estimates
from geologists, these faults have a probable earthquake magnitude of between 5.0
and 8.5 on the Richter Scale. The area has experienced a number of major
earthquakes originating on faults both in the County and in the broader region,
including most recently the Loma Prieta Earthquake in 1989.
Seismic activity associated with faults can also cause hazards such as liquefaction
and soil settlement, slope failure, deformation of sidehill fills, ridgetop fissuring and
shattering, and seiches 14 among others. Typically, structures located on bedrock
experience less groundshaking and earthquake-related impacts than structures on
recent sedimentary deposits.
Since housing in the region will likely be subject to a damaging earthquake, it must
be designed to withstand the event and protect its occupants. Without proper
mitigation, earthquakes and other seismic-related activity can have a major impact
on housing development. For development proposed in areas with potential
earthquake-induced hazards, special mitigation measures must be included as
conditions of development approval. As described in the Safety Element, these
measures may include:
o Environmental review: Through the environmental review process, the
County requires geologic, seismic, and/or soils studies as necessary to
evaluate proposed development in areas subject to groundshaking, fault
displacement, or liquefaction.
o Improved construction design: Staff review of applications may require
modified seismic strengthening and detailing to meet the latest adopted
seismic design criteria.
14 An earthquake generated wave in an enclosed body of water such as a lake, reservoir or bay.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-60
o Setbacks: Require that structures are adequately setback from active and
potentially active fault traces.
Fire Hazard Constraints
Fire hazards, particularly wildland fires, can represent a considerable constraint to
residential development without appropriate mitigation measures and the
availability of fire fighting services. However, this constraint is primarily limited to
development that is adjacent to the ULL where there is more open space and
typically a greater amount of vegetation. Areas of the County outside the ULL that
are covered with natural vegetation and dry-farmed grained areas are extremely
flammable during the late summer and fall. These types of wildland or brush fires
are a particular threat to home sites with large areas of non-irrigated vegetation.
Most of the County is identified as susceptible to moderate wildland fire hazards,
while isolated areas in the western and central areas of the County have a high
susceptibility. Another special hazard in the East County is peat fires. Once peat
fires occur they are extremely difficult to extinguish. Any area located east of the
high water line may have peaty soil conditions. However, most of these areas with
a moderate to high susceptibility to fire hazards are located beyond the ULL
boundary where development is limited and the areas are primarily used as open
space and for agricultural operations.
The Safety Element and the Public Facilities and Services Element of the County
General Plan contain policies and measures designed to protect the public and
housing from these fire hazards, particularly beyond the ULL. Some of these
policies are identified below.
o Projects that encroach into areas that have a high or extreme fire hazard
must be reviewed by the appropriate Fire Bureau to determine if special fire
prevention measures are advisable.
o Major developments will not be approved if fire-fighting services are not
available or are not adequate for the area.
o New development will pay for its fair share of costs for new fire protection
facilities and services.
o Needed upgrades to fire facilities and equipment will be identified as part of
project environmental review and area planning activities in order to reduce
fire risk and improve emergency response in the County.
Flood Hazard Constraints
Substantial areas within Contra Costa County are subject to flooding, with most of
the County’s creeks and shoreline areas lying in the 100-year flood plain. The land
inventory for residential sites includes an analysis of flood hazard constraints, and
sites lying in the 100 year flood plain. A substantial portion of East County located
near the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is subject to flooding. The most serious
flood hazards are associated with the system of levees that protect the islands and
adjacent mainland in the Delta area. As with fire hazards, the majority of the area
subject to flooding, particularly in the eastern part of the County, is located beyond
the ULL boundary in areas where development is restricted.
General policies and specific measures in the Safety Element are designed to
protect persons and structures from the hazards related to flooding. These include:
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-61
o Intensive urban and suburban development is not permitted in reclaimed
areas unless flood protection in such areas is constructed, at a minimum, to
the standards of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973.
o The creek setback ordinance requires appropriate setbacks for residential and
commercial structures in order to prevent property damage from bank failure
along natural water courses.
o The environmental review process ensures that potential flooding impacts are
adequately addressed through appropriate mitigation measures such as
flood-proofing, levee protection, and Delta reclamation.
Geologic/Topographical Constraints
The presence of steep hillsides and the risk of landslides and erosion can restrict
housing development in certain areas of the County and may require specific
mitigation measures to ensure the safety of structures and their inhabitants. Much
of the topography of the County includes hilly terrain and it also has a high
proportion of recent, poorly consolidated geologic formations that are prone to
slope failure. As a result, many of these areas have been placed outside the ULL in
order to restrict development in these areas and ensure public safety.
Apart from earthquakes, unstable hill slopes, reclaimed wetlands, and marsh fill
areas, which may suffer landslides, slumping, soil slips, and rockslides are
considered a major geologic hazard in these areas of Contra Costa County.
In order to protect persons and property from these types of geologic/topographical
hazards, the County has recognized that major slope areas in excess of 26 percent
may be unsuitable for development. In addition, the County has adopted a Hillside
Preservation Ordinance to prevent development in areas that are hazardous for
persons or structures. Additional measures and policies affecting housing
development identified in the Safety Element include:
o Slope stability is primary consideration in the ability of land to be developed
or designated for urban uses.
o Slope stability is given careful scrutiny in the design of developments and
structures, and in the adoption of conditions of approval and required
mitigation measures.
o Residential density shall decrease as slope increases, especially above a 15
percent slope.
o Subdivisions approved on hillsides that include individual lots to be resold at
a later time will be large enough to provide flexibility in finding suitable
building site and driveway location.
In general, the County has taken important measures to ensure that the areas
designated for urban development (i.e. those areas lying within the ULL boundary)
are safe and suitable for residential development. Major areas subject to flooding
and fire hazards as well as areas with particularly steep hillsides have been placed
outside the ULL in order to restrict inappropriate and unsafe development there.
While earthquakes affect the entire region, adequate measures identified both in
the Safety Element and contained in the Uniform Building and Housing Codes are
incorporated into developments to ensure that structures are designed to withstand
these events and protect their inhabitants.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-62
2. Infrastructure and Public Service Constraints
A lack of adequate infrastructure or public services and facilities can be a
substantial constraint to residential development if it is to avoid impacting existing
residents. In fact, according to the National Association of Home Builders, ensuring
that the construction of schools, roads and other infrastructure keeps pace with the
anticipated growth in population and economic activity is one of the biggest
challenges facing local and regional governments.15
As part of the Growth Management Program, the County conducts an evaluation of
the remaining infrastructure capacity. This includes an analysis of areas not
adequately served by infrastructure. This process enables the County to identify
constraints to the provision of services and facilities in a given area and better plan
for cost-effective and efficient growth.
The General Plan, as the principal document regulating growth and development in
the County, contains service standards that establish a linkage between new
development accommodated in the Plan and new facilities and/or services required
to meet demands created by new development. The Growth Management Element
contains the implementing programs and service standard requirements that
facilitate the attainment of goals and objectives of the Land Use, Public Facilities
and Services, and Housing Elements of the General Plan.
These standards ensure that the infrastructure and public services and facilities are
in place to serve that development within the Urban Limit Line. The standards are
implemented through payment of fees and exaction and site improvements
discussed earlier in this section. However, it is important to note that intensive
residential development on infill sites can create additional challenges to existing
infrastructure and public services. This is particularly true in areas with aging
infrastructure or public facilities that are already strained serving the needs of
current residents.
Many of the County’s affordable housing developments are located in infill locations
in areas already served by existing infrastructure. While such infill sites are
beneficial in that they don’t require the extension of services, provide housing near
public transit and jobs, encourage economic growth in urban areas, and thus
promote “smart growth” development principles 16, they may face other challenges
to development. Infill sites in the older communities in the County may require
upgrading of existing infrastructure systems to support more intense development,
such as roadway improvements, and replacement of undersized sewer and water
lines. Other constraints to development of infill sites include site assembly and
clean-up; relocation; compatibility with surrounding land uses; and potential
neighborhood opposition.
There are thirty (30) unincorporated communities in Contra Costa County, which
are within the County’s Urban Limit Line, that are provided water and sanitary
sewer services from multiple providers, including single purpose agencies, special
districts, community service districts, county service areas, and private companies.
A complete listing of the water and sanitary service providers for the
unincorporated communities is provided in Appendix C, Table C-1. Each of these
15 National Association of Home Builders, Smart Growth: Building Better Places to Live, Work and Play. May 2000.
16 Judy Corbett and Joe Velasquez. “The Ahwahnee Principles: Toward More Livable Communities,” Western City.
September 1994.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-63
providers is responsible for determining the supply or capacity to their service area,
and they are responsible for informing the County as to whether there is insufficient
supply or capacity within their system for new residential development. To date, as
noted in Table C-1, Appendix C, the water and sanitary sewer providers serving the
unincorporated communities within the County’s Urban Limit Line have adequate
capacity or supply.
The adequacy of the public infrastructure to serve new residential development is
central to the County’s planning process. The Growth Management and Public
Facilities/Services elements to the General Plan establish performance measures for
infrastructure, including water and sewer, and new residential development must
receive written verification for both water and sewer services prior to final
subdivision map or issuance of a building permit. Additionally, under Senate Bill 610
and Senate Bill 211, both which took effect as of January 1, 2002, there is now a
requirement that extensive, specific information about water availability be
presented and considered by cities and counties in connection with residential
subdivisions of a certain size. Cities and counties are required to contact the
responsible water agency proposed to serve the residential subdivision to determine
whether water supplies are sufficient to serve the project. Information from water
and sewer agencies about supply and system capacity is also presented in a
residential project’s environmental review analysis prepared pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
If the drought affecting California persists, the adequacy of future water supplies
for residential development could become a constraint in the coming years. The
East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) and the Contra Costa Water District
(CCWD) are two of the main suppliers of potable water to residents in both
incorporated and unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. Both of these water
districts have prepared water supply management plans that project existing and
future demand for water service within their respective districts and capital
improvement plans for water delivery facilities within their respective districts. Each
of these water providers has recently declared that a drought emergency exists.
They have likewise indicated in their respective water supply management plans
that there may not be adequate water supplies as a result of the drought and they
project shortages for water delivery if the drought continues.
6.4 HOUSING RESOURCES
This section analyzes the resources available for the development, rehabilitation,
and preservation of housing in the unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County.
This analysis includes an evaluation of the availability of land resources for future
housing development, the County’s ability to satisfy its share of the region’s future
housing needs, the financial resources available to support housing activities and
the administrative resources available to assist in implementing the County’s
housing programs. Additionally, this section examines opportunities for energy
conservation.
A. Availability of Sites for Housing
The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is responsible for developing the
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), which assigns a share of the region’s
future housing need to each jurisdiction in the ABAG region. State law requires
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-64
communities to demonstrate that they have sufficient land to accommodate their
share of the region’s need for housing from January 1, 2007 through June 30,
2014. (See Table 6-24 for the County’s RHNA share.) This section identifies the
development potential on suitable land throughout the unincorporated areas of
Contra Costa County.
1. Site Inventory
An important component of the Housing Element is the identification of sites for
future housing development, and evaluation of the adequacy of these sites in
fulfilling the County’s share of regional housing needs as determined by ABAG. As
part of the 2009-2014 Housing Element update, an analysis of the residential
development potential in each of the unincorporated communities of Contra Costa
County was conducted. Results of this analysis are summarized in Table 6-32. In
addition, a parcel-specific vacant and underutilized site analysis was performed
using the County’s Geographic Information System (GIS) and up-to-date real
estate information from the County Assessor’s records.
AB 2428 [Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B)] provides jurisdictions with
an alternative to preparing a site specific analysis to determine how many units at
what affordability levels could be developed and allows local governments to utilize
“default” density standards deemed adequate to meet the “appropriate zoning”
test. The purpose is to provide a numerical density standard for local governments,
resulting in greater certainty in the housing element review process. In Contra
Costa, sites zoned at a minimum of 30 units to the acre that are large enough for a
20 unit development are consider adequate for affordable housing development and
no further analysis is required to establish the adequacy of density standard.
To assess the realistic residential development potential in the unincorporated
areas, the County performed a detailed parcel-by-parcel analysis (a detailed sites
analysis will be provided in a CD ROM that will accompany this Housing Element).
The analysis takes into consideration a range of factors, including permitted
density, parcel size, potential for lot consolidation, development constraints relating
to topography and other physical and environmental issues, location and housing
demand, as well as available development tools and incentives such as
redevelopment and planned unit development.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-65
Table 6-34
Residential Sites Analysis
Subregion Total # of Parcels Total Acres Potential # of Units
West County
Built: 148 17 148
Approved: 44 46 456
Under Consideration: 71 146 2,426
Vacant: 3 1 7
Underutilized: 5 2 66
Total: 271 212 3,103
Central County
Built: 505 204 505
Approved: 265 608 1,351
Under Consideration: 30 57 106
Vacant: 1 1 9
Underutilized: 6 9 157
Total: 807 879 2,128
East County
Built: 31 6 31
Approved: 667 112 836
Under Consideration: 84 197 983
Vacant: 8 14 119
Underutilized: 0 0 0
Total: 790 329 1,969
TOTAL COUNTY
Built: 684 227 684
Approved: 976 766 2,643
Under Consideration: 185 400 3,515
Vacant: 12 16 135
Underutilized: 11 11 223
Total: 1,868 1,420 7,200
Source: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development.
For example, low density residential sites in some areas of the County are
considered feasible for affordable housing development for moderate income
households based on market conditions in these areas. New single-family homes
currently for sale in the West and Eastern portions of the County are selling in the
mid-300,000s. Homes within this price range are affordable to moderate income
families (see Table 6-17 for affordable housing prices by income group). Overall,
the County does not rely on single-family sites to fulfill its low income housing
needs. No very low income housing need of the RHNA is assumed to be fulfilled
with single-family residential development.
It is noted that in the Table 6-34, Residential Site Analysis, in the category “Under
Consideration” listed for West County up to 2100 of the potential units can be
attributed to a Specific Plan that is now in preparation for an area in North
Richmond currently designated for industrial use. The Specific Plan proposes to re-
designate a 100(+) acre area from industrial use to a mix of residential,
commercial, and public uses in order to establish a new residential neighborhood
within North Richmond. As currently proposed, the Specific Plan would permit up to
2100 residential units of which 1860 would be considered affordable to moderate
households and 240 affordable to low income households. It is expected that the
Specific Plan will be considered for adoption by the Board of Supervisors in mid-
2010 following the completion of an Environmental Impact Report and a public
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-66
hearing before the County Planning Commission. Once adopted, it is anticipated
that the Specific Plan would be implemented in a phased manner according to
market conditions and the completion of upgrades to public infrastructure
necessary to support the new residential development. The affordable units would
be built in proportionate share with the phasing of the market rate units consistent
with the approach under similar Specific Plans adopted by the County, such as
Dougherty Valley. In the event that the Specific Plan cannot be approved as
proposed by mid-2010, the County would continue working toward Specific Plan
approval and initiate plan implementation within the reporting period of this
Housing Element. Regardless of the timing for Specific Plan approval, any plan
considered for this area of North Richmond would include provisions to contribute a
significant share of the County’s affordable housing need. If it appears that the
North Richmond Specific Plan cannot be approved within the reporting period of this
Housing Element, the County would re-double its efforts to secure a comparable
share of affordable housing units elsewhere in the County.
In considering the impact of utility constraints on the cost of development, the
County assumes that development on residential parcels with utility or other site
constraints will be limited to the development of moderate and above moderate
income housing. In estimating the potential unit yield on such constrained sites, the
low end of the residential density under the General Plan was assumed.
Based on the detailed residential sites analysis, vacant and underutilized sites in the
unincorporated areas of the County can potentially accommodate a total of 7,200
new units (see Table 6-34). Many underutilized sites are located within County
redevelopment project areas. With the availability of redevelopment tools and
financing, these underutilized sites can be more readily available for development
than vacant sites in other areas.
Table 6-35
RHNA Affordability Analysis
Affordability Level Units Yield *
West County
Above Moderate: 605
Moderate: 2,086
Lower: 412
Total: 3,103
Central County
Above Moderate: 1,443
Moderate: 284
Lower: 401
Total: 2,128
East County
Above Moderate: 1,162
Moderate: 181
Lower: 626
Total: 1,969
TOTAL COUNTY
Above Moderate: 3,210
Moderate: 2,551
Lower: 1,439
Total: 7,200
Source: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
*Includes built, approved, under consideration, vacant and underutilized residential sites.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-67
2. Progress Toward RHNA
The Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) was prepared by ABAG for the
period of January 1, 2007 through June 30, 2014. As part of this process, ABAG
requires each jurisdiction to plan for a certain number of housing units for this
period. This requirement is satisfied by identifying adequate sites that could
accommodate housing that is affordable to very low, low, moderate, and above
moderate-income households. ABAG has determined that the unincorporated
County’s share of regional housing needs is a total of 3,508 new housing units.
Table 6-36
Remaining RHNA by Income Group
Income
Group RHNA
Permits
Pulled
Units
Approved
Units Under
Consideration
Remaining
RHNA
Potential Units
on Vacant/
Underutilized
Sites*
Lower 1,413 22 261 837 293 319
Moderate 687 301 189 2,057 0 4
Above
Moderate 1,408 361 2,193 621 0 35
Total 3,508 684 2,643 3,515 293 358
Source: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development.
* There are additional unvetted Vacant & Underutilized sites in the Moderate & Above Moderate category.
Housing Units Constructed or Approved
Building permits issued from January 1, 2007 onward can be credited towards
meeting the adequate sites requirement for the RHNA. In 2007 building permits
were pulled for 646 housing units in the unincorporated areas, including a total of
184 affordable housing units. These assisted units are provided primarily through
the following residential developments:
o Bella Flora: 69 units (An additional 104 units were constructed in the
previous reporting period. Thirty-five units were affordable to very-low
and lower income families.)
o Alamo Creek developments: 58 units (An additional 69 units were
constructed in the previous reporting period. All 127 units were affordable
to moderate income families.)
In 2008 there were 568 permits pulled including the 422 unit Avalon Bay apartment
project at Contra Costa Centre. In addition to the units built, over 2,070 new units
have been approved and 693 applications have been submitted (shown in Table 6-
37 on the following page). The County anticipates that many of these approved
units will be completed within the 2007-2014 planning period.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-68
Table 6-37
Major Residential Projects Approved or Under Consideration
Community Density
(units/acre) Status Potential
Unit Yield
Affordability
Level
Alamo Creek Single Family
High Density Approved 650
(Blackhawk-Camino Tassajara)*
5.6 Units/Ac. 530 SF
Units Above Mod. 530
Single Family
Low Density 120 Senior
Units Low 120
2.4 Units/Ac.
Multi-Family
High Density
26.88
Units/Ac.
Discovery Bay West (Discovery Bay) 5.0 - 7.2 Approved 623 Above Mod 626
Avalon Bay Transit Village @ 80 du/ac Approved 522
(Contra Costa Centre) 437 For
Sale Units Mod. 437
85 Rental
Units Very Low 85
Nove Above Mod 315
(North Richmond) Mod 16
Low 16
12.0-20.9 Approved 370
Very Low 23
Affinto (Bay Point) Above Mod 118
Mod. 14
12.0-20.9 Approved 140
Low 8
Appian Way Sunrise (El Sobrante) 7.3-11.9 Approved 32 Mod 32
Balmore Court (El Sobrante) 5.0-7.2 Approved 25 Above Mod 25
Rock Island Homes (Sandmound Slough) 7.3-11.9 Approved 21 Mod 21
Swim Club (Rodeo) 5.0-7.2 Approved 17 Mod 17
DP04-3021 (Bay Point) 7.3-11.9 Approved 15 Mod 15
Former School Site (Mt View) 5.0-7.2 Approved 13 Mod 13
Humphrey (Alamo) 1.0-2.9 Approved 12 Above Mod 12
SD08-09229 (Bay Point) 29.9 Approved 12 Mod 12
Discovery Builders (Vine Hill) 5.0-7.2 Approved 10 Mod 10
Habitat for Humanity (Bay Point) 5.0-7.2 Approved 9 Very Low 9
Discovery Builders (Bay Point) 5.0-7.2 Approved 8 Mod 8
Geoghegan (El Sobrante) 5.0-7.2 Approved 5 Above Mod 5
DP07-03008 (Bay Point) 5.0-7.2 Approved 5 Mod 5
Muir Ln Estates (Alamo) 1.0-2.9 Approved 3 Above Mod 3
Pantages (Discovery Bay) 3.0 - 4.9 Applied 290 Above Mod 290
SD06-09160 Senior Apts (Discovery Bay) 5.0 - 7.2 Applied 64 Mod 64
SD01-8533 (El Sobrante) 5.0 - 7.2 Applied 40 Above Mod 40
DP05-3095 (Mt View) 21.0 - 29.9 Applied 30 Low 30
SD03-8784 (Vine Hill) 5.0 - 7.2 Applied 27 Mod 27
SD05-9053 (El Sobrante) 3.0 - 4.9 Applied 19 Above Mod 19
DP07-03035 (Bay Point) 5.0 - 7.2 Applied 17 Mod 17
SD06-9130 (El Sobrante) 7.3 - 11.9 Applied 17 Mod 17
SD06-9066 (El Sobrante) 5.0 - 7.2 Applied 14 Above Mod 14
SD06-09063 (Bay Point) 5.0 - 7.2 Applied 14 Mod 14
DP05-03101 (Vine Hill) 5.0 - 7.2 Applied 11 Mod 11
SD05-09004 (Vine Hill) 5.0 - 7.2 Applied 11 Mod 11
SD05-8554 (El Sobrante) 5.0 - 7.2 Applied 10 Above Mod 10
SD05-8986 (El Sobrante) 7.3 - 11.9 Applied 10 Mod 10
SD07-9174 (Reliez Valley) 1.0 - 2.9 Applied 9 Above Mod 9
SD05-9064 (El Sobrante) 3.0 - 4.9 Applied 8 Above Mod 8
DP07-3007 (Crockett) 5.0 - 7.2 Applied 8 Mod 8
DP02-3009 (El Sobrante) 7.3 - 11.9 Applied 7 Above Mod 7
DP07-3061 (Alamo) .02 - .09 Applied 5 Above Mod 5
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-69
Table 6-37
Major Residential Projects Approved or Under Consideration
Community Density
(units/acre) Status Potential
Unit Yield
Affordability
Level
MS07-0014 (Alamo) 1.0 - 2.9 Applied 4 Above Mod 4
MS08-00004 (Unincorporated Walnut Creek) 1.0 - 2.9 Applied 4 Above Mod 4
MS07-00022 (Pacheco) 12.0 - 20.9 Applied 4 Above Mod 4
MS05-00055 (El Sobrante) 3.0 - 4.9 Applied 4 Above Mod 4
MS07-0002 (El Sobrante) 5.0 - 7.2 Applied 4 Above Mod 4
Source: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development, 2008.
* Affordability requirements included in proposed conditions of approval.
** Affordable units required by conditions of approval and/or existing development agreements.
B. Financial Resources
Contra Costa County has access to a variety of existing and potential funding
sources available for affordable housing activities. These include programs from
federal, state, local, and private resources. The following section describes the key
housing funding sources currently used in the County – CDBG, HOME, ESG,
HOPWA, and MHSA funds as well as redevelopment set-aside funds, bond financing,
tax credits, and Section 8. Table 6-38 provides a complete inventory of the key
financial resources available for housing in the unincorporated areas of the County.
Table 6-38
Financial Resources for Housing Activities
Program Name Description Eligible Activities
1. Federal Programs
Community
Development Block
Grant (CDBG)
Annual grants awarded to the County on a
formula basis for housing and community
development activities in the Urban County.
• Acquisition
• Rehabilitation
• Home Buyer Assistance
• Economic Development
• Infrastructure Improvements
• Homeless Assistance
• Public Services
HOME Investment
Partnership Act
Funds
Flexible grant program awarded to County on
a formula basis for affordable housing
activities in the Contra Costa Consortium
area.
• Acquisition
• Rehabilitation
• Home Buyer Assistance
• New Construction
Emergency Shelter
Grants (ESG
Grants awarded to County to implement a
broad range of activities that serve homeless
persons in Urban County.
• Shelter Construction
• Shelter Operation
• Social Services
• Homeless Prevention
Housing
Opportunities for
Persons with AIDS
(HOPWA
Funds for housing development and related
support services for low-income persons with
HIV/AIDS and their families.
• Acquisition
• Rehabilitation
• New Construction
• Housing-related Services
Section 8 Rental
Assistance Program
Rental assistance payments to owners of
private market rate units on behalf of very
low-income tenants.
• Rental Assistance
Section 202 Grants to non-profit developers of multi-family
rental housing for the elderly. • Acquisition
• Rehabilitation
• New Construction
• Rental Assistance
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-70
Table 6-38
Financial Resources for Housing Activities
Program Name Description Eligible Activities
Section 811 Grants to non-profit developers of supportive
rental housing for persons with mental,
physical, and other disabilities, including
group homes, independent living facilities and
intermediate care facilities.
• Acquisition
• Rehabilitation
• New Construction
• Rental Assistance
Section 108 Loan Provides loan guarantee to CDBG entitlement
jurisdictions for large-scale projects.
Maximum loan amount can be up to five times
the jurisdiction’s recent annual allocation.
Maximum loan term is 20 years.
• Acquisition
• Rehabilitation
• Home Buyer Assistance
• Economic Development
• Homeless Assistance
• Public Services
Mortgage Credit
Certificate Program
Income tax credits available to first-time
homebuyers to buy new or existing single-
family housing. Local agencies (County) make
certificates available.
• Home Buyer Assistance
Low-income Housing
Tax Credit (LIHTC)
Tax credits are available to persons and
corporations that invest in rental housing for
lower income households. Proceeds from the
sale of the credits are typically used to create
housing.
• New Construction
• Acquisition
• Rehabilitation
• Historic Preservation
Capital Fund
Program
Funds are available to pubic housing authority
for public housing modernization and
rehabilitation.
• Rehabilitation
• Modernization
Shelter Plus Care
Program
Rental assistance that is either tenant-based,
project-based, or sponsor-based to maximize
independence for disabled homeless persons.
Funds to support the provision of permanent
housing and supportive services for the
homeless.
• Rental Assistance
• New Construction
• Support Services
Supportive Housing
Program (SHP)
Grants for development of supportive housing
and support services to assist homeless
persons in the transition from homelessness.
• Transitional Housing
• Housing for the Disabled
• Supportive Housing
• Support Services
2. State Programs
School Facility Fee
(SFF) Downpayment
Assistance Program
SFF is designed to provide qualified home-
buyers with assistance to purchase their
newly constructed home. Eligible applicants
receive a conditional grant based on either a
partial or full rebate of the school facility fees
paid by the builder. The assistance can be
used for down payment, closing costs, or any
costs associated with the buyer’s first
mortgage loan, subject to acceptance by the
mortgage lender and the mortgage insurer.
• Homebuyer Assistance
Multi-Family Housing
Program (MHP)
Deferred payment loans for new construction,
rehabilitation, acquisition, and preservation of
permanent and transitional rental housing.
This program is expected to be out of funds
by 2009.
• New Construction
• Rehabilitation
• Acquisition
• Preservation
California Housing
Finance Agency
(CalHFA) Rental
Housing Programs
Below market rate financing offered to
builders and developers of multiple-family and
elderly rental housing. Tax-exempt bonds
provide below-market mortgages. Funds may
also be used to acquire properties.
• New Construction
• Rehabilitation
• Acquisition
California Housing
Finance Agency
(CalHFA) Home
Mortgage Purchase
Program
CalHFA sells tax-exempt bonds to make below
market loans to first-time homebuyers.
Program operates through participating
lenders who originate loans for CalHFA.
• Homebuyer Assistance
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-71
Table 6-38
Financial Resources for Housing Activities
Program Name Description Eligible Activities
California
Farmworker Housing
Grant Program
Provides matching grants to assist
development of various types of housing
(renter - and owner-occupied) projects for
agricultural worker households.
• Land Acquisition
• Site Development
• Construction
• Rehabilitation
Downtown Rebound Finance the conversion of vacant or
underutilized commercial and industrial
structures into residential units; residential
infill; and the development of high-density
housing adjacent to existing or planned mass
transit facilities.
• Rehabilitation
• Conversion
3. Local Programs
Redevelopment
Housing Set-Aside
Funds
State law requires that 20% of
Redevelopment Agency funds be set aside for
a wide range of affordable housing activities.
• Acquisition
• Rehabilitation
• New Construction
Single-Family
Mortgage Revenue
Bond
Issue mortgage revenue bonds to support the
development and improvement of affordable
single-family homes to qualified households.
• New Construction
• Rehabilitation
• Acquisition
Tax Exempt
Housing Revenue
Bond
Support low-income housing development by
issuing housing tax-exempt bonds requiring
the developer to lease a fixed percentage of
the units to low-income families at specified
rental rates.
• New Construction
• Rehabilitation
• Acquisition
4. Private Resources/Financing Programs
• Fixed rate mortgages issued by private
mortgage insurers.
• Home Buyer Assistance
• Mortgages which fund the purchase and
rehabilitation of a home.
• Home Buyer Assistance
• Rehabilitation
Federal National
Mortgage Association
(Fannie Mae)
• Low Down-Payment Mortgages for Single-
Family Homes in under served low-
income and minority cities.
• Home Buyer Assistance
Savings Assn.
Mortgage Company
Inc. (SAMCO)
Pooling process to fund loans for affordable
ownership and rental housing projects. Non-
profit and for profit developers contact
member institutions.
• New construction of rentals,
cooperatives, self help
housing, homeless shelters,
and group homes
California
Community
Reinvestment
Corporation (CCRC)
Non-profit mortgage banking consortium
designed to provide long term debt financing
for affordable rental housing. Non-profit and
for profit developers contact member banks.
• New Construction
• Rehabilitation
• Acquisition
Federal Home Loan
Bank Affordable
Housing Program
Direct subsidies to non-profit and for profit
developers & public agencies for affordable
low-income ownership and rental projects.
• New Construction
Freddie Mac
Home Works - Provides first and second
mortgages that include rehabilitation loan.
County provides gap financing for
rehabilitation component. Households earning
up to 80% MFI qualify.
• Home Buyer Assistance
combined with Rehabilitation
Bay Area Local
Initiatives Support
Corporation (LISC)
Bay Area LISC provides recoverable grants
and debt financing on favorable terms to
support a variety of community development
activities including affordable housing.
• Acquisition
• New Construction
• Rehabilitation
Northern California
Community Loan
Fund (NCCLF)
Offers low-interest loans for the revitalization
of low-income communities and affordable
housing development.
• Acquisition
• Rehabilitation
• New Construction
Low-Income
Housing Fund
(LIHF)
LIHF provides below-market loan financing for
all phases of affordable housing development
and/or rehabilitation.
• Acquisition
• Rehabilitation
• New Construction
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-72
1. Community Development Block Grant Program Funds
Through the CDBG program, the federal Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) provides funds to local governments for funding a wide range
of housing and community development activities for low-income persons.
The County administers the CDBG Program for all Contra Costa jurisdictions except
the cities of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, Richmond, and Walnut Creek. These five
cities have populations over 50,000 and are entitled to receive funding from HUD
directly. The remaining 14 cities and the unincorporated areas participate in the
CDBG program through the County, and are collectively referred to as the Contra
Costa Urban County.
Based on previous allocations, the County anticipates receiving an annual allocation
of approximately $3.5 million in CDBG funds during the 2009-2014 period.17 In
accordance with policies established by the Board of Supervisors, 47 percent of the
annual CDBG allocation (approximately $1.8 million) is reserved for programs and
projects to increase and maintain the supply of affordable housing in the Urban
County. Program priorities include projects to:
o increase the supply of multifamily rental housing affordable to and
occupied by very low- and low-income households;
o maintain the existing affordable housing stock through the rehabilitation
of owner-occupied and rental housing;
o increase the supply of appropriate and supportive housing for special
needs populations;
o assist the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless by providing
emergency and transitional housing; and
o alleviate problems of housing discrimination.
CDBG funds are used for site acquisition, rehabilitation, first-time homebuyer
assistance, development of emergency and transitional shelters, and fair
housing/housing counseling activities. Additional activities in support of the new
construction of affordable housing include site acquisition, site clearance, and the
financing of related infrastructure and public facility improvements.
On July 30, 2008, President Bush signed into law the 2008 Housing and Economic
Recovery Act (HERA). HERA included a special allocation of CDBG funds, known as
Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds. NSP provides targeted emergency
assistance to state and local governments to acquire and redevelop abandoned and
foreclosed residential properties that might otherwise become sources of
abandonment and blight within our communities. Contra Costa County, as the
Urban County 18 lead agency, has been allocated $6,019,051 in NSP funds to be
used over five years. The County intends to use these funds to support acquisition
and rehabilitation programs of vacant foreclosed homes in Bay Point, Oakley, Rodeo
San Pablo, and North Richmond.
17 CDBG Funding to the County has decreased every year for the past 5 years. It is difficult to predict with any certainty
at what level the Urban County will be funded in the future.
18 The Urban County includes the unincorporated County and all cities with the exception of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg,
Richmond, and Walnut Creek. Antioch and Richmond received direct allocations of NSP funds. If the State finds Concord,
Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek to be high impact communities, they may apply to the State for NSP funds.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-73
2. HOME Investment Partnership Act Program Funds
The purpose of the HOME Program is to improve and/or expand the supply of
affordable housing opportunities for low-income households. Contra Costa as the
Urban County and the cities of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg and Walnut Creek
formed the Contra Costa Consortium for purposes of participating in the HOME
Program. The County administers the program on behalf of the Consortium.
Approximately $2.9 million in HOME funds are allocated to the Consortium on an
annual basis through HUD.
Consortium HOME Program priorities include the following:
o acquisition, rehabilitation and new construction of affordable multifamily
rental housing;
o owner-occupied housing rehabilitation programs for low-income
households;
o first-time homebuyer’s assistance for low-income households.
All projects funded with HOME funds must be targeted to very low and low-income
households and must have permanent matching funds from non-federal resources
equal to 25 percent of the requested funds. In addition, the Board of Supervisors
has established a priority for the allocation of HOME and CDBG funds to projects
that include a portion of the units affordable to extremely low-income households.
3. Emergency Shelter Grants (ESG) Funds
The Emergency Shelter Grants (ESG) Program was established as part of the
federal Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act. The program provides funds
for homeless shelters, social services for the homeless, and for homeless
prevention efforts. On behalf of the Urban County, Contra Costa receives
approximately $154,000 annually in ESG funds from HUD. These funds are awarded
to local non-profit and public agencies to provide emergency shelter and services
for the homeless. In the past, ESG funds have been used in combination with
General Fund and other resources to support two emergency shelters for adults in
West and Central County. Additional projects have included homeless prevention
activities, the homeless hotline and shelter and services for battered women and
families.
4. Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)
The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program provides
funding for housing development and related support services for low-income
persons with HIV/AIDS and their families. Funds are provided through HUD on an
annual basis to the City of Oakland for the Alameda/Contra Costa eligible
metropolitan area. Contra Costa County receives a formula share of HOPWA funds
from the City of Oakland based on the number of reported AIDS cases. Contra
Costa’s share is approximately 25 percent of the total allocation, or $430,000.
Funds have been used primarily for acquisition/rehabilitation, and new construction
of permanent housing. Additional funds have been used by the County AIDS
Program for housing advocacy.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-74
5. Mental Health Services Act
The Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) was established by the passage of
Proposition 63 in November 2004 as is intended to “transform the public mental
health system”. The population to be helped under MHSA is defined as adults and
older adults who have been diagnosed with or who may have a serious and
persistent mental illness, and children and youth who have been diagnosed with or
who may have serious emotional disorders, and their families. In 2008, the County
assigned its MHSA housing funds to the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA)
to administer on behalf of the County. The County has approximately $9 million
over the next five years. Up to $3 million may be used to support housing
development operating costs.
6. Redevelopment Set-Aside Funds
In accordance with State law, the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency sets
aside 20 percent of all tax increment revenue generated from its redevelopment
project areas to fund projects that increase, improve, or preserve the supply of
affordable housing. Housing developed with these set-aside funds must remain
affordable to low- and moderate-income households for at least 55 years for rentals
and 45 years for ownership housing. The Agency receives approximately $3.4
million in set-aside funds annually and anticipates using these funds to support the
following major programs/activities during the planning period: new construction of
affordable housing, preservation of assisted housing, acquisition/rehabilitation,
special needs housing, first-time homebuyer assistance, homeowner rehabilitation,
and the residential displacement program. In recent years, the Agency has
successfully used housing funds to assist with the financing of several affordable
housing developments, including the award winning Bella Monte Apartments (Bay
Point), Rodeo Gateway (Rodeo), and Avalon Walnut Creek (Contra Costa Centre).
Funds have also been used to support the development of affordable
homeownership opportunities, including the Bay Point Habitat Homes and a first-
time homebuyer program. Redevelopment funds were a critical component of the
Contra Costa Centre Transit Village development. These funds were the catalyst for
significant private investment which will result in 422 units of rental (including 85
affordable units) and 100 units of ownership housing.
7. Bond Financing
The County has been very active in issuing tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds to
support the development of affordable housing. Under the Mortgage Revenue Bond
(MRB) Program, the County provides mortgage financing for affordable housing
projects through the sale of tax-exempt bonds. In particular, the Multi-family
Residential Rental Housing Revenue Bond Program assists developers of multi-
family rental housing in increasing the supply of affordable rental units available to
qualified households. The proceeds from bond sales are used for new construction,
acquisition, and/or rehabilitation of multi-family housing developments. A specified
number of units are required to remain affordable to eligible, lower-income
households for a specified number of years after the initial financing is provided.
Numerous County affordable housing developments have been funded in part by
proceeds from County-issued bonds, including Avalon Walnut Creek at Contra Costa
Centre. Through the refinancing of bonds, the County has also extended the
affordability terms on assisted housing projects.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-75
8. Mortgage Credit Certificates
The Mortgage Credit Certificate Program, authorized by Congress in the Tax Reform
Act of 1984, provides financial assistance to "First time homebuyers" for the
purchase of new or existing single-family home. In 1985, the State adopted
legislation authorizing local agencies, such as Contra Costa County, to make
Mortgage Credit Certificates (MCCs) available in California. Contra Costa County
MCC authority can be used in all cities as well as the unincorporated areas of the
County.
9. Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC)
Created by the 1986 Tax Reform Act, the LIHTC program has been used in
combination with County and other resources to encourage the construction and
rehabilitation of rental housing for lower-income households. The program allows
investors an annual tax credit over a ten-year period, provided that the housing
meets minimum low-income occupancy requirements. The tax credit is typically
sold to large investors at a syndication value. Several County affordable apartment
projects have been funded in part by LIHTC proceeds, including Bella Monte
apartments in the Bay Point area.
10. Section 8 Assistance
The Section 8 program is a federal program that provides rental assistance to very-
low income persons in need of affordable housing. The Section 8 program offers a
voucher that pays the difference between the current fair market rent and what a
tenant can afford to pay (e.g., 30 percent of their income). The voucher allows a
tenant to choose housing that may cost above the payment standard, but the
tenant must pay the extra cost. The County currently has approximately 7,000
residents who receive Section 8 assistance.
C. County Administrative Resources
Non-profit agencies that are involved in housing development represent a
substantial resource for the provision of affordable units in a community. Nonprofit
ownership helps assure that these housing units will remain as low-income housing.
Described below are major public and non-profit agencies that have been involved
in affordable housing activities throughout Contra Costa County. These
agencies/organizations play important roles in the production, improvement,
preservation, and management of affordable housing.
1. Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
The Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) maintains overall
responsibility for the development of housing and community development plans,
policies and strategies, including the County Housing Element and the Consolidated
Plan. DCD, Redevelopment Division implements programs designed to increase and
maintain affordable housing, expand economic and social opportunities for lower
income, homeless and special needs populations, and revitalize declining
neighborhoods. Specific programs administered through the Redevelopment
Division include the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), the HOME
Investment Partnership Act Program, the Housing Opportunities for Persons with
AIDS (HOPWA) Program, the Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) Program, the tax-
exempt and mortgage revenue bond, and Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC)
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-76
programs. The Redevelopment Division is also responsible for the review of projects
applying to HUD for funding to determine their consistency with the Consortium’s
Consolidated Plan.
The Building Inspection Division of DCD (BID) carries out building inspection and
code enforcement activities that are designed to ensure the safety of the County’s
housing stock. BID operates the Neighborhood Preservation Program, a housing
rehabilitation loan program for low-income homeowners in the Urban County. In
addition, BID offers a weatherization and energy conservation program. This
program helps lower income households to reduce monthly housing costs through
the provision of resources for rehabilitation and other improvements designed to
increase efficiency in energy use.
2. Redevelopment Agency of the County of Contra Costa
Also within the DCD, Redevelopment Division is the Contra Costa Redevelopment
Agency (RDA). The RDA supports and provides resources for affordable housing
development in the County’s redevelopment areas located in Bay Point, Contra
Costa Centre, Montalvin Manor, North Richmond, and Rodeo. In accordance with
State law, the County Redevelopment Agency reserves a minimum of 20 percent of
its annual tax increment revenues for the support of affordable housing projects.
RDA resources are used to support the maintenance and expansion of affordable
homeownership and multifamily rental opportunities within the redevelopment
areas.
3. Housing Authority of the County of Contra Costa (HACCC)
The Housing Authority plays a major role in supporting and implementing the
County’s housing programs. The HACCC is responsible for the County’s public
housing and rental assistance programs (e.g. Section 8 certificates and vouchers),
operates rental housing rehabilitation programs for several jurisdictions, and is the
project sponsor for selected affordable housing projects.
4. Contra Costa County Health Services Department
The Health Services Department (HSD) is responsible for the development of plans
and programs to assist homeless households and adults throughout the County by
providing emergency and permanent supportive housing and supportive services
designed to enable this population to achieve greater economic independence and a
stable living environment. HSD coordinates the activities of and provides staff
support to the Contra Costa Interagency Council on Homelessness (CCICH),
appointed by the County Board of Supervisors and consisting of representatives of
local jurisdictions, homeless service providers, advocacy and volunteer groups, the
business and faith communities, citizens at large, and previously/currently
homeless individuals. The CCICH works with the HSD to develop and refine the Ten
Year Plan to End Homelessness, and to develop the County’s annual McKinney Act
application, educate the public with respect to homeless issues, and advocate for
increased funding for homeless programs.
D. Local Affordable Housing Developer Capacity
Contra Costa County has several successful affordable housing developers with
significant organizational capacity. Following is an example of the most active
developers in the County.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-77
1. BRIDGE Housing Corporation
Located in San Francisco, BRIDGE Housing Corporation develops and manages
affordable housing for lower income households in the Bay Area and throughout
California. Projects developed and managed by BRIDGE in Contra Costa County
include affordable multifamily rental housing (e.g. Coggins Square Apartments,
Grayson Creek) and rental housing for seniors (Pinole Grove, The Arbors).
2. Christian Church Homes
Christian Church Homes of Northern California (CCHNC), located in Oakland, was
created to meet the housing needs of low-income seniors. The agency currently
manages Sycamore Place I & II Apartments, Antioch Hillcrest Terrace and
Carquinez Vista Manor.
3. Community Housing Development Corporation (CHDC)
CHDC is a non-profit housing developer located in North Richmond that has been
active in the development of affordable homeownership opportunities and multi-
family rental housing in the West County area. Successfully completed projects
include Parkway Estates and the Community Heritage Apartments.
4. Eden Housing, Inc.
Based in Hayward, Eden Housing assists communities through an array of
affordable housing development and management activities as well as social
services that meet the needs of lower income households. The agency serves low-
and moderate-income families, seniors, disabled households and the formerly
homeless. Projects include Brentwood Senior Commons, Riverhouse, Rivertown
Place, Samara Terrace, Victoria Family, Virginia Lane, and West Rivertown.
Additional projects in Lafayette and Orinda are in predevelopment.
5. EAH
EAH is a non-profit housing developer active throughout California. EAH develops
and manages affordable housing projects in order to expand the supply of high
quality affordable housing and to enable families to attain financial stability. The
agency has completed a number of affordable developments in the County including
The Oaks, Golden Oak Manor, Silver Oak, Casa Adobe, and Rodeo Gateway
Apartments.
6. Mercy Housing California
Mercy Housing California is a non-profit housing developer located in San Francisco
and Sacramento that has been active in Contra Costa County developing
homeownership and rental housing projects. Target populations include senior and
farm worker families. Projects include Arroyo Seco, Marsh Creek Vista, Villa
Amador, a multi-family rental housing project for low-income farmworker-
households in East County. Mercy Housing, in partnership with Contra Costa
Interfaith Housing, developed a permanent supportive housing project for homeless
families called Garden Park.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-78
7. Habitat for Humanity, East Bay
Habitat for Humanity is a non-profit agency dedicated to building affordable housing
and rehabilitating homes to provide affordable homeownership opportunities for
lower income families. Habitat builds and repairs homes with the help of public
funds, private donations, volunteers and partner families. Habitat homes are sold to
partner families at no profit with affordable, no-interest loans. Volunteers,
churches, businesses, and other groups provide most of the labor for the homes.
Habitat developed Ellis Street Townhomes, Herb White Way, Norcross, Montague
and Rivertown homes.
8. Resources for Community Development (RCD)
Resources for Community Development (RCD) is a non-profit housing developer
located in Berkley and active throughout Alameda and Contra Costa County. RCD
develops housing for individuals, families, and special needs populations through
acquisition/rehabilitation and new construction projects. Contra Costa projects
include Terrace Glen, Aspen Court, Riley Court, Camara Circle, Pinecrest
Apartments, Caldera Place, Alvarez Court, Lakeside, and East Leland Court.
Additional projects are in predevelopment in El Cerrito and Martinez.
9. Rubicon Programs
Rubicon Programs is a non-profit community-based service organization and
affordable housing provider located in Richmond. Rubicon serves the West County
area by providing housing and services to homeless and special needs populations.
Projects include The Idaho Apartments, Ohio Avenue, Virginia Avenue, and Church
Lane Apartments.
10. SHELTER, Inc.
SHELTER, Inc. is a non-profit community-based service organization and affordable
housing provider located in Martinez that is active in Central and East Contra Costa
County. SHELTER, Inc. provides homeless prevention services as well as
transitional and special needs housing. Projects and programs include REACH Plus,
East County Family Transitional Housing (management), Mt. View House, The
Landings, and Victoria Apartments.
E. Opportunities for Energy Conservation and Reducing Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Utility-related costs can directly impact the affordability of housing in Northern
California, particularly in light of the recent energy crisis. Title 24 of the California
Administrative Code sets forth mandatory energy standards for new development
and requires adoption of an “energy budget.” In turn, the home building industry
must comply with these standards while localities are responsible for enforcing the
energy conservation regulations.
There are many alternative ways to meet these energy standards including but not
limited to:
o use of passive solar,
o high insulation levels,
o active solar water heating,
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-79
o locating the home on the northern portion of the sunniest location of the site,
o designing the structure to admit the maximum amount of sunlight into the
building and to reduce exposure to extreme weather condition,
o locating indoor areas of maximum usage along the south face of the building
and placing corridors, closets, laundry rooms, power core, and garages along
the north face making the main entrance a small enclosed space that creates
an air lock between the building and its exterior,
o orienting the entrance away from winds, or
o using a windbreak to reduce the wind velocity against the entrance.
1. Utility Incentive Programs
Utility companies serving Contra Costa County offer various programs to promote
the efficient use of energy and other resources, and to assist lower income
customers. These programs are discussed below.
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) provides both natural gas and electricity to residential
consumers in the County. PG&E provides a variety of energy efficiency rebates and
energy conservation services for residents, including:
o $600 rebate for home duct sealing
o $300 rebate for the installation of an energy-efficient natural gas furnace
o $50 rebate for the installation of an energy-efficient variable speed motor air
handler system
o $100 rebate for the installation of an energy-efficient whole house fan
o automatic rebates for lighting products with the PG&E Rebate Sticker
o $100 rebate for the installation of a multi-speed swimming pool filtration
pump and motor
o $75 rebate for the installation of a high-efficiency clothes washer
o $50 rebate for the installation of a high-efficiency dishwasher
o $50 rebate for the installation of an energy-efficient room air conditioner
o $30 rebate for the installation of an energy-efficient water heater
o $200 rebate per 1000 square feet for the installation of a cool roof
o $150 rebate per 1000 square feet for the installation of attic and wall
insulation
o $35 rebate for the recycling of an old refrigerator or freezer
o $25 rebate for the recycling of an old room air conditioner
o automatic rebates for energy efficient computers and electronics
o tax credits up to $2,000 available for home energy-efficiency improvements
PG&E also participates in several energy assistance programs for lower income
households, which help qualified homeowners and renters conserve energy and
control electricity costs. These include the California Alternate Rates for Energy
(CARE) Program and the Relief for Energy Assistance through Community Help
(REACH) Program.
The California Alternate Rates for Energy Program (CARE) provides a 20 percent
monthly discount on gas and electric rates to income qualified households, certain
non-profits, facilities housing agricultural employees, homeless shelters, hospices
and other qualified non-profit group living facilities.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-80
The REACH Program provides one-time energy assistance to customers who have
no other way to pay their energy bill. The intent of REACH is to assist low-income
customers, particularly the elderly, disabled, sick, working poor, and the
unemployed, who experience severe hardships and are unable to pay for their
necessary energy needs.
In addition, the State Department of Health and Human Services funds the Home
Energy Assistance Program (HEAP). Under this program, eligible low-income
persons, via local governmental and non-profit organizations, can receive financial
assistance to offset the costs of heating and/or cooling dwellings.
As energy is used in the treatment and transportation of water, water use efficiency
translates to energy efficiency. The Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) delivers
treated and untreated water to residential consumers in central and eastern Contra
Costa County. The CCWD offers rebates and incentives to its customers for
efficiency in home water use.
The CCWD’s residential High-Efficiency Washing Machine Rebate Program provides
$100 rebates to its residential customers for the purchase of qualified high-
efficiency washing machines.
Residential High-Efficiency Toilet Rebates are provided in the amount of $175 for
the purchase of select high-efficiency toilets.
Residential Smart Sprinkler Timer Rebates are provided for the purchase of select
smart sprinkler timers.
The East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), which also serves residents of
Contra Costa County, offers many conservation services and incentives to its
customers. To start, EBMUD offers complimentary on-site surveys of indoor and
outdoor water use to its users, as well as conservation devices—including low-flow
showerheads and faucet aerators.
In conjunction with PG&E, EBMUD offers a $125 to $200 rebate for the purchase of
high-efficiency clothes washers. EBMUD also offers toilet performance testing and a
$150 rebate for the purchase of high-efficiency toilets.
EBMUD also offers rebates for water-efficient home landscaping and WaterSmart
Garden Grants for public garden water conservation projects.
2. The County’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
Contra Costa County completed a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory in
June 2008, and found that 13 percent of the County’s GHG emissions in 2005 came
from residential energy use. Focusing on the County’s unincorporated area,
residential energy use represents 6 percent of total GHG emissions. Fortunately,
the County has already implemented energy efficiency and other GHG reduction
programs. However, there are multiple opportunities to expand these programs and
implement new programs.
3. The County’s Efforts to Promote Energy Efficiency and Reduce GHG
Emissions
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors formed the Climate Change Working
Group in May 2005. The CCWG is comprised of the Agricultural Commissioner, the
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-81
Director of General Services, the Director of Health Services, the Director of Public
Works, the Director of the Department of Conservation and Development and the
Deputy Directory for Building Inspection.
Through a GHG emissions inventory conducted in the summer of 2007 and updated
in June of 2008, the County was able to quantify existing emissions from municipal
operations and community-wide sources. The County is now focusing on the next
step in the climate protection process—the development of a Climate Action Plan. A
Climate Action Plan represents the local blueprint for climate protection, which
should include the set of programs and policies the jurisdiction will implement in
order to achieve its chosen emissions reduction targets. The Climate Action Plan
should include existing initiatives as well as potential policies and programs that,
when implemented, will help meet the chosen emissions reduction targets.
The County has elected to develop the Climate Action Plan in two separate phases,
the first focused on further reducing the County’s municipal GHG emissions and the
second focused on community-wide emissions. While community-wide reduction
measures may result in greater overall GHG reductions, the County government
has greater control over its municipal emissions, and the development of a
Municipal Climate Action Plan provides an opportunity for the County to lead by
example. The County is beginning to meet with other local jurisdictions to discuss
collaboration in the creation of a community-wide Climate Action Plan.
The County has already implemented many measures that have reduced its
municipal GHG emissions. Some of the most effective municipal GHG reduction
measures include employee carpool and vanpool programs, compressed employee
work weeks, building lighting retrofits, building heating-ventilating-air conditioning
(HVAC) improvements, direct digital control devices for building HVAC systems,
installation of cogeneration plants for buildings that operate 24 hours per day,
purchase of energy efficient computers and copiers, building paper recycling, use of
B20 biodiesel fuel for the County diesel fleet, purchase of hybrid vehicles for the
County fleet, and the use of LEDs in traffic signals. The County’s efforts to reduce
municipal GHG emissions will continue to expand with the development and
implementation of its Municipal Climate Action Plan.
The County has also implemented various community-wide measures that have
targeted residential energy conservation or otherwise reduced GHG emissions.
Some of the residential energy conservation measures include:
o offer density bonuses for development projects that include a specified
number of affordable housing units,
o encourage mixed use development to limit travel distances,
o conduct a weatherization program to assist low or fixed income households in
making their homes more energy efficient,
o adopt and encourage use of Green Building Guidelines for residential
construction and remodeling projects
o provide green building related information to the public (including custom-
made green building materials display and free copies of above-mentioned
Guidelines),
o require developers to provide information on commute alternatives available
to their residents,
o require certain new developments to use drought-tolerant landscaping,
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-82
o require certain development projects to construct bicycle and pedestrian
amenities, and
o require large development projects in designated transit areas to install
features to support mass transit.
Other community-wide GHG reduction measures include efforts to adopt residential
variable can rate structures to promote waste reduction and recycling, inform
residents regarding the proper methods to manage their unwanted household
chemicals and electronics, use methane from landfills to generate electricity, and
recognize businesses that adopt green business practices.
4. Regional Opportunities to Further Reduce Energy Use and GHG
Emissions
Many residential energy conservation opportunities are closely inter-related with
other regulations/standards currently being developed and adopted at the regional
and state levels.
The County is one of the local governments in the nine-county San Francisco Bay
Area that is participating in the regional voluntary, incentive-based program known
as FOCUS intended to encourage focused growth. FOCUS involves regional
agencies, local governments, and communities collaborating to protect and improve
the quality of life in the Bay Area. In the FOCUS process, local governments are
partnering with regional agencies to create a development and conservation
strategy for the San Francisco Bay Area. FOCUS is led by and unites the efforts of
four regional agencies, Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), with support from the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and the Bay Conservation and
Development Commission (BCDC), into a single program that encourages future
growth in areas near transit and within the communities that surround the San
Francisco Bay. Concentrating housing in these areas offers housing and
transportation choices for all residents, while helping to reduce traffic, protect the
environment, and enhance existing neighborhoods.
As part of FOCUS, local governments have identified Priority Development Areas
(PDAs) and Priority Conservation Areas. Only willing jurisdictions receive priority
area designations and PDAs have to be within an existing community, near existing
or planned fixed transit or served by comparable bus service, and planned for more
housing. Designation of PDAs in the Bay Area expresses the region's priorities for
growth and informs regional agencies which jurisdictions want and need assistance.
These areas have been identified based on criteria that are consistent with the Bay
Area's regional goals. Regional agencies will support local governments'
commitment to these goals by working to direct existing and future incentives to
these priority areas. FOCUS is partially funded by a Blueprint Grant from the State
of California Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency.
PDAs are infill development opportunities within existing communities that welcome
more residents while being committed to creating more housing choices in locations
easily accessible to transit, jobs, shopping and services. To achieve the region's
housing objectives in a way that works for both new and existing residents and
ensures complete, livable communities, PDAs will require help and resources. The
regional agencies are working to develop a program of technical assistance,
planning grants, and capital funding for local governments undertaking PDA
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-83
development. The Regional Transportation Plan being developed now for adoption
in 2009 is one opportunity to identify supportive funds. Other opportunities will be
pursued in partnership with the State of California and a variety of funding sources.
Six of the adopted PDAs are within the County’s jurisdiction. Pittsburg/Bay Point,
Contra Costa Centre (Pleasant Hill BART), Montalvin Manor and Rodeo are the
County’s four “Planned” PDAs, while El Sobrante and North Richmond are the two
“Proposed” PDAs. The primary difference between these two designations is that a
planned PDA has both an adopted land use plan and a resolution of support from
the jurisdictions’ decision making body.
o The County will monitor developments related to SB37519 and other
anticipated AB32 20-related regulations, as well as the recent California Green
Building Standards Code that can be adopted by local governments in July of
2009 (some subset thereof likely becoming mandatory in January of 2011) to
identify most resource-efficient means of further reducing residential energy
consumption.
o The County will take an active role in the development of the Regional
Transportation Plan & Sustainable Communities Strategy to ensure that it will
result in GHG emissions reductions while still being feasible to implement
locally. Following adoption of the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy
(SCS), the County can then focus available resources at identifying to what
extent our land use policies and regulations are consistent with the SCS.
5. Local Opportunities to Further Reduce Energy Use and GHG Emissions
The County also has many opportunities to expand its existing efforts toward
community-wide GHG reduction, including further reductions in residential energy
use. However, the County does not currently have resources and/or expertise
adequate to conduct in-depth feasibility analysis or prioritization of the many
potential new opportunities for energy conservation with respect to residential
development.
As a starting point, the County will expand efforts to promote:
o infill and transit-oriented development,
o water- and energy-saving incentives/rebates offered to households,
o use of water-efficient landscaping and energy efficient irrigation systems,
o use of photovoltaic systems,
o use of permeable paving materials for cooling and water conservation,
o promote Location Efficient Mortgage and Energy Efficient Mortgage programs
as available, and
o seek or support applications for affordable housing funds from agencies that
reward and offer incentives for affordable infill housing and affordable
housing built close to jobs, transportation, and amenities (e.g., HCD’s
Multifamily Housing Program and California Tax Credit Allocation Committee).
19 SB 375 by Senator Steinberg, approved in 2008, builds on AB 32 by requiring the California Air Resources Board (CARB)
to provide each Metropolitan Planning Organization with regional emissions-reduction targets and requiring that regional
transportation plans include a Sustainable Communities Strategy designed to achieve the reduction targets. Furthermore,
it exempts from CEQA those housing developments that are consistent with adopted Sustainable Communities Strategy.
20 AB 32—Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 requires that the state’s global warming emissions be reduced to 1990
levels by 2020 through an forceable statewide cap that will be phased in starting in 2012 and further directs the CARB to
develop appropriate regulations and establish a mandatory reporting system to track and monitor global warming
emissions levels.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-84
As resources are available, the County will initiate process to review existing
policies, standards or requirements in our County Code and General Plan to identify
which:
o help reduce energy use from residential buildings and assess potential for
expanding or enhancing them, and
o serve as potential barriers to incorporating residential energy efficiency
incentives or requirements and assess feasibility of modifying or eliminating
them.
For example, the County’s parking standards could potentially be modified to allow
for smaller parking spaces, establish maximum parking spaces per project type or
facilitate use of permeable pavement surfaces and landscaping in parking lots
without requiring variances.
6.5 HOUSING ACCOMPLISHMENTS
In order to craft an effective housing strategy for the 2009 to 2014 planning period,
the County must assess the achievements of the existing housing programs. This
assessment will allow the County to evaluate the effectiveness and continued
appropriateness of the existing programs and make adjustments for the next five
years.
A. Evaluation of Accomplishments under Adopted Housing Element
Contra Costa County’s last Housing Element was adopted in 2001. The Element sets
forth a series of housing programs with related objectives for the following seven
areas:
1) Housing Production
2) Housing Affordability
3) Housing Conservation and Rehabilitation
4) Special Housing Needs
5) Redevelopment
6) Fair Housing
7) Housing Element Implementation
The following discussion summarizes the County’s housing accomplishments in each
of the seven areas from 2001 through 2007. Appendix B provides a more detailed
assessment of each housing program established in the 2001 Housing Element. The
County was generally successful in implementing its programs. Therefore, the
programs will be continued in the 2007 Housing Element with only minor
modifications.
Goal 1: Housing Production
Between 1999 and 2007, approximately 4,000 new housing units were constructed
in the County unincorporated areas. Using CDBG, HOME, HOPWA, redevelopment
set-aside funds, and bond financing, the County facilitates affordable housing
development throughout the County. Between 2000 and 2007, the County assisted
in the development of 1,249 new affordable housing units throughout Contra Costa
County, including 1,233 rental units and 16 ownership units. Table 6-39
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-85
summarizes the amount of new housing built with County assistance by location
(incorporated or unincorporated) and household income since 2001.
Table 6-39
County-wide Assisted New Construction
2000 – 2007
Unincorporated Incorporated Cities Total Income (% of
County Median) Owner Renter Owner Renter Owner Renter
30% or Less 43 101 144
31-50% 1 208 369 1 577
51-80% 15 133 379 15 512
Total 16 384 849 16 1,233
Source: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development.
Geographically, 400 of the new units were developed in unincorporated areas of the
County, including 384 rentals and 16 ownership units. County efforts facilitated the
development of 849 rentals units in incorporated cities.
This level of affordable housing production exhibited above is largely the result of
the County’s partnership with housing developers in the area. The County has been
active in meeting with local developers, community groups, and other jurisdictions
to review housing needs and develop effective strategies to meet those needs. The
County also participates in various regional and local organizations concerned with
housing issues. County staff provides ongoing technical assistance to non-profit and
for-profit developers in the development and financing of affordable housing.
Goal 2: Housing Affordability
Affordable Homeownership Opportunities
In addition to facilitating new construction of affordable housing (as described
above), the County has also been active in promoting housing affordability by
expanding homeownership opportunities. One homeownership assistance program
is the Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) program administered by the County. The
County receives an annual allocation of 30 to 50 MCCs.
Aside from the MCC, the County has implemented various programs to provide
affordable homeownership opportunities to lower- and moderate-income
households. The County’s homebuyer assistance programs include the following:
o RDA, HOME and CDBG funds have been used for new construction and
rehabilitation of single-family homes. Following completion, these funds are
rolled over into deferred equity share loans for low-income homebuyers.
o Through agreements with developers, homes affordable to low- and
moderate-income homebuyers have been constructed as a component of
market-rate housing developments.
o Through partnerships with adjacent counties, Contra Costa has used single-
family mortgage revenue bonds to provide low-interest loans for low- and
moderate-income homebuyers.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-86
Preservation of Existing Affordable Housing
To preserve the affordability of low-income use restricted units, the County has
refinanced various housing projects with new tax-exempt bond issues. Since 2001,
the County has successfully applied this technique to extend the period of required
affordability for three multi-family rental housing projects in the unincorporated
area. These projects include 208 affordable units (total of 280 units including
market rate.)
Goal 3: Housing Conservation and Rehabilitation
To maintain and improve the quality of the housing stock and residential
neighborhoods, the County has been active in providing residential rehabilitation
assistance through a variety of programs. These programs include County funded
acquisition and/or rehabilitation of existing rental housing, the Neighborhood
Preservation Program, and the Rental Rehabilitation Program.
Acquisition/Rehabilitation
The County funds the acquisition and/or rehabilitation of existing rental housing by
affordable housing developers using CDBG, HOME, and HOPWA funds. These funds
are offered countywide as low-interest deferred loans in exchange for long-term
affordability. The rehabilitation of rental properties has been critical to preserving
and increasing the supply of affordable housing in the County.
Between 2001 and 2007, the County assisted in the rehabilitation of 379 housing
units throughout Contra Costa County, including 318 rental units and 62 ownership
units. Geographically, 376 of the 379 units rehabilitated with County assistance are
located in the incorporated cities, including 318 rentals and 59 ownership units. The
remaining 3 units rehabilitated with County assistance are owner-occupied homes
located in North Richmond.
All of these units are deed-restricted as affordable housing to households earning
less than 80 percent of the County median income upon completion of the
rehabilitation.
Rental Rehabilitation Program
The Rental Rehabilitation Program (RRP) is offered through the Housing Authority of
Contra Costa County to improve the rental housing stock in the County. Since
2001, the Housing Authority has rehabilitated 28 rental units 21 in the Urban County.
Rent and occupancy restrictions recorded on the properties ensure these units
remain affordable to and occupied by low income households for a minimum of 20
years. Many of these units are occupied by households who have a housing choice
voucher.
Neighborhood Preservation Program 22
Under the Neighborhood Preservation Program (NPP), the County provides
deferred, zero and low-interest home rehabilitation loans to lower-income
homeowners in the Urban County. Between 2001 and 2007 the program assisted a
21 The 11 units rehabilitated through the Rental Rehabilitation programs are in addition to the units discussed in
rehabilitation section and include units in both the incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County.
22 The 287 units rehabilitated through the Rental Rehabilitation programs are in addition to the units discussed in
rehabilitation section and include units in both the incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-87
total of 287 lower-income households in the Urban County, the vast majority of
whom earned less than 50 percent of the County median income.
Goal 4: Special Housing Needs
One of the major goals of the County is to meet the housing and supportive
services needs of special needs groups, including the disabled, elderly, the
homeless, and farmworkers. Since 2001, the County has made significant progress
towards this goal.
Senior Housing
Recognizing the special needs of the elderly, the County has provided design
flexibility in the development of senior housing. In addition, the County has
provided financial assistance in the development of affordable housing for lower-
income seniors. Since 2001, the County has provided financial assistance to
complete the construction and rehabilitation of 456 senior rental housing units
throughout the County, including 449 affordable units. Affordability of senior units
targets households earning less than 80 percent of the County median income. The
majority (359 units or 80 percent) are new construction units. In terms of
geographic distribution, only 50 senior units are located in the unincorporated
areas.
Housing for Persons with Disabilities
Among the 1,644 units constructed or acquired/rehabilitated with financial
contributions from the County, 31 units are set aside for lower-income disabled
residents, including 11 units are reserved for people with HIV/AIDS, 9 units are
reserved for people with developmental disabilities, and 11 are reserved for people
with severe mental disabilities. In addition, 323 beds were provided for homeless
individuals and families, people recovering from drug and alcohol addiction, and
three are group homes for individuals with special needs.
The County has also allocated CDBG and HOPWA funds to County agencies and
non-profit organizations to support home sharing and roommate referral programs.
Agencies that have received funding for housing referral programs include
Independent Living Resources and the County HIV/AIDS Program.
Homeless Facilities
The County has also played an active role in providing housing to homeless
individuals and families. During the past ten years, the County acquired,
rehabilitated and supported the construction of several major homeless facilities
including the purchase of the Central County Shelter with 75 beds, the construction
of the GRIP shelter with 75 beds, and the renovation of the HOPE House with 30
beds. The County also maintains the West County Emergency Shelter, which has
100 beds. Rehabilitation and new construction assistance was also provided by the
County to 71 units of permanent supportive housing projects: Garden Park in
Pleasant Hill (28 units); Lakeside Apartments in Concord, and Giant Road
Apartments in San Pablo.
Housing for Farmworkers
To meet the housing needs of farmworkers, the County has provided CDBG and/or
HOME funding for various developments in East County that provide affordable
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-88
homeownership opportunities for extremely low and very low-income households,
including many farmworker families. The County provided $2 million in HOME funds
for the Villa Amador project in Brentwood. This project involves the new
construction of 91 townhome rental units.
Goal 5: Redevelopment
The Redevelopment Agency has made significant progress toward its goal of
providing additional housing opportunities in the redevelopment project areas.
North Richmond Project Area
Since 2001, 176 new units have been built in the Project Area, all of which were
Agency-assisted and are affordable to very low, low and moderate-income
households, including 38 units with affordability restrictions. Major housing
developments in the Project Area include the 173-unit Bella Flora single family
home project. In addition, there is a 370 unit, mixed product development which
has received its planning approvals.
Rodeo Project Area
Since 2001, the 50-unit Rodeo Gateway Apartments project was completed. All
units are restricted to very-low income seniors. The majority of tenants have
incomes of less than 30 percent AMI.
In addition, the community is seeking a developer for its town square project which
will include market rate and affordable housing.
Bay Point Project Area
Since 2001, 51 multi-family units at Bella Monte have been built in the project area,
which were Agency-assisted with recorded affordability controls. The HACCC
demolished 90 units of public housing and rebuilt a 180-unit low income housing
tax credit project on the same site. The County also participated in the acquisition
and rehabilitation of 48 units at the Willow Pass Apartments, 88 affordable units at
the Hidden Cove apartments, and 72 affordable units at the Willowbrook
apartments through tax-exempt bond issuances.
The agency is currently rebuilding the Orbisonia Heights area, which will include the
development of 325 new homes.
Contra Costa Centre Project Area
Since the Contra Costa Centre Project Area was adopted in 1984, a total of 1,354
units projects have been completed. These projects include the 892-unit Park
Regency apartment development (which included 135 affordable units), the 150-
unit Wayside Plaza condominium project, the 87-unit Coggins Square Apartments,
and a 54-unit townhouse project. The County and Redevelopment Agency assisted
in the financing of Coggins Square Apartments, which offers 87 units for extremely
low, very-low, and low-income families.
The first residential component of the Contra Costa Centre Transit Village is under
construction. When completed, it will include 422 rental units (including 85
affordable units) and 100 condominium units.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-89
Goal 6: Fair Housing
The County has continued to allocate CDBG funds to support local non-profit
organizations that offer fair housing counseling and legal services. Also, in
allocating affordable housing funds, the County assigns priority to projects that do
not involve permanent relocation (displacement). However, projects involving
relocation may be funded if required to eliminate unsafe or hazardous housing
conditions, reverse conditions of neighborhood decline, stimulate revitalization of a
specific area, and/or accomplish high priority affordable housing projects. In such
situations, the County monitors projects to ensure that relocation is carried out in a
manner fully consistent with federal and State requirements. Wherever feasible,
displaced households and organizations are offered the opportunity to relocate into
the affordable housing project upon completion.
Goal 7: Housing Element Implementation
The County has successfully implemented many of its housing programs established
under the previous Housing Element. As illustrated above, the County has made
evident progress in meeting its goals in the areas of housing production, housing
affordability, conservation and rehabilitation, special housing needs,
redevelopment, and fair housing. The 2007-2014 Housing Element builds upon the
success of the 2001 Element and establishes means to make further strides toward
achieving the housing goals of the County.
B. Housing Production in Previous RHNA Period
ABAG’s projected Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the unincorporated
areas of Contra Costa County was 5,436 new units for the 2001-2006 planning
period. This allocation included 1,101 very low, 642 low, 1,401 moderate and 2,292
above moderate-income units. Units developed or issued with certificates of
occupancy after January 1, 2007 are applied to the County’s future RHNA for the
2009-2014 period.
From 2001 through 2006, a total of 4,263 housing units were built in the
unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. Of the 4,263 housing units built, 252
units were for very low-income households, 148 units for low-income households,
and 234 units for moderate-income households.
While the County facilitated the development of far more affordable housing
throughout the County, for purposes of the RHNA, the County is only given credit
for units located in the unincorporated areas.
Table 6-40 on the following page compares the County’s assigned RHNA with actual
levels of housing production between 2001 and 2007. The shortfalls in housing
production for very low to moderate-income households do not reflect the
substantial number of affordable housing units developed in incorporated
communities with County assistance. The County has been active in expanding the
supply of affordable housing and facilitating the development of a variety of housing
types, including family and senior rentals and first-time homebuyer opportunities.
Between 2001 and 2007, the County financed and/or completed over 1,200
affordable units for families, seniors, and special needs groups, including persons
with HIV/AIDS and the disabled.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-90
Table 6-40
2001 – 2007
RHNA versus Units Built
Income Group RHNA Units Built Difference
Very Low 1,101 252 -849
Low 642 148 -494
Moderate 1,401 234 -1,167
Above Moderate 2,292 3,629 +1,377
Total 5,436 4,263 -1,173
Source: Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
The 2001 Housing Element was found to be in compliance with State law with the
condition that the County implemented Program 19 to rezone at least 10 acres to
M29 to facilitate lower-income housing. The County completed the rezone through
the adoption of the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area Specific Plan, which
increased densities of up to 65 units per acre in 7.5 acres and 29 units per acre in
31 acres.
6.6 HOUSING PLAN
Sections 6.2 through 6.5 of the Housing Element present a housing needs
assessment, an analysis of constraints to housing provision, an inventory of land,
financial, and administrative resources, as well as an evaluation of past housing
accomplishments. This section presents the County’s five-year Housing Plan, which
sets forth goals, policies, and programs to address the identified housing needs and
other important housing issues.
The County’s housing plan for addressing the identified housing needs is detailed
according to the following seven areas:
o Housing and Neighborhood Conservation
o Housing Production
o Special Needs Housing
o Housing Affordability
o Provision of Adequate Residential Sites
o Removal of Governmental Constraints
o Promotion of Equal Housing Opportunity
A. Housing Goals and Policies
The following are the goals and policies the County intends to implement to address
the community’s identified housing needs and issues.
Housing and Neighborhood Conservation
An important goal for the County is to maintain and enhance the quality of the
housing stock and residential neighborhoods. Almost 46 percent of the housing
stock in the unincorporated areas is thirty years or older, the age when most homes
begin to have major home improvement/rehabilitation needs. Rehabilitation needs
have specifically been identified in the redevelopment project areas and selected
older neighborhoods. The County will continue to support neighborhood
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-91
preservation and upgrading through its offering of housing rehabilitation assistance,
code enforcement efforts, and redevelopment activities.
Maintenance of the existing affordable housing is an important strategy in Contra
Costa County. The County and affordable housing developers have invested
substantial financial and administrative resources in creating the existing diverse
inventory of affordable housing. Ensuring the long-term availability of such
affordable housing is therefore the most cost-effective means of addressing
affordable housing needs.
GOAL 1 Maintain and improve the quality of the existing housing stock
and residential neighborhoods in Contra Costa County.
Policy 1.1 Assist owners of affordable rental properties and low-income
homeowners in maintaining and improving residential properties
through a variety of housing rehabilitation assistance programs.
Policy 1.2 Focus rehabilitation assistance and code enforcement efforts in
redevelopment project areas and communities with a high
concentration of older and/or substandard residential structures.
Policy 1.3 Assist non-profit housing providers in the acquisition and
rehabilitation of older residential structures, and maintenance as
long-term affordable housing.
Policy 1.4 Promote increased awareness among property owners and
residents of the importance of property maintenance to
neighborhood quality.
GOAL 2 Preserve the existing affordable housing stock in Contra Costa
County.
Policy 2.1 Maintain a condominium conversion ordinance aimed at
preserving the existing stock of rental housing and providing
tenant protections for units approved for conversion.
Policy 2.2 Preserve existing affordable housing developments at risk of
converting to market rate housing through bond refinancing and
other mechanisms.
Housing Production
Contra Costa County implements various programs to increase the supply of
housing and encourage a diversity of housing types. Part of this diversity is
addressed through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), which
encourages the provision of housing for all economic segments of the community.
Housing diversity is important to ensure that all households, regardless of income
level, age, and household type, have the opportunity to find housing suited to their
needs and lifestyle.
GOAL 3 Increase the supply of housing with a priority on the
development of affordable housing.
Policy 3.1 Support the development of additional affordable housing by
non-profit and for-profit developers through financial assistance
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-92
and/or regulatory incentives such as density bonus or flexible
development standards through planned unit development.
Policy 3.2 Encourage and provide incentives for the production of housing
in close proximity to public transportation and services.
Policy 3.3 Increase the supply of affordable housing and encourage the
development of mixed-income housing through the Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance.
Policy 3.4 Facilitate the development of second units as an affordable
housing alternative.
Special Needs Housing
Persons and households with special housing needs include the elderly, the
disabled, large households, single parents, persons with HIV/AIDS, persons with
mental illness, farmworkers, and the homeless. These groups typically have
difficulty in finding suitable and affordable housing. The County, affordable housing
developers and related interest groups have demonstrated great commitment
toward expanding the supply of housing for special needs households. The County
will continue to make efforts to increase the supply of housing for special needs
populations.
GOAL 4 Increase the supply of appropriate and supportive housing for
special needs populations.
Policy 4.1 Expand affordable housing opportunities for households with
special needs, including seniors, disabled persons, large
households, single parents, persons with HIV/AIDS, persons
with mental illness, farmworkers, and the homelesss.
Policy 4.2 Continue to support non-profit service providers that help meet
the diverse housing and supportive service needs of the
community.
Policy 4.3 Continue to require inclusion of accessible units in all new
construction projects receiving County financing.
Housing Affordability
A household is considered to be overpaying for housing or “cost burdened” if it
spends more than 30 percent of its gross income on housing. Problems of housing
cost burden increase when housing costs rise faster than income. With relatively
high housing prices, many households pay a significant portion of their income for
housing; housing cost burden is common in Contra Costa County. The problem is
particularly severe for renters and a significant number of very low-income
residents receive Section 8 rental assistance in order to afford rental housing in the
County.
To improve housing affordability, the County has been active in expanding the
supply of affordable housing and providing various forms of assistance, including
rental subsidies, homebuyer assistance, and other similar programs. The County
will continue to offer such assistance to address housing affordability issues faced
by many County residents.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-93
GOAL 5 Improve housing affordability for both renters and homeowners.
Policy 5.1 Increase access to homeownership for lower- and moderate-
income households.
Policy 5.2 Continue to support the provision of rental assistance to lower-
income households.
Policy 5.3 Provide financial support to non-profit organizations assisting
lower- and moderate-income seniors, disabled, and other
residents in finding affordable housing through homesharing and
other activities as appropriate.
Provision of Adequate Residential Sites
Meeting the housing needs of all segments of the community requires the provision
of adequate sites suitable for the development of all types, sizes and prices of
housing. The County General Plan and Planning and Zoning Code determine where
housing may locate, thereby affecting the supply of land available for residential
development in the unincorporated areas.
GOAL 6 Provide adequate sites through appropriate land use and zoning
designations to accommodate the County’s share of regional
housing needs.
Policy 6.1 Maintain an up-to-date site inventory that details the amount,
type, and size of vacant and underutilized parcels, and assist
developers in identifying land suitable for residential
development.
Policy 6.2 Provide adequate sites to meet the housing needs of special
needs groups, including seniors, disabled persons, large
households, single parents, persons with HIV/AIDS, persons
with mental illness, farmworkers, and the homeless.
Policy 6.3 Promote mixed-use development where housing is located
adjacent to jobs, services, shopping, schools, and public
transportation.
Removal of Governmental Constraints
To achieve its housing goals, the County must address, and where legally possible,
remove governmental constraints affecting the maintenance, improvement, and
development of housing, particularly for lower and moderate income and special
needs households.
GOAL 7 Mitigate potential governmental constraints to housing
development and affordability.
Policy 7.1 Establish and maintain development standards that support
housing development while protecting quality of life goals.
Policy 7.2 Provide financial and/or regulatory incentives where feasible and
appropriate to offset or reduce the costs of affordable housing
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-94
development, including density bonuses and flexibility in site
development standards.
Policy 7.3 Continue to provide planning and development fee reductions,
deferrals and/or waivers for developments that meet the
affordable and special housing needs of the community.
Policy 7.4 Continue to provide for timely and coordinated processing of
residential development projects in order to minimize project
holding costs and encourage housing production.
Promotion of Equal Housing Opportunity
Equal access to housing is fundamental to each person in meeting essential needs
and pursuing personal, educational, employment, or other goals. In recognition of
equal housing access as a fundamental right, the federal and State of California
governments have both established fair housing as a right protected by law.
To promote equal housing opportunities, the housing plan must promote housing
opportunities for all persons regardless of race, color, ancestry, national origin,
religion, disability, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status or other
such arbitrary factors.
GOAL 8 Promote equal opportunity for all residents to reside in the
housing of their choice.
Policy 8.1 Prohibit discrimination in the sale or rental of housing to anyone
on the basis of race, color, ancestry, national origin, religion,
disability, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status
or other such arbitrary factors.
Policy 8.2 Provide financial support to non-profit organizations providing
fair housing services.
Policy 8.3 Enhance the opportunity for seniors, persons with disabilities,
large households, single parents, persons with HIV/AIDS,
persons with mental illness, and farmworkers to have access to
housing of their choice.
B. Related Plans
In addition to the Housing Element, the goals and policies presented earlier are
implemented through a series of housing programs offered primarily through the
County Department of Conservation and Development (DCD), Redevelopment
Agency, and the Housing Authority of Contra Costa County. The following plans
prepared by these agencies help define the County’s overall housing strategy
presented in this housing Plan.
Contra Costa Consortium Consolidated Plan
The Consolidated Planning process for the Contra Costa Consortium is managed by
DCD. The Consolidated Plan (CP) outlines the Consortium’s objectives and strategy
for meeting its housing and community development needs using CDBG, HOME,
ESG, and HOPWA funds.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-95
For CDBG and ESG funds, programs are available to the Urban County, including
the unincorporated areas, and the cities and towns of Brentwood, Clayton, Danville,
El Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez, Moraga, Oakley, Orinda, Pinole, Pleasant
Hill, San Pablo, and San Ramon. HOME-funded programs are available to the
Contra Costa Consortium, including the Urban County and the cities of Antioch,
Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek. HOPWA-funded activities are available to all
jurisdictions in the County.
Contra Costa Interagency Council on Homelessness/Continuum of Care Strategy
The Contra Costa Interagency Council on Homelessness (CCICH), a new working
group which is the result of a merger of the Homeless Interdepartmental
Interagency Working Group and the Continuum of Care Board, as well as non-profit
community and advocacy groups, the interfaith community, business organizations
and other relevant community groups to implement key strategies identified in the
five-year Continuum of Care Plan and the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness.
Contra Costa Continuum of Care Plan identifies priorities and strategies for meeting
the housing and service needs of homeless and at-risk populations throughout the
County. The Plan addresses gaps in existing facilities and services for homeless
households and includes strategies with priorities to expand capacity in the
following areas: homeless prevention, outreach and assessment activities;
emergency shelter, transitional housing, and permanent housing affordable to
extremely low income and homeless households; and supportive service needs. The
County’s Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness includes priorities to address three
types of homeless populations: the chronically homeless, those discharged into
homelessness, and the transitionally (or episodic) homeless people. This will include
programs and projects to increase income and employment opportunities for
homeless households, expand needed support services and programs to prevent
homelessness, and increase the availability of housing affordable to extremely-low
income households and homeless persons.
Redevelopment and Housing Implementation Plan
The Redevelopment and Housing Implementation Plan describes the County
Redevelopment Agency’s strategy for use of Agency tax increment funds, including
the 20 percent housing set-aside funds. The Plan details the Agency’s strategy in
meeting the affordable housing obligations (inclusionary and replacement) in the
County redevelopment project areas of Bay Point, Montalvin Manor, North
Richmond, Contra Costa Centre, and Rodeo.
Public Housing Agency Plan
The Housing Authority of Contra Costa County (HACCC) owns and operates the
County’s public housing projects and administers the Section 8 Rental Assistance
program for County residents. HACCC prepares a five-year Public Housing Agency
Plan (PHAP) and an annual Action Plan, which identify strategies and actions to
maintain and improve the public housing stock, expand the availability and use of
Section 8 assistance throughout the County, and improve overall program
administration.
C. Housing Programs
The housing programs presented in this Housing Plan define the specific actions the
County will undertake to achieve its stated goals and policies. The housing
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-96
programs presented on the following pages include existing programs as well as a
few new programs that have been added to address the identified housing needs.
The program summary (Table 6-39) included at the end of this section specifies for
each program the following: goal, key five-year objective(s) for the unincorporated
areas, time frame for implementation, funding source(s), and agency responsible
for program implementation. Table 6-40 summarizes the quantified objectives for
the unincorporated areas relating to new construction, rehabilitation, conservation
and housing assistance.
As described earlier, the County administers a variety of programs. Depending on
the funding sources, the programs are available to different geographic areas.
Where a program is applicable to a geographic area larger than the County
unincorporated areas, the overall five-year objectives for the program and specific
quantified objectives for the unincorporated areas are presented where possible.
Housing and Neighborhood Conservation
NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION PROGRAM
Through the Neighborhood Preservation Program, the County provides home
rehabilitation loans to extremely-low, very-low, and low-income persons to make
necessary home repairs and improve their homes. DCD, through the Building
Inspection Division, administers this program which is available to income-qualified
households throughout the Urban County.
Eligible residents may receive assistance for a variety of home improvement
activities including but not limited to: re-roofing, plumbing/heating/electrical
repairs, termite and dry rot repair, modifications for disabled accessibility, security,
exterior painting, and energy conservation. Specific loan terms are based on
financial need and may be zero or three percent, deferred or amortizing after five
years.
DCD has identified the following unincorporated areas for focused rehabilitation
assistance: Bay Point, Bethel Island, Byron, Clyde, Crockett, El Sobrante, Montalvin
Manor, North Richmond, Sandhill, Rodeo, Rollingwood, and the Vine Hill area near
Martinez.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Rehabilitation Loans Disseminate information on housing rehabilitation assistance
through notices in the press, public service announcements on
television and radio, presentations and distribution of brochures
to public service agencies and community groups, and mailings
to County residents.
Rehabilitate 8 units annually for a total of 40 units over 5 years.
HACCC RENTAL REHABILITATION ASSISTANCE
The Housing Authority of Contra Costa County (HACCC) offers a Rental
Rehabilitation Program (RRP) to improve the County’s rental housing stock. The
rehabilitation of rental properties has been critical to preserving and increasing the
supply of affordable housing in the County. The HACCC provides low-interest
rehabilitation loans to rental property owners who agree to rent a minimum of 50
percent of the units rehabilitated to extremely-low, very-low, and low income
households at affordable rents.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-97
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
HACCC Rehabilitation Loans Disseminate information on housing rehabilitation assistance
through notices in the press, public service announcements on
television and radio, presentations and distribution of brochures
to apartment owners and property management associations.
Rehabilitate 3 units annually for a total of 15 units over 5 years.
PUBLIC HOUSING IMPROVEMENT
The 1,272 public housing units currently managed by the Housing Authority of
Contra Costa County (HACCC) are an important component of the County’s
affordable housing stock especially for the housing of extremely-low households.
The maintenance and improvement of these housing units thus represents an
important goal of the County.
Some of the public housing developments have exceeded their useful life.
Therefore, the HACCC is evaluating the feasibility of demolishing and reconstructing
some of the public housing units. Included in their review is the Bayo Vista project
in Rodeo and Las Deltas in North Richmond.
WEATHERIZATION PROGRAM
The County DCD offers a free weatherization program for extremely-low, very-low,
and low income homeowners and renters. The program provides resources for
minor home repairs and energy improvements including: attic insulation, weather
stripping, pipe wrapping, furnace filters, shower heads, heaters/ovens, ceiling fans,
door bottoms, etc. In addition, the program provides assistance to lower utility bills
for lower income households.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Weatherization and Utility
Payment Assistance
Assist 50 households annually for a total of 250 households
over 5 years.
Provide education on energy conservation.
CODE ENFORCEMENT
The County Building Inspection Division Code Enforcement Section is responsible
for enforcing both State and County regulations governing the maintenance of all
buildings and properties in the unincorporated areas. Code enforcement handles
complaints and inspections in the unincorporated areas of the County and also
provides services to several cities and towns, including Clayton, Lafayette, Moraga,
and Orinda.
Code Enforcement staff handle approximately 100 cases per month. Most of the
complaints deal with property maintenance, substandard housing issues, junk and
debris, and abandoned vehicles. To facilitate the correction of code violations or
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Public Housing Improvement Continue to maintain and improve public housing projects in the
County, totaling 608 units for very low-income households.
Determine feasibility of demolishing and rebuilding public
housing in Rodeo and North Richmond that has exceeded its
useful life.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-98
deficiencies, Code Enforcement works closely with the County Building Inspectors,
the HACCC, and other County agencies. Code Enforcement staff routinely refer
homeowners to the County’s rehabilitation loan and grants programs including the
Neighborhood Preservation Program and the HACCC Rental Rehabilitation Program.
The Division also refers homeowners, mobile home owners, and apartment owners
to the County’s Weatherization Program.
RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAM
In 2005, the Board of Supervisors adopted the Residential Rental Inspection
Program (RRIP). The program was established to proactively identify blighted and
deteriorated housing stock and ensure the rehabilitation or abatement of housing
that does not comply with State and local building electrical, fire, and plumbing
code standards. RRIP also promotes the safety and preservation of all single and
multiple-family residential rental units. RRIP mandates inspection of all rental units
including single family homes, residential hotels and Section 8 housing.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Residential Rental Inspection Continue to identify property that does meet building code.
Continue to promote safety.
REDEVELOPMENT REPLACEMENT HOUSING
In compliance with State law, the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency will
continue to facilitate the provision of replacement housing within four years of
removing housing units occupied by lower- and moderate-income households in the
redevelopment project areas. To date, the Agency has met or exceeded its
replacement housing obligation in the North Richmond, Rodeo, Contra Costa
Centre, and Bay Point redevelopment project areas.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Replacement Housing Continue to facilitate the development of replacement housing
in the redevelopment project areas as required.
Update and conduct mid-term review of the AB 1290
Redevelopment and Housing Implementation Plan to assess the
Agency’s replacement obligations.
CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE
The County’s apartment housing stock represents an important source of affordable
housing to lower and moderate income households. Loss of apartment housing due
to conversion to common interest developments (such as condominiums)
compromises further the County’s ability to address rental housing needs. However,
condominiums also provide affordable homeownership opportunities. An ordinance
has been adopted to regulate condominium conversion. This ordinance requires a
permit for conversion, and compliance with current zoning requirements for newly
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Code Enforcement Continue to carry out code enforcement activities as a means to
maintain the quality of the housing stock and residential
neighborhoods.
Continue to refer eligible homeowners, mobile home owners,
and apartment owners to various County programs for
assistance.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-99
created condominiums, including parking requirements. The Ordinance further
makes provisions for protecting the rights of tenants currently residing in the units
that are approved for conversion. These provisions include specific purchasing
rights for the tenants as well as eviction clauses to which owners must adhere.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Condominium Conversion Continue to enforce the condominium conversion ordinance.
PRESERVATION OF ASSISTED HOUSING
As of 2009, a total of 1,171 publicly assisted housing units in multi-family
developments are located in the unincorporated areas of the County. Of these
units, 49 units in Rivershore Apartments are at risk of conversion to market rate
housing in 2017.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Monitor At-Risk Units Monitor the at-risk units by continuing to maintain close contact
with the property owner(s) regarding their long-term plan for
the project.
Conduct Tenant Education Notify tenants at least one year prior to potential conversion to
market rate housing.
Provide information regarding tenant rights and conversion
procedures should the property owner be uninterested in
refinancing.
Offer tenants information regarding Section 8 rental subsidies
and other available assistance through County agencies and
non-profit organizations.
Housing Production
NEW CONSTRUCTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Non-profit and for-profit housing developers play an important role in providing
affordable housing in Contra Costa County. Over the years, the County has
provided direct financial assistance, regulatory incentives, and land write-downs to
numerous developers to provide both ownership and rental housing to extremely-
low, very-low, low-income, and special needs households. Major sources of County
financing include HOME, HOPWA, RDA housing set-aside funds, and tax-exempt
bond financing. In addition, the County reserves 45 percent of each year’s CDBG
allocation for projects to increase and maintain affordable housing in the Urban
County. Projects have been completed with County resources in both
unincorporated areas and the cities.
In general, funding is provided on a competitive application basis to developers of
multi-family rental housing and homeownership developments. Funding criteria
include proposed target population and alleviation of affordable housing needs,
cost-effectiveness, developer experience, and term of affordability. The County
Board of Supervisors has adopted a funding priority for projects that reserve a
portion of the units for extremely low income households.
County maintains continuous contact with numerous affordable housing developers.
County staff offers formal technical assistance and guidance as well as frequent
consultations with interested developers.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-100
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Financial and Regulatory
Incentives for New
Construction of Affordable
Housing Development
Continue to support Affordable Housing Development through
direct financial assistance, regulatory incentives, and land
write-downs. Sources of financial assistance available through
the County include HOME, CDBG, HOPWA, MHSA, RDA housing
set-aside funds, and bond financing.
Meet with the local development community, key leaders and
local civic and community groups to promote the County’s
interest in working cooperatively to increase housing
development activity.
Promote the utilization of the County’s pre-development
application meeting.
Allow techniques such as smaller unit sizes, parking reduction,
common dining facilities and fewer required amenities for senior
projects.
Provide predevelopment and/or secondary financing for non-
profit organizations to develop housing affordable to extremely
low- and very low-income households.
Support applications by nonprofit organizations for affordable
housing funds, including federal, State, and local public and
private funds.
Collaborate with HACCC to explore the use of project-based
Section 8 assistance as leverage to obtain additional private
sector funds for affordable housing development.
Assist in the financing and development of 650 affordable units
over 5 years.
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING ORDINANCE
In October, 2006, the County adopted an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO). All
new residential developments of five or more units, as well as condominium
conversions, are subject to the IHO. Fifteen percent of all the residential units are
required to be affordable.
o Rental Projects: 12 percent to lower income households and 3 percent to
very low income households.
o For-sale Projects: 12 percent to moderate income households and 3 percent
to low income households.
Developers may comply with the IHO through several alternative approaches:
o On-site development
o Off-site development
o Land conveyance
o Payment of a fee in lieu of development
o Other – developers may propose another method of compliance that would
have at least the same benefit as on-site construction.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance
Continue to implement the IHO and encourage developers to
provide affordable units on site.
Provide in-lieu fees to support the development of affordable
housing projects
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-101
ACQUISITION/REHABILITATION
The County offers financial assistance, including CDBG, HOME, HOPWA, and MHSA
funds to affordable housing developers for the acquisition and rehabilitation of
existing rental housing. These funds are offered Countywide as low-interest
deferred loans in exchange for long-term affordability restrictions on the rental
units. Priority is assigned to projects that reserve a portion of the units for
extremely low-income households.
SECOND UNITS
Second units are attached or detached dwelling units that provide complete,
independent living facilities for one or more persons which are located on the same
lot as the primary structure and include permanent provisions for living, sleeping,
cooking and sanitation. Integrating second units in existing residential
neighborhoods is a means of increasing the supply of needed rental housing. The
development of second units is also effective in dispersing affordable housing
throughout the unincorporated areas and can provide housing to lower- and
moderate-income individuals and families, as well as seniors and disabled persons.
Since 2003, when the County adopted a Residential Second Unit Ordinance
consistent with State law, there have been 153 second units.
SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING
In addition to the development of affordable housing in general, the County will
work with housing developers to provide housing appropriate to the County’s
special needs populations, including mentally and physically disabled persons,
seniors, large households, persons with HIV/AIDS and farmworkers.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Acquisition/Rehabilitation Disseminate information on housing rehabilitation assistance
through notices in the press, public service announcements on
television and radio, presentations and distribution of
brochures to apartment owners and property management
associations.
Provide financing and assist in the acquisition and
rehabilitation of 50 rental units over 5 years.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Second Units Publicize the Secondary Unit Program to increase public
awareness.
Consider an amnesty program to legalize illegal second units if
these units meet the requirements specified in the Planning and
Zoning Code and the property owners agree to deed-restrict
second units as housing affordable to lower income households
for a period of 10 years.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-102
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Special Needs Housing Revise the zoning code with the following changes:
o Identify zone where emergency shelters are allowed by
right pursuant to Chapter 633, Statutes of 2007 (SB2)
o Permit transitional and supportive housing as a residential
use subject to only those restrictions that apply to other
residential use of the same type in the same zone.
o Allow agriculture employee housing to be permitted by-right
(without a conditional use permit) in single family zones for
less than six person and in agricultural zones with no more
than 12 units or 36 beds consistent with Health and Safety
Code 17021.5 and 17021.6
Provide financial incentives for the development of housing
targeted to special needs populations (HOME, CDBG, HOPWA,
MHSA, RDA set-aside funds).
Work with developers to obtain additional required financing.
Allow techniques such as smaller unit sizes, parking reduction,
common dining facilities and fewer required amenities for senior
projects.
ACCESSIBLE HOUSING
Persons with disabilities represent a major special needs group in Contra Costa
County. To maintain independent living, disabled persons are likely to require
assistance, which may include special housing design features, income support for
those who are unable to work, and in-home supportive services for persons with
mobility limitations. To provide additional housing opportunities for the disabled,
the County will continue to require inclusion of accessible units in all new
construction projects receiving County financing (e.g. CDBG, HOME, redevelopment
set-aside). Current regulations require that five percent of the units must be
accessible to the physically impaired and an additional two percent of the units
must be accessible to the hearing/vision impaired.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Accessible Housing Continue to require inclusion of accessible units in all new
construction projects receiving County financing.
Loan funds are available through the Neighborhood
Preservation Program and the Housing Authority Rental
Rehabilitation Program for accessibility improvements in
existing affordable housing.
CONTRA COSTA INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON HOMELESSNESS
The Contra Costa County Continuum of Care and the Homeless Inter-agency Inter-
departmental Working Group joined to form the CCICH, which implements
programs and strategies contained in the Continuum of Care Plan and Ten-Year
Plan to End Homelessness. These plans are designed to address the needs of the
homeless. The goal of these programs is to ensure that homeless individuals and
families can obtain decent, suitable, and affordable housing in the County. Through
the Ten Year Plan, the County has adopted a “housing first” strategy, which works
to immediately house a homeless individual or family rather than force them
through a sequence of temporary shelter solutions. The Ten Year Plan further
deemphasizes emergency shelters by supporting “interim housing” as a preferred
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-103
housing type. Interim housing is very short-term and focuses on helping people
access permanent housing as quickly as possible. Services provided in interim
housing include housing search assistance and case management to help address
immediate needs and identify longer-term issues to be dealt with once in
permanent housing.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Contra Costa Interagency
Council on Homelessness
Continue to work with local non-profit organizations and
relevant public agencies to obtain required funding to expand
the number of permanent supportive housing units.
Continue to support existing transitional housing programs,
operated by the County and non-profit agencies.
Continue to support the operations of existing emergency
shelters.
Continue to support licensed residential care facilities in all
residential zones through the land use permit process.
Housing Affordability
FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYER OPPORTUNITIES
The County implements a number of programs to provide affordable
homeownership opportunities for lower- and moderate-income households as well
as special needs groups, including farmworkers. These programs include the
following:
Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC): The MCC is a federal program designed to assist
low- and moderate-income first-time homebuyers. A mortgage credit certificate is
issued to qualified homebuyers, allowing for a federal income tax credit of up to 20
percent of the annual mortgage interest paid.
New Construction: Redevelopment set-aside (RDA), HOME and CDBG funds are
used for new construction and rehabilitation of single-family homes. Following
completion, these funds are rolled over into subsidized loans for lower- and
moderate-income homebuyers.
Inclusionary Housing: Through the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, homes
affordable to lower- and moderate-income homebuyers are constructed as a
component of market-rate housing developments (see Program 11 above).
Neighborhood Stabilization Program: NSP provides targeted emergency assistance
to state and local governments to acquire and redevelop abandoned and foreclosed
residential properties that might otherwise become sources of abandonment and
blight within our communities. The County will use its funds to support affordable
homeownership opportunities in the target communities. These include North
Richmond, Montalvin Manor, San Pablo, Bay Point, Oakley, Brentwood, and
Discovery Bay.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
First-Time Homebuyer
Opportunities
Continue to expand homeownership opportunities through a
combination of homebuyer assistance programs, financial
support of new construction, and development agreements.
Assist 50 first-time homebuyers over 5 years.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-104
SECTION 8 RENTAL ASSISTANCE
The Section 8 program is a federal program that provides rental assistance to
extremely-low and very low-income persons in need of affordable housing. The
Section 8 program offers a voucher that pays the difference between the current
fair market rent (FMR) and the amount a tenant can afford to pay (e.g. 30 percent
of household income). The voucher allows a tenant to choose housing that may cost
above the payment standard, provided the tenant pays the extra cost. Countywide,
approximately 7,000 residents receive Section 8 assistance through HACCC.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Section 8 Rental Assistance Continue to provide Section 8 Rental Assistance to very low-
income residents.
Prepare Annual Public Housing Agency Action Plan to identify
and adjust strategies for expanding the use of Section 8
assistance.
Apply for new Section 8 certificates as available through HUD.
HOME SHARING PROGRAM
The County will continue to encourage and support the provision of shared housing
opportunities in Contra Costa County. Under a shared housing program, a home
provider, a person who has a home to share, is matched with a home seeker, a
person in search of a home to share. Typically, providers are senior residents with
living space (a bedroom) to share, while seekers are lower-income adults in need of
an inexpensive place to stay.
The County allocates resources to County agencies and community-based
organizations to support programs that help residents find affordable housing
opportunities, including shared housing or roommate referrals. Organizations that
have received funding for shared housing/referral programs include Independent
Living Resources, and the County HIV/AIDS Program.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Shared Housing Continue to support the provision of shared housing
opportunities in Contra Costa County by contributing funds to
appropriate County agencies and community-based
organizations.
Provision of Adequate Residential Sites
SITES INVENTORY
As part of the 2009-2014 Housing Element update, an analysis of the residential
development potential in each of the unincorporated communities of the County
was conducted. This analysis was performed using the County’s Geographic
Information System (GIS) and data from the County Assessor’s records. Based on
this assessment, the unincorporated areas can potentially accommodate over 8,030
new units on vacant and underutilized properties. Combined with housing units built
and projects approved since July 2008, the County has sufficient sites to meet the
3,508-unit RHNA (815 very-low income, 598 low-income, 687 moderate-income,
and 1,408 above moderate-income).
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-105
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Residential Sites Inventory • Continue to provide adequate sites to accommodate the County’s
RHNA of 3,508 units.
• Maintain an up-to-date inventory of vacant/underutilized
residential sites as funding permits and make inventory available
to potential developers (both for profit and non-profit developers)
MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENTS
County General Plan Land Use Element includes a category for mixed-use
developments in the unincorporated areas. This category has enabled the County to
create unique projects that combine residential uses such as apartments or
condominiums with commercial and other uses. Such developments provide needed
housing in close proximity to key services such as transportation. The development
at the Contra Costa Centre is an example of mixed-use development. Other
instances of mixed-use in County unincorporated areas include the Bay Point Willow
Pass Corridor and the Parker Avenue downtown area in Rodeo. The mixed-use
category offers the County greater flexibility by providing needed housing in urban
areas close to important services.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Mixed-Use Development • Continue to encourage mixed-use development where
appropriate by offering flexible development standards.
• Pursue the establishment of mixed use designation under the
General Plan along San Pablo Dam Road and Appian Way in El
Sobrante pursuant to recommendations of the El Sobrante
Municipal Advisory Council.
DENSITY BONUS AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES
In accordance with State law and the County’s Residential Density Bonus
Ordinance, the County provides density bonuses to qualified new housing projects
consistent with State law. The County will continue to update its ordinance as State
law changes. Currently, the housing development must have: (1) at least 5 percent
of the total units affordable to very-low income households; (2) at least 10 percent
of the total units affordable to lower income households; or (3) at least at least 10
percent ownership in a planned development for moderate income, or (4) 100
percent senior housing development. If one of these conditions is met, a developer
is entitled to a density bonus of 20 percent (5 percent for ownership) of the
maximum density permitted in the underlying zone plus other development
concessions or incentives (e.g. modified standards, regulatory incentives, or
concessions). Affordability must be maintained for a minimum of 30 years. The
County has utilized density bonuses to facilitate the development of affordable
housing.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Density Bonus • Continue to offer density bonuses and other development
incentives to facilitate affordable housing development.
• Continue to provide information regarding the Density Bonus
Ordinance to developers at the application and permit center in
DCD as well as during pre-application meetings.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-106
INFILL DEVELOPMENT
Throughout the unincorporated areas, many single-family lots were legally created
but do not meet the current minimum lot size standard specified in the Planning
and Zoning Code. To acknowledge the development right on these parcels, the
County DCD uses a Small Lot Review process to assist applicants in determining the
massing and bulk of the units to ensure compatibility with adjacent properties.
Similarly, many multi-family residential lots in the unincorporated areas do not
meet current minimum lot size standards. Consolidation of a number of undersized
lots would likely be necessary to provide an adequate land area to develop an
economically feasible multi-family project. As a means to facilitate the infill
development of multi-family housing, the County has identified small vacant multi-
family residential sites that have the potential for lot consolidation with adjacent
properties.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Single-Family Infill
Development
• Continue to use the Small Lot Review process to assist applicants
in developing infill single-family homes on small lots.
Multi-Family Infill
Development
• Identify small vacant multi-family lots with the potential for lot
consolidation and make this information available to developers.
• Consider offering a tiered density bonus program based on lot
size to encourage consolidation of small lots for multi-family
development.
Removal of Governmental Constraints
PLANNED UNIT DISTRICT
The Planned Unit District (P-1) provides the opportunity for more creative and
flexible design for large-scale residential developments than would be permitted in
the conventional residential districts. The use of the P-1 district is intended to
promote the diversification of buildings, lot sizes, and open spaces to produce an
environment in harmony with surrounding existing and potential uses. The
flexibility associated with the P-1 district includes variation in structures, lot sizes,
yards, and setbacks and enables the developer to address specific needs or
environmental constraints in an area. The final plan for a P-1 development is
subject to approval by the County Planning Commission. The P-1 District is
applicable to all residential districts.
Through the P-1 District, increased residential densities can be achieved. Density of
up to 44.9 units per acre can be achieved in the P-1 district if the underlying
General Plan designation is Multiple-Family Residential Very High Density (MV). The
density can be increased to 99 units per acre if the underlying General Plan
designation is Multiple-Family Residential Very High Density Special (MS).
In older, developed areas where the objective is to revitalize neighborhoods
through redevelopment, the P-1 process can also be used to define allowable land
uses, and minimum development and design guidelines that are appropriate for the
specific community. In this situation, the P-1 designation streamlines the
development process for projects consistent with the specified guidelines.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-107
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Planned Unit District • Encourage rezoning to P-1 District in the unincorporated areas,
where appropriate, particularly in areas where the underlying
General Plan designation is Multiple- Family Residential Very High
Density and Multiple-Family Residential Very High Density
Special.
• Consider eliminating the 5-acre minimum parcel size currently
required for P-1 zoning to permit flexibility for small sites and
infill development.
PLANNING FEES
Planning and processing fees, combined with costs for required site improvements,
add to the cost of housing. Earlier analysis indicates that in comparison with other
communities in the Bay Area, fees levied by Contra Costa County are comparable
to, and in many cases, lower than those of other jurisdictions. Nevertheless, to
facilitate affordable housing development, the County can defer, reduce, or waive a
portion of the planning fees for non-profit housing developers.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Planning Fees • Continue to offer fee deferrals, reductions, or waivers to
developers of housing projects with long-term affordability
restrictions.
STREAMLINING OF PERMIT PROCESSING
To expedite the review of residential projects, the County has implemented a
number of policies and actions:
o The County Zoning Administrator reviews development applications for
projects with fewer than 100 units.
o The Application and Permit Center makes permit processing quicker and
easier by enhancing coordination of permitting services. Over 70 percent of
permit applications submitted to the Building Inspection Division are
approved the same day.
o The County offers a voluntary pre-application review to determine the
permits necessary and the cost and review time involved.
The P-1 designation can also be used to streamline the development process for
projects in older, existing communities that are consistent with the specified
development and design guidelines.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Streamlining of Permit
Processing
• Continue to require only the Zoning Administrator’s review of
projects with fewer than 100 units.
• Continue to expedite the permit processing procedures through
the Application and Permit Center and pre-application review
process.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-108
REVIEW AND UPDATE OF ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
The County regulates the type, location, density, and scale of residential
development in the unincorporated areas primarily through the Planning and Zoning
Code. Zoning regulations are designed to protect and promote the health, safety,
and general welfare of residents as well as implement the policies of the County
General Plan. The County is engaged in an ongoing process of reviewing the
Planning and Zoning Code for consistency with State laws. The main purpose of this
review is to ensure that the County’s requirements and standards do not act as a
constraint to the development of affordable housing.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinance Review and Update
• Periodically review the Planning and Zoning Code and other
regulations to ensure that County policies and regulations do not
constrain housing development and affordability.
• Pursuant to S.B. 2, within one (1) year of the adoption of this
Housing Element amend the Zoning Code to allow an emergency
shelter facility without a conditional use permit or other
discretionary action subject to permit procedures and certain
development standards. The development standards would
include but not limited to the maximum number of beds or
persons served nightly by the facility, length of stay at the
facility, size and location of the facility’s exterior and interior on-
site waiting and client intake area, proximity of the facility to
other emergency shelters, facility off-street parking that is not
greater than other residential or commercial uses, facility lighting
and security, and the provision for on-site management at the
facility. Amend the C: General Commercial District zone.
• Permit transitional and supportive housing as a residential use
subject to only those restrictions that apply to other residential
use of the same type in the same zone.
• Allow agriculture employee housing to be permitted by-right
(without a conditional use permit) in single family zones for less
than six person and in agricultural zones with no more than 12
units or 36 beds consistent with Health and Safety Code 17021.5
and 17021.6.
• Amend the zoning ordinance to include development standards
and permit procedures to encourage and facilitate the
development of SROs.
• Public Works Department in coordination with DCD to undertake
review of standards under the subdivision ordinance.
Promotion of Equal Housing Opportunity
ANTI-DISCRIMINATION PROGRAM
To promote fair housing, the County allocates CDBG funds to local non-profit
organizations for fair housing counseling and legal services. Services offered
typically include advocacy and collaboration in support of fair housing opportunities
for all; public outreach and education regarding fair housing rights; specialized
property owner, management, and lender training; rental home seeking and
relocation services; and discrimination complaint processing and investigation.
All housing developers receiving financial assistance from the County are required
to submit a marketing plan detailing the developer’s equal opportunity outreach
program and demonstrating efforts to reach those people who are least likely to
hear about affordable housing opportunities.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-109
The Contra Costa Consortium has adopted the HUD-mandated Analysis of
Impediments (AI) to Fair Housing Choice. The AI includes: a comprehensive review
of the County’s laws, regulations, and administrative policies; an assessment of
how those laws affect the location, availability, and accessibility of housing; and an
assessment of conditions, both public and private, affecting fair housing choice.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Anti-Discrimination • Continue to support local non-profit organizations for fair housing
counseling and legal services.
• Carry out necessary actions to address the impediments to fair
housing choice identified in the AI.
RESIDENTIAL DISPLACEMENT PROGRAM
In allocating affordable housing funds, the County assigns priority to projects that
do not involve permanent relocation (displacement). However, projects involving
relocation may be funded if required to eliminate unsafe or hazardous housing
conditions, reverse conditions of neighborhood decline, stimulate revitalization of a
specific area, and/or accomplish high priority affordable housing projects. In such
situations, the County monitors projects to ensure that relocation consistent with
federal and state requirements is provided. Wherever feasible, displaced
households and organizations are offered the opportunity to relocate into the
affordable housing project upon completion.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Residential Displacement
Program
• Continue to implement the Residential Displacement Program.
TABLE 6-41
Housing Implementation Programs Summary
Housing Program Program Goal
Key Five-year
Objective(s)
Funding
Source
Responsible
Agency/
Dept. Timeframe
Housing and Neighborhood Conservation
1. Neighborhood
Preservation Program
Improve the quality of
existing housing &
neighborhoods.
Disseminate
information.
Rehabilitate 40
units.
CDBG Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
2. HACCC Rental
Rehabilitation
Assistance
Improve the quality of
the rental housing
stock.
Disseminate
information.
Rehabilitate 15
units.
CDBG HACCC Ongoing
3. Public Housing
Improvement
Maintain and improve
the quality of the public
housing stock.
Maintain and
improve 608
public housing
units.
HUD HACCC Ongoing
4. Weatherization
Program
Assist homeowners and
renters with minor
home repairs.
Assist 250
households.
Low Income
Housing
Energy
Assistance
Program
Conservation &
Development
Ongoing
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-110
TABLE 6-41
Housing Implementation Programs Summary
Housing Program Program Goal
Key Five-year
Objective(s)
Funding
Source
Responsible
Agency/
Dept. Timeframe
5. Code Enforcement Maintain & improve the
quality of existing
housing &
neighborhoods.
Continue to
implement
program.
General
Fund
Conservation &
Development
Ongoing
6. Rental Inspection
Identify blighted and
deteriorated housing
stock and ensure the
rehabilitation of
abatement of housing
that does not comply
with State and local
building code.
Continue to
implement
program.
Inspection
fees
Conservation &
Development
Ongoing
7. Redevelopment
Replacement Housing
Provide replacement
housing to lower- &
moderate-income
households.
Continue to
facilitate the
development of
replacement
housing as
required.
RDA Set-
Aside
Redevelopment
Agency
Assess
replacement
obligations
every 2-3
years
8. Condominium
Conversion Ordinance
Preserve the rental
stock & protect
apartment tenants.
Continue to
enforce ordinance.
None
Required
Conservation &
Development
Ongoing
9. Preservation of
Assisted Housing
Preserve the existing
stock of affordable
housing.
Monitor at-risk
units. Participate
in preservation of
units. Conduct
tenant education.
Tax Exempt
Bonds,
CDBG,
HOME, RDA
Set-Aside
Conservation &
Development
On-going
Housing Production
10. New Construction of
Affordable Housing
Increase the supply of
affordable housing.
Assist in the
financing and
development of
650 affordable
units.
CDBG,
HOME,
HOPWA,
MHSA, RDA
Set-Aside,
Bond-
financing
Conservation
and
Development;
Redevelopment
Agency
Ongoing
11. Inclusionary Housing Integrate affordable
housing within market-
rate developments.
Continue to
implement
ordinance.
None
Required
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
12. Acquisition/
Rehabilitation
Improve existing
housing and increase
supply of affordable
housing.
Assist in the
acquisition and
rehabilitation of
50 affordable
units.
CDBG,
HOME,
HOPWA,
MHSA,
RDA Set-
Aside, Bond
Financing
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
13. Second Units Facilitate the
development of second
units.
Continue program
implementation.
None
Required
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
Special Needs Housing
14. Special Needs
Housing
Increase the supply of
special needs housing.
Provide financial
and other
incentives for the
development of
housing for
special needs
populations.
CDBG,
HOME,
HOPWA,
RDA Set-
Aside
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
15. Accessible Housing Increase the supply of
accessible housing.
Require inclusion
of accessible units
in all new County-
funded
construction
projects.
None
Required
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-111
TABLE 6-41
Housing Implementation Programs Summary
Housing Program Program Goal
Key Five-year
Objective(s)
Funding
Source
Responsible
Agency/
Dept. Timeframe
16. Contra Costa
Interagency Council
on Homelessness
Meet the housing &
supportive services
needs of the homeless
Support
development of
permanent
supportive
housing.
CDBG,
HOPWA,
HOME
Health Services;
Conservation
and
Development;
HACCC
Ongoing
Housing Affordability
17. First-Time Homebuyer
Opportunities
Provide additional
homeownership
opportunities.
Assist 50 low and
moderate income
first-time
homebuyers.
MCC, HOME,
CDBG, RDA
Set-Aside,
Mortgage
Revenue
Bonds
Conservation
and
Development;
Redevelopment
Agency
Ongoing
18. Section 8 Rental
Assistance
Assist very low-income
households with rental
payments.
Continue to
provide Section 8
assistance. Apply
for additional
vouchers.
HUD Section
8
HACCC Prepare PHAP
– Action Plan
annually.
19. Home Sharing
Program
Provide for home
sharing opportunities.
Support
appropriate
agencies offering
shared housing
opportunities.
CDBG,
HOPWA
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
Provision of Adequate Housing Sites
20. Sites Inventory Provide for adequate
housing sites, including
‘as-right development’
sites for homeless
facilities
Adopt revised
zoning text.
Maintain sites
inventory.
Funding
source to be
determined
for
maintenance
of site
inventory
Conservation
and
Development
June 2010 for
zoning
changes.
Ongoing
maintenance
of site
inventory.
21. Mixed-Use
Developments
Encourage mixed-use
developments.
Pursuant to El
Sobrante MAC’s
recommendations,
establish mixed
use designations
under the General
Plan for sections
San Pablo Dam
Road and Appian
Way in El
Sobrante.
Conservation
and
Development
/no new
funds
required
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
22. Density Bonus &
Other Development
Incentives
Support affordable
housing development.
Offer density
bonuses and other
incentives for
affordable
housing.
Conservation
and
Development
/no new
funds
required
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
23. Infill Development Facilitate infill
development.
Identify small
vacant multi-
family lots with
potential for lot
consolidation.
Conservation
and
Development
/no new
funds
required
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-112
TABLE 6-41
Housing Implementation Programs Summary
Housing Program Program Goal
Key Five-year
Objective(s)
Funding
Source
Responsible
Agency/
Dept. Timeframe
Removal of Governmental Constraints
24. Planned Unit District Provide flexibility in
design for residential
projects.
Encourage
rezoning to P-1
District in
unincorporated
areas, where
appropriate.
Consider
elimination of 5-
acre minimum
parcel size.
RDA,
Conservation
and
Development
(planning
fees)
Conservation
and
Development,
RDA
25. Planning Fees Reduce the cost of
development.
Offer fee
deferrals,
reduction, or
waivers to
developers of
affordable
housing.
RDA Set-
Aside
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
26. Streamlining of Permit
Processing
Expedite review of
residential projects.
Consider only
Zoning
Administrator’s
review of projects
with <100 units.
Expedite permit
processing.
Conservation
and
Development
/no new
funds
required
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
27. Review of Zoning &
Subdivision Ordinance
Ensure County
regulations do not
unnecessarily constrain
housing development.
Revise Zoning
Code to allow
emergency
homeless shelters
by right, define
transitional and
supportive
housing as
residential uses,
allow agricultural
worker housing,
and provide SRO
development
standards.
Periodically review
Planning and
Zoning Code.
General
Fund as
directed by
Board of
Supervisors
Conservation
and
Development
a) June 2010
b) Ongoing
Equal Housing Opportunity
28. Anti-Discrimination
Program
Promote fair housing. Support local non-
profits offering
fair housing
counseling and
legal services.
Carry out AI
recommendations.
CDBG Conservation
and
Development
Complete
update to the
AI by 2010
and ongoing
provision of
services.
29. Residential
Displacement
Program
Limit number of
households being
displaced or relocated.
Continue to
implement
program.
Set-Aside,
HOME,
CDBG
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-113
Table 6-42
Quantified Five-Year Objectives
Activity
Very Low
Income
Low
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
Income Total
New Construction
Provision of Adequate Sites 815 598 687 1,408 3,508
Assistance in Construction 160 320 165 650
Homeowner Rehabilitation 30 10 40
Weatherization 250 250
Acquisition/Rehabilitation 35 10 5 50
Preservation of At-Risk Units N/A
First-Time Homebuyers
Assistance
5 35 10 50
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-1A
APPENDIX A
DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING/PROCESSING FEES BY HOUSING TYPE
The following presents detailed calculations of the total development and planning/
processing fees for a typical single-family development (Table A-1) and a typical
multi-family development (Table A-2) in Contra Costa County. As shown, depending
on the availability and adequacy of infrastructure, the development fees charged by
the County can vary significantly by subarea.
Table A-1
Development and Planning/Processing Fees
Single Family Home
WEST CENTRAL EAST SINGLE FAMILY HOME
–
FEE DESCRIPTION North
Richmond Rodeo Pacheco Alamo
Bay
Point
Discovery
Bay
Permit/Plan Processing Fees
Building Permit $ 1,227.25 $ 1,227.00 $ 1,227.00 $ 1,517.00 $ 1,227.00 $ 1,517.00
BID Plan Check $ 797.00 $ 797.00 $ 797.00 $ 986.00 $ 797.00 $ 986.00
Energy Report (Title 24) $ 506.00 $ 506.00 $ 506.00 $ 625.00 $ 506.00 $ 625.00
BID New Residence Electrical
Insp. $ 184.00 $ 184.00 $ 184.00 $ 227.00 $ 184.00 $ 227.00
BID New Residence Plumbing
Insp. $ 184.00 $ 184.00 $ 184.00 $ 227.00 $ 184.00 $ 227.00
BID New Residence Mechanical
Insp. $ 122.00 $ 122.00 $ 122.00 $ 151.00 $ 122.73 $ 151.00
Sewer Plan Check/Inspection $ 80.00 n/a $ 102.00 $ 102.00 n/a $ 250.00
CDD/Planning Dept. Fees $ 1,006.00 $ 1,006.00 $ 1,006.00 $ 1,244.00 $ 1,006.00 $ 1,244.00
Earthquake $ 16.74 $ 16.74 $ 16.74 $ 22.00 $ 16.74 $ 22.00
Flood Zone $ 30.00 $ 30.00 $ 30.00 $ 30.00 $ 30.00 $ 30.00
Subtotal $ 4,152.99 $ 4,072.74 $ 4,174.74 $ 5,131.00 $ 4,073.47 $ 5,279.00
Capital Facilities Fees
Sub Regional Traffic Impact Fee $ 2,871.00 $ 2,871.00 n/a $ 3,180.00 $ 16,800.00 $ 16,800.00
Traffic AOB (Roadway
Improvements) $ 2,947.00 $ 1,648.00 $ 990.00 $ 8,906.00 $ 2,875.00 $ 2,273.00
Flood Control/Drainage Area Fee
(s.f. of land per unit) n/a n/a n/a n/a $ 1,455.00 n/a
Park Dedication Fee (Quimby Act) $ 7,238.00 $ 7,238.00 $ 7,238.00 $ 7,238.00 $ 5,891.00 $ 5,891.00
School Facilities Fee (fee per s.f.
collected by school dist.) $ 8,880.00 $ 5,940.00 $ 5,940.00 $ 5,940.00 $ 5,940.00 $ 6,940.00
Sewer District Capital Facilities
Fee n/a n/a $ 4,923.00 $ 4,923.00 n/a $ 2,789.00
Water District Capital Facilities
Fee $ 8,110.00 $ 8,110.00 $ 16,405.00 $ 24,990.00 n/a $ 297.00
Fire District Capital Facilities Fee $ 591.00 n/a $ 591.00 n/a $ 591.00 $ 450.00
Subtotal $ 30,637.00 $ 25,807.00 $ 36,087.00 $ 55,177.00 $ 33,552.00 $ 35,440.00
Service Connection Fees
Water Meter/Connection Fee $ 4,673.00 $ 4,673.00 n/a $ 4,673.00 $ 9,509.00 $ 550.00
Water Account Establishment Fee $ 30.00 $ 30.00 n/a $ 30.00 n/a n/a
Sewer Connection Fee $ 2,431.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 311.00 $ 311.00 n/a $ 550.00
Power Pole (Electrical Connection) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Subtotal $ 7,134.00 $ 9,703.00 $ - $ 5,014.00 $ 9,509.00 $ 1,100.00
TOTAL $ 41,923.99 $ 39,582.74 $ 40,261.74 $ 65,322.00 $ 47,134.47 $ 41,819.00
Assumptions: Single family 2,000 sq. ft. home with 400 sq. ft. attached garage.
N/A = Not Applicable
Source: Contra Costa County- Dept. of Conservation and Development, Building Insp. Div. Fee Estimator Program and
information provided by Special Districts.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-2A
Table A-2
Development and Planning/Processing Fees
Multi-Family Apartment
WEST CENTRAL EAST MULTI-FAMILY
APARTMENT -
FEE DESCRIPTION North
Richmond Rodeo Pacheco Alamo Bay Point
Discovery
Bay
Permits/Processing Fees
Building Permit $ 7,674.00 $ 7,674.25 $ 7,674.00 $ 7,674.00 $ 7,674.00 $ 7,674.00
BID Plan Check $ 4,988.26 $ 4,988.26 $ 4,988.00 $ 4,988.00 $ 4,988.00 $ 4,988.00
Access/S.C $ 3,165.00 $ 3,165.63 $ 3,165.00 $ 3,165.00 $ 3,165.00 $ 3,165.00
Energy Report (Title 24) $ 3,165.00 $ 3,165.63 $ 3,165.00 $ 3,165.00 $ 3,165.00 $ 3,165.00
BID New Residence Electrical
Insp. $ 1,151.00 $ 1,151.00 $ 1,151.00 $ 1,151.00 $ 1,151.00 $ 1,151.00
BID New Residence Plumbing
Insp. $ 1,151.00 $ 1,151.00 $ 1,151.00 $ 1,151.00 $ 1,151.00 $ 1,151.00
BID New Residence
Mechanical Insp. $ 767.00 $ 767.43 $ 767.00 $ 767.00 $ 767.00 $ 767.00
CDD/Planning Dept. Fees $ 6,292.93 $ 6,292.89 $ 6,292.89 $ 6,293.00 $ 6,293.00 $ 6,293.00
Sewer Plan Check/Inspection $ 30.00 N/A $ 102.00 $ 102.00 N/A N/A
Earthquake $ 196.74 $ 196.74 $ 196.74 $ 196.74 $ 196.74 $ 196.74
Flood Zone $ 30.00 $ 30.00 $ 30.00 $ 30.00 $ 30.00 $ 30.00
Subtotal $ 28,610.93 $ 28,582.83 $ 28,682.63 $ 28,682.74 $ 28,580.74 $ 28,580.74
Capital Facilities Fees
Sub Regional Traffic Impact
Fee $ 14,350.00 $ 14,350.00 N/A $ 60,375.00 $ 257,825.00 $ 257,825.00
Traffic AOB (Local Area
Roadway Improvements) $ 59,125.00 $ 32,975.00 $ 24,750.00 $206,300.00 $ 45,325.00 $ 42,950.00
Flood Control/Drainage Area
Fee (s.f. of land per unit) N/A N/A N/A N/A $ 29,750.00 N/A
Park Fee Dedication (Quimby
Act) $ 130,325.00 $130,325.00 $130,325.00 $130,325.00 $ 106,075.00 $ 106,075.00
School Facilities Fee (fee per
s.f. collected by school dist.) $ 55,200.00 $ 59,400.00 $ 59,400.00 $ 59,400.00 $ 59,400.00 $ 69,400.00
Sewer District Capital
Facilities Fee $ - $ - $123,075.00 $123,075.00 $ - $ 69,725.00
Water District Capital Facilities
Fee $ 114,250.00 $114,250.00 $ 71,000.00 $201,250.00 unavail. $ 7,425.00
Fire District Capital Facilities
Fee $ 7,145.00 N/A $ 7,145.00 N/A $ 7,125.00 $ 7,250.00
Subtotal $ 380,395.00 $351,300.00 $415,695.00 $780,725.00 $ 505,500.00 $ 560,650.00
Service Connection Fees
Water Account Establishment
Fee $ 25.00 $ 25.00 N/A $ 25.00 N/A N/A
Water Meter/Connection Fee $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 4,213.00 $ 7,750.00 unavail. N/A
Sewer Connection $ 60,775.00 $125,000.00 $ 7,775.00
Power Pole (Electrical
Connection) $ - $ -
Subtotal $ 85,800.00 $150,025.00 $ 11,988.00 $ 7,775.00 $ - $ -
Fees on Carport $ 2,607.64 $ 2,607.64 $ 2,607.64 $ 2,607.64 $ 2,607.64 $ 2,607.64
TOTAL $ 497,413.57 $532,515.47 $458,973.27 $819,790.38 $ 536,688.38 $ 591,838.38
TOTAL PER UNIT FEES $ 19,896.54 $ 21,300.62 $ 18,358.93 $ 32,791.62 $ 21,467.54 $ 23,673.54
Assumptions: Prototypical multi-family residence. Assume a 20,000 square foot apartment building with 25 units.
Five 3-bedroom units, 10 2-bedroom units, Ten 1-bedroom units. 46 off-street parking stalls in a carport.
One structure, 2-story, and wood frame.
N/A = Not Applicable
Source: Contra Costa County-Dept. of Conservation and Development, Building Insp. Div. Fee Estimator Program and information
provided by Special Districts.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-1B
APPENDIX B
Table B-1
Program Implementation Status
Name of Program Program Goal Objective Deadline in
H. E. Status
1. Neighborhood
Preservation Program
Improve the quality of
existing housing &
neighborhoods.
Disseminate information.
Rehabilitate 125 units.
Ongoing 287 homes rehabilitated
2. HACCC Rental
Rehabilitation
Assistance
Improve the quality of
the rental housing
stock.
Disseminate information.
Rehabilitate 120 units.
Ongoing 28 rental unit rehabilitated
3. Public Housing
Improvement
Maintain and improve
the quality of the public
housing stock.
Maintain and improve 608
public housing units.
Ongoing Public housing units are
routinely maintained.
4. Weatherization
Program
Assist homeowners and
renters with minor
home repairs.
Assist 250 households. Ongoing Approximately 2,500
households were assisted.
5. Code
Enforcement
Maintain & improve the
quality of existing
housing &
neighborhoods.
Continue to implement
program.
Ongoing 750 – 1,000 residential cases
processed each year
County adopted a rental
inspection ordinance.
Approximately 200 units are
inspected annually.
6. Redevelopment
Replacement Housing
Provide replacement
housing to lower- &
moderate-income
households.
Continue to facilitate the
development of
replacement housing as
required.
Assess
replacement
obligations
every 2-3
years
The RDA has met all current
replacement housing
obligations. The Orbisonia
Heights project in Bay Point will
meet its replacement
obligation.
7. Condominium
Conversion Ordinance
Preserve the rental
stock & protect
apartment tenants.
Continue to enforce
ordinance.
Ongoing 44 unit apartment building in El
Sobrante converted to condos
in 2005
8. Preservation of
Assisted Housing
Preserve the existing
stock of affordable
housing.
Monitor at-risk units.
Participate in preservation
of units. Conduct tenant
education.
Work to
extend term
of
affordability
for Byron
Park units by
2008.
Byron Park, El Cerrito Del Norte
and Riverstone (formerly
Meadows) Apartments were
refinanced and affordability
continued.
9. New Construction
of Affordable Housing
Increase the supply of
affordable housing.
Assist in the financing and
development of 200
affordable units.
Ongoing Assisted in financing of 400
affordable units in the
unincorporated County, and an
additional 849 units in the
cities.
10. Development
Agreements
Integrate affordable
housing within market-
rate developments.
Continue to implement
program.
Ongoing Willow development integrated
into Alamo Creek development
in Danville
Dougherty Valley affordable
and market-rate units under
development
Inclusionary Ordinance adopted
in 2006
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-2B
Table B-1
Program Implementation Status
Name of Program Program Goal Objective Deadline in
H. E. Status
11. Acquisition/
Rehabilitation
Improve existing
housing and increase
supply of affordable
housing.
Assist in the acquisition
and rehabilitation of 50
affordable units.
Ongoing No rehabilitation projects other
than the Housing Authority
rental rehabilitation program
undertaken in the
unincorporated County during
the reporting period.
12. Second Units Facilitate the
development of second
units.
Facilitate the development
of 100 units.
Ongoing 2nd unit ordinance revised to be
consistent with AB 1866
13. Special Needs
Housing
Increase the supply of
special needs housing.
Provide financial and
other incentives for the
development of housing
for special needs
populations.
Through the County
Agriculture Advisory Task
Force, develop
recommendations to
address farmworker
housing issues.
Ongoing ABC Apartments, El Sobrante –
9 apartments for
developmentally disabled adults
Villa Amador, City of Brentwood
– County provided HOME funds
to support 92 unit family
apartment building also funded
with J. Serna Farmworker grant
and loan funds
CDBG funds used to purchase
the 75 bed Concord homeless
shelter for single adults.
14. Accessible
Housing
Increase the supply of
accessible housing.
Require inclusion of
accessible units in all new
County-funded
construction projects.
Ongoing ABC Apartments, El Sobrante –
9 apartments for
developmentally disabled adults
All new construction funded
with HOME/CDBG require 5% of
units accessible to those with
mobility impairments and an
additional 2% accessible to
those with vision and/or
hearing impairments
15. Homeless
Continuum of Care
Meet the housing &
supportive services
needs of the homeless
Pursue development of
two transitional housing
facilities with 48
apartments.
Develop two
new
transitional
housing
facilities by
2003.
Garden Park, City of Pleasant
Hill includes 28 units of
transitional housing for families
– supported with McKinney Act
funds.
McKinney Act also used for
Lakeside Apts, Concord; Giant
Rd., San Pablo; and Villa
Vasconcellos, Walnut Creek
16. First-Time
Homebuyer
Opportunities
Provide additional
homeownership
opportunities.
Assist 80 low and
moderate income first-
time homebuyers.
Ongoing Bella Flora, North Richmond –
35 single-family homes for
lower income families sold
Willow, Danville – 127
townhomes for moderate
income families sold
Mortgage Credit Certificates –
approximately 300 issued
throughout the County.
17. Section 8 Rental
Assistance
Assist very low-income
households with rental
payments.
Continue to provide
Section 8 assistance.
Apply for additional
vouchers.
Prepare PHAP
– Action Plan
annually.
HA prepares annual action plan,
supports 6,504 vouchers,
maintains waiting list of 3,595
families
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-3B
Table B-1
Program Implementation Status
Name of Program Program Goal Objective Deadline in
H. E. Status
18. Home Sharing
Program
Provide for home
sharing opportunities.
Support appropriate
agencies offering shared
housing opportunities.
Ongoing No requests for support;
generally not a preferred
housing option
19. Sites Inventory Provide for adequate
housing sites.
In 2002, review and
evaluate densities for
vacant and underutilized
sites provide adequate
sites for the development
of housing for very low,
low, and moderate income
households. Initiate
program in 2003 to
increase underlying
densities on at least 10
acres of residential land to
Multi-Family High Density
Residential (M-29) to
provide affordable housing
opportunities.
Maintain sites inventory.
Ongoing Department updating the sites
inventory using County’s GIS
information.
7.5 acres in Bay Point increased
to up to 65 units per acre
31 acres in Bay Point increased
to 29 units per acre
Nove GPA (2/13/07) rezoned
30 acres from industry to MF
allowing up to 370 residential
units
20. Mixed-Use
Developments
Encourage mixed-use
developments.
Offer flexible development
standards for affordable
and special needs
housing.
Ongoing Evaluating new mixed-use land
designation in El Sobrante to
enable commercial/residential
mix
Seeking community consensus
21. Density Bonus &
Other Development
Incentives
Support affordable
housing development.
Offer density bonuses and
other incentives for
affordable housing.
Ongoing Bella Flora, North Richmond
Proposed – Signature/Nove,
North Richmond
22. Infill
Development
Facilitate infill
development.
Identify small vacant
multi-family lots with
potential for lot
consolidation.
Ongoing Through update of sites
inventory, DCD intends to have
website list of vacant land
w/residential zoning and
available public services.
Unsuccessfully sought
legislative change to CEQA to
provide the unincorporated
County the same infill CEQA
exemption provided to cities
23. Planned Unit
District
Provide flexibility in
design for residential
projects.
Pursue P-1 zoning of
Rodeo and Bay Point
Redevelopment Project
Areas.
Promote P-1 zoning in
unincorporated areas.
Consider elimination of 5-
acre minimum parcel size.
Rezone
Rodeo and
Bay Point
Redev. Areas
by 2002.
Rodeo and Bay Point P-1 plans
are adopted. Montalvin Manor
P-1 is pending.
Parcels smaller than 5 acres
may be re-zoned to P-1 under
certain conditions
24. Planning Fees Reduce the cost of
development.
Offer fee deferrals,
reduction, or waivers to
developers of affordable
housing.
Ongoing Will implement State law to
provide fee deferrals to
affordable housing development
25. Streamlining of
Permit Processing
Expedite review of
residential projects.
Require only Zoning
Administrator’s review of
projects with <100 units.
Expedite permit
processing.
Ongoing If no GPA or re-zone required,
project only needs ZA approval
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-4B
Table B-1
Program Implementation Status
Name of Program Program Goal Objective Deadline in
H. E. Status
26. Review of Zoning
& Subdivision
Ordinance
Ensure County
regulations do not
unnecessarily constrain
housing development.
Periodically review
Planning and Zoning
Code.
Ongoing
Amended Second Unit and
Density Bonus ordinances.
Adopted Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance. Reviewing
Condominium Conversion
Ordinance
27. Anti-
Discrimination
Program
Promote fair housing. Support local non-profits
offering fair housing
counseling and legal
services. Carry out AI
recommendations.
Complete AI
by 2001 and
ongoing
provision of
services.
AI completed and re-adopted
with 2005/09 Consolidated
Plan. On-going support of local
non-profits offering fair housing
counseling and legal services.
28. Residential
Displacement
Program
Protect households
being displaced or
relocated.
Continue to implement
program.
Ongoing Displaced households in
Orbisonia Heights, Bay Point
being relocated in conformance
with State law.
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-1C
APPENDIX C
Table C-1
Water and Sewer Service Providers
Unincorporated Communities (Inside ULL)
Unincorporated
Community
(inside ULL)
Water
Service Provider
Adequate
Capacity or
Supply
Sanitary Sewer Service
Provider
Adequate
Capacity or
Supply
Alamo East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
Alhambra Valley City of Martinez Yes County Sanitary District 6 /
Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
Bay Point Golden State Water Co.
(wholesale water through
Contra Costa Water
District)
Yes Delta Diablo Sanitation
District
Yes
Bethel Island Diablo Water District /
County Service Area M-28
/ Mutual Water Cos.
Yes Ironhouse Sanitary District Yes
Blackhawk East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
Byron Potable water provided
through individual wells
Yes Byron Sanitary District
Constrained 23
Clyde Contra Costa Water District Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
Contra Costa Centre East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
Crockett East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Crockett Community
Services District
Yes
Diablo East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
Discovery Bay Discovery Bay Community
Services District
Yes Discovery Bay Community
Services District
Yes
East Richmond Heights East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes West County Wastewater
District
Yes
El Sobrante East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes West County Wastewater
District
Yes
Kensington East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Stege Sanitary District –
collection
East Bay Municipal Utility
District - treatment
Yes
Knightsen Diablo Water District Yes Septic systems for
individual lots
Yes
Montalvin Manor East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes West County Wastewater
District
Yes
23 Wastewater collection and treatment system operated by the Byron Sanitary District needs significant upgrades to
accommodate additional growth. (Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board)
Adopted July 21, 2009
CCC Board of Supervisors
6-2C
Table C-1
Water and Sewer Service Providers
Unincorporated Communities (Inside ULL)
Unincorporated
Community
(inside ULL)
Water
Service Provider
Adequate
Capacity or
Supply
Sanitary Sewer Service
Provider
Adequate
Capacity or
Supply
Mountain View Contra Costa Water District Yes Mountain View Sanitary
District
Yes
Norris Canyon East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
North Gate East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
North Richmond East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes West County
Wastewater District
Yes
Pacheco Contra Costa Water District Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
Port Costa Contra Costa Water District Yes Crockett Community
Services District
Yes
Reliez Valley Contra Costa Water District Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
Rodeo East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Rodeo Sanitary District Yes
Rollingwood East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes West County Wastewater
District
Yes
Sandmound Slough Diablo Water District (SOI) Yes Ironhouse Sanitary District Yes
Saranap East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
Tara Hills East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes West County Wastewater
District
Yes
Tassajara East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitation District
Yes
Unincorp. Walnut
Creek
East Bay Municipal Utility
District
Yes Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District
Yes
Vine Hill Contra Costa Water District Yes Mountain View Sanitary
District
Yes
State HCD Review Comment #1: At Risk Units
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Insert to “E. Loss of Assisted Housing”, pages 6-33 to 6-34, add text listing 3
qualified entities that might receive transfer of ownership for the at-risk Rivershore
Apartments (see new text underlined and highlighted in yellow in the paragraph below):
Rivershore Apartments are at-risk of converting to market rate within
the next 10 years. Rivershore Apartments is a 245 unit apartment
complex in Bay Point. In exchange for assistance through the County
tax-exempt bond program, the development allocates 49 affordable
units for low income families. The affordability restriction on
Rivershore Apartments is set to expire in 2017. The analysis below
provides the options for preserving and/or replacing the affordable
units in Rivershore.
Preservation and Replacement Options: To maintain the existing
affordable housing stock, the County must either preserve the existing
assisted units or replenish the affordable housing inventory with new
units. Depending on the circumstances of at-risk projects, different
options may be used to preserve or replace the units. Preservation
options typically include: 1) transfer of project to non-profit
ownership; 2) provision of rental assistance to tenants using non-
federal funding sources; 3) tax-exempt bond refinancing; and 4)
purchase of affordability covenants. With regard to replacement, the
most direct option is the development of new assisted multi-family
housing units. These options are described below, specifically in
relation to the preservation/replacement of at-risk units in Rivershore.
1) Transfer of Ownership: Transferring ownership of an at-risk project
to a non-profit housing provider is generally one of the least costly
ways to ensure that the at-risk units remain affordable for the long
term. By transferring property ownership to a non-profit organization,
low-income restrictions can be secured for 55 years and the project
would become potentially eligible for a greater range of governmental
assistance. According to a list of qualified entities maintained by the
California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD),
there are a number of non-profit housing providers that would be
suitable candidates to receive the transfer ownership of the at-risk
units in the Rivershore Apartments. There are three qualified entities
on the HCD list that are well established non-profit housing providers
active in Contra Costa County, including BRIDGE Housing Corporation
(San Francisco), Resources for Community Development (Berkeley),
and Eden Housing, Inc. (Hayward), which could be suitable candidates
for the transfer of ownership. The HCD list does not include a number
of housing developers who have the capacity to own and manage this
type of property. The entities named above are representative of the
active developers in the County.
State HCD Review Comment #1: At Risk Units
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Because it is not possible to only acquire the 49 affordable units in
Rivershore, the estimated market value is calculated for all 245 units
in the project, as indicated in Table 6-22:
Table 6-22
Market Value of At-Risk Project
Project Information Total
1- bedroom units 44
2- bedroom units 145
3- bedroom units 56
Total Units 245
Annual Operating Costs $ 1,513,365
Annual Gross Income $ 3,184,476
Net Annual Income $ 1,671,111
Estimated Market Value $23,395,554
Market value for project is estimated with the following assumptions:
1. Estimated market rents: 1-bdrm - ; 2-bdrm - ; 3-bdrm.
2. Vacancy rate is 5%.
3. Annual operating expenses is estimated to be $ 6,177 based on information from Bay Area Local Initiatives Support Coalition Operating Cost Database. An estimate of expenses as 40% of revenue would yield an annual income of $2 million.
4. Market value = Annual net project income x multiplication factor.
5. Industry standard multiplication factor for a building in moderate condition is 14.
Current market value for the units is estimated on the basis of the
project’s potential annual income, and operating and maintenance
expenses. As indicated above, the estimated market value of the 245
units is $23.4 million.1
1 This market value is estimated using basic assumptions and is intended as an indicator of the magnitude of
costs involved; in no way does it represent the actual market value of Rivershore Apartments.
State HCD Review Comment #2: Licensed Residential Care Facilities
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Insert to Housing Element page 6-48, under “2. Provisions for a Variety of
Housing”, under subheading “Licensed Care Facilities:”; add further information
about the processing of land use permit applications for residential care facilities with
more that six beds; see new text in underlined and yellow highlighted that elaborates
and provides examples for the land use permit process related to a residential care
facility within a residential district involving more than six beds:
“Licensed Care Facilities: The Zoning Code permits licensed
residential or community care facilities with six or fewer beds
in all residential zones by right. Those facilities with more than
six beds require a land use permit. Since land use permits for
residential care facilities with more than six beds are not very
common, the County has not formally adopted a procedure for
processing such land use permits. However, in reviewing the
records from the last Housing Element cycle (2001 to 2006),
there were two applications that involved land use permits for
residential care facilities with more than six beds. These two
land use permit applications both involved the expansion of an
existing 6-bed residential care facility for the elderly,
increasing their size from 6 beds to 8 beds and 6 beds to 12
beds, respectively. Each facility was located in an established
residential neighborhood in the unincorporated area, and the
applications for each were heard before the County Zoning
Administrator. The processing time for each application was
approximately 6-7 months, including the period from the initial
application in-take to the hearing before the Zoning
Administrator. Each application was determined to be
categorically exempt under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA)(CEQA Guidelines section 15301. Existing
Facilities). While there was neighborhood opposition to each
application to increase the number of beds for the respective
residential care facility, the County Zoning Administrator was
able to sustain the staff recommendation to approve the land
use permit subject to conditions of approval and the findings
necessary to approve a land use permit under the County
Ordinance Code. In each case, the conditions of approval for
the land use permit required verification that the residential
care facility was licensed by an appropriate state or local
agency, and that public services (police and fire protection)
and utilities (water, sewer, etc.) were adequate to serve the
location and size of the facility; and, in each case, there were
certain conditions relating to the approval of a site plan for the
facility and maximum number of employees working in the
facility at one time. Significantly, the County Zoning
Administrator’s decision to approve each application was never
State HCD Review Comment #2: Licensed Residential Care Facilities
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
appealed. The recent experience with these residential care
facility applications indicates that land use permit approval
process is reasonable and does not unduly limit or bar such
uses within residential zoned districts in the unincorporated
area. A total of 38 licensed community care facilities with over
238 beds are located in the unincorporated areas of Contra
Costa County. In addition, several other residential projects
provide housing for persons with disabilities as shown in Table
6-21.”
State HCD Review Comment #3: Water & Sewer Providers
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Insert to Housing Element page 6-62 to 6-63, under “2. Infrastructure and Public
Service Constraints”, add new paragraph in middle of page 63 on CA Govt. Code Sec.
65589.7, to note that water and sewer service providers must establish priority
procedures and grant priority water and sewer service to developments with affordable
units and local jurisdiction must make Housing Element immediately available to them
(see new paragraph underlined and highlighted in yellow):
2. Infrastructure and Public Service Constraints
A lack of adequate infrastructure or public services and facilities can be
a substantial constraint to residential development if it is to avoid
impacting existing residents. In fact, according to the National
Association of Home Builders, ensuring that the construction of
schools, roads and other infrastructure keeps pace with the anticipated
growth in population and economic activity is one of the biggest
challenges facing local and regional governments.1
As part of the Growth Management Program, the County conducts an
evaluation of the remaining infrastructure capacity. This includes an
analysis of areas not adequately served by infrastructure. This process
enables the County to identify constraints to the provision of services
and facilities in a given area and better plan for cost-effective and
efficient growth.
The General Plan, as the principal document regulating growth and
development in the County, contains service standards that establish a
linkage between new development accommodated in the Plan and new
facilities and/or services required to meet demands created by new
development. The Growth Management Element contains the
implementing programs and service standard requirements that
facilitate the attainment of goals and objectives of the Land Use, Public
Facilities and Services, and Housing Elements of the General Plan.
These standards ensure that the infrastructure and public services and
facilities are in place to serve that development within the Urban Limit
Line. The standards are implemented through payment of fees and
exaction and site improvements discussed earlier in this section.
However, it is important to note that intensive residential development
on infill sites can create additional challenges to existing infrastructure
and public services. This is particularly true in areas with aging
infrastructure or public facilities that are already strained serving the
needs of current residents.
1 National Association of Home Builders, Smart Growth: Building Better Places to Live, Work and Play. May
2000.
State HCD Review Comment #3: Water & Sewer Providers
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Many of the County’s affordable housing developments are located in
infill locations in areas already served by existing infrastructure. While
such infill sites are beneficial in that they don’t require the extension of
services, provide housing near public transit and jobs, encourage
economic growth in urban areas, and thus promote “smart growth”
development principles 2 , they may face other challenges to
development. Infill sites in the older communities in the County may
require upgrading of existing infrastructure systems to support more
intense development, such as roadway improvements, and
replacement of undersized sewer and water lines. Other constraints to
development of infill sites include site assembly and clean-up;
relocation; compatibility with surrounding land uses; and potential
neighborhood opposition.
There are thirty (30) unincorporated communities in Contra Costa
County, which are within the County’s Urban Limit Line, that are
provided water and sanitary sewer services from multiple providers,
including single purpose agencies, special districts, community service
districts, county service areas, and private companies. A complete
listing of the water and sanitary service providers for the
unincorporated communities is provided in Appendix C, Table C-1.
Each of these providers is responsible for determining the supply or
capacity to their service area, and they are responsible for informing
the County as to whether there is insufficient supply or capacity within
their system for new residential development. To date, as noted in
Table C-1, Appendix C, the water and sanitary sewer providers serving
the unincorporated communities within the County’s Urban Limit Line
have adequate capacity or supply.
Government Code Section 65589.7 requires water and sewer providers
to establish specific procedures and grant priority water and sewer
service to residential developments with units affordable to lower-
income households. The statute also requires local governments to
immediately deliver the Housing Element to water and sewer providers
(note: following the Board of Supervisors adoption, the 2009 Housing
Element was sent to each of the water and sewer providers serving the
unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County).
The adequacy of the public infrastructure to serve new residential
development is central to the County’s planning process. The Growth
Management and Public Facilities/Services elements to the General
Plan establish performance measures for infrastructure, including
water and sewer, and new residential development must receive
written verification for both water and sewer services prior to final
subdivision map or issuance of a building permit. Additionally, under
2 Judy Corbett and Joe Velasquez. “The Ahwahnee Principles: Toward More Livable Communities,” Western City.
September 1994.
State HCD Review Comment #3: Water & Sewer Providers
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 211, both which took effect as of
January 1, 2002, there is now a requirement that extensive, specific
information about water availability be presented and considered by
cities and counties in connection with residential subdivisions of a
certain size. Cities and counties are required to contact the responsible
water agency proposed to serve the residential subdivision to
determine whether water supplies are sufficient to serve the project.
Information from water and sewer agencies about supply and system
capacity is also presented in a residential project’s environmental
review analysis prepared pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
If the drought affecting California persists, the adequacy of future
water supplies for residential development could become a constraint
in the coming years. The East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD)
and the Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) are two of the main
suppliers of potable water to residents in both incorporated and
unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. Both of these water
districts have prepared water supply management plans that project
existing and future demand for water service within their respective
districts and capital improvement plans for water delivery facilities
within their respective districts. Each of these water providers has
recently declared that a drought emergency exists. They have likewise
indicated in their respective water supply management plans that
there may not be adequate water supplies as a result of the drought
and they project shortages for water delivery if the drought continues.
State HCD Review Comment #4: Emergency Shelters
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Insert to page 6-108, Housing Programs, Review and Update of Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinance, add language to the description of the 5-year Program Objective to clarify
that development standards for emergency shelter will be the same as those within the
selected zone (C: Commercial District) where shelter can be established without
conditional use permit (see new text in underlined and yellow highlighted).
REVIEW AND UPDATE OF ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
The County regulates the type, location, density, and scale of
residential development in the unincorporated areas primarily through
the Planning and Zoning Code. Zoning regulations are designed to
protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of
residents as well as implement the policies of the County General Plan.
The County is engaged in an ongoing process of reviewing the
Planning and Zoning Code for consistency with State laws. The main
purpose of this review is to ensure that the County’s requirements and
standards do not act as a constraint to the development of affordable
housing.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinance Review and Update
• Periodically review the Planning and Zoning Code and other
regulations to ensure that County policies and regulations do not
constrain housing development and affordability.
• Pursuant to S.B. 2, within one (1) year of the adoption of this
Housing Element amend the Zoning Code to allow an emergency
shelter facility without a conditional use permit or other
discretionary action subject to permit procedures and certain
development standards. Emergency shelters will only be subject
to those development standards that apply to residential and
commercial use within the same zone. The development
standards would include but not limited to the maximum number
of beds or persons served nightly by the facility, length of stay at
the facility, size and location of the facility’s exterior and interior
on-site waiting and client intake area, proximity of the facility to
other emergency shelters, facility off-street parking that is not
greater than other residential or commercial uses, facility lighting
and security, and the provision for on-site management at the
facility. Amend the C: General Commercial District zone.
• Permit transitional and supportive housing as a residential use
subject to only those restrictions that apply to other residential
use of the same type in the same zone.
• Allow agriculture employee housing to be permitted by-right
(without a conditional use permit) in single family zones for less
than six person and in agricultural zones with no more than 12
units or 36 beds consistent with Health and Safety Code 17021.5
and 17021.6.
• Amend the zoning ordinance to include development standards
and permit procedures to encourage and facilitate the
development of SROs.
• Public Works Department in coordination with DCD to undertake
review of standards under the subdivision ordinance.
State HCD Review Comment #4: Emergency Shelters
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
State HCD Review Comment #5: Extremely Low Income Housing
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Insert to Housing Programs, pages 6-103 to 6-104, “Housing Affordability”, add new
program entitled “Extremely Low Income Housing Development Assistance”, see below
proposed new program to be inserted at the end of this section on page 6-104 after
“Home Sharing Program”:
EXTREMELY LOW INCOME (ELI) HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE
The County is an entitlement jurisdiction for the CDBG, HOME, and ESG
programs. It is a sub-grantee for the HOPWA program. In addition, the
County applies for and receives approximately $7 million in McKinney-Vento
Act funds on an annual basis. The County administers each of these grants
for either most or all of the County (incorporated cities and towns, and the
unincorporated areas). Existing Board of Supervisor policy gives priority to
projects that provide housing affordable to and occupied by extremely low
income households.
The County shall continue to seek state and federal funding to support the
construction and rehabilitation of low-income housing, particularly for
housing that is affordable to extremely low income households. The
Redevelopment Agency shall continue to assess potential funding sources to
support construction and rehabilitation of low-income housing, such as, but
not limited to Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME
programs. The County shall also seek state and federal funding specifically
targeted for the development of housing affordable to extremely low income
households, such as local Housing Trust funds and Proposition 1-C funds. The
County shall promote the benefits of this assistance program to develop
housing for extremely low income households on its web page and create
handout material to be distributed with residential development applications.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Extremely Low Income
(ELI)Housing Development
Assistance
Redevelopment Agency will assess and pursue all available
state and federal funding programs to support the construction
and rehabilitation of low-income housing for extremely low
income households.
Department of Conservation and Development (Planning Dept.)
will promote the ELI development assistance program to
developers (for profit and non-profit) by placing program
information on County website and providing handout material
on the program at the Application & Permit Counter.
State HCD Review Comment #5: Extremely Low Income Housing
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Insert to Housing Element, at page 6-111, Table 6-41: Housing Implementation
Programs Summary, new item 19.a “Extremely Low Income Housing”, under the
subheading “Houisng Affordability”, see new text underlined and yellow highlighted.
Housing Affordability
17. First-Time
Homebuyer
Opportunities
Provide additional
homeownership
opportunities.
Assist 50 low and
moderate income
first-time
homebuyers.
MCC, HOME,
CDBG, RDA
Set-Aside,
Mortgage
Revenue
Bonds
Conservation
and
Development;
Redevelopment
Agency
Ongoing
18. Section 8 Rental
Assistance
Assist very low-income
households with rental
payments.
Continue to
provide Section 8
assistance. Apply
for additional
vouchers.
HUD Section
8
HACCC Prepare PHAP
– Action Plan
annually.
19. Home Sharing
Program
Provide for home
sharing opportunities.
Support
appropriate
agencies offering
shared housing
opportunities.
CDBG,
HOPWA
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
19.a. Extremely Low
Income Housing
Promote development of
housing affordable to
extremely low income
households.
Continue applying
for funding that
supports housing
for extremely low
income
households.
Promote funding
assistance to
profit and non-
profit builders
develop for
extremely low
income housing
projects.
HOME
CDBG
State (as
funding is
available)
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
State HCD Review Comment #5: Extremely Low Income Housing
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Insert Extremely Low Income category into Table 6-42: Quantified Five-Year
Objectives, at page 6-113. See change underlined and yellow highlighted.
Table 6-42
Quantified Five-Year Objectives
Activity
Extremely
Low
Income
Very Low
Income
Low
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
Income Total
New Construction
Provision of Adequate
Sites
65 750 598 687 1,408 3,508
Assistance in
Construction
65 95 320 165 650
Homeowner Rehabilitation 15 15 10 40
Weatherization 100 150 250
Acquisition/Rehabilitation 5 30 10 5 50
Preservation of At-Risk
Units
49 196 245
First-Time Homebuyers
Assistance
5 35 10 50
State HCD Review Comment #6: North Richmond Specific Plan
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Insert to Housing Element page 6-106, under “Provision of Adequate Residential Sites”,
new program item entitled “NORTH RICHMOND SPECIFIC PLAN”, see next text in
underlined and highlighted in yellow.
NORTH RICHMOND SPECIFIC PLAN
Contra Costa County has initiated a Specific Plan process to re-
designate a 100(+) acre area from an industrial General Plan Land
Use designation to a mix of residential, commercial, and public uses
in order to establish a new residential neighborhood within the
unincorporated community of North Richmond. The North Richmond
Specific Plan area covers an area bounded by Wildcat Creek on the
south, San Pablo Creek on the north, the Richmond Parkway on the
west, and the Union Pacific Railroad tracks to the east. This is 100
(+/-) acre area is designated for industrial uses but is comprised of
largely vacant or underutilized lands once used for nurseries for the
cut flower industry. As currently proposed, the Specific Plan would
permit up to 2100 residential units of which 1860 would be
considered affordable to moderate households, with an estimate of at
least 315 to very low, low and moderate income households. The
Specific Plan area is within a County Redevelopment Project Area,
which will require that a minimum of 15% of the units developed
would be subject to deed restrictions or regulatory restrictions that
would assure affordability for the long term; however, it is possible
that there could be more affordable units than the minimum as a
result of the Specific Plan process. It is expected that the Specific
Plan will be considered for adoption by the Board of Supervisors in
2010 following the completion of a community outreach program, an
Environmental Impact Report and public hearings before the County
Planning Commission and eventually the Board of Supervisors. Once
adopted, it is anticipated that the Specific Plan would be
implemented in a phased manner according to market conditions and
the completion of upgrades to public infrastructure necessary to
support the new residential development. The affordable units would
be built generally in proportionate share with the phasing of the
market rate units consistent with the approach under similar Specific
Plans adopted by the County, such as the Dougherty Valley Specific
Plan. The County will work toward Specific Plan adoption and initiate
plan implementation within the reporting period of this Housing
Element. Regardless of the timing for Specific Plan approval, any
plan considered for this area of North Richmond would include
provisions to contribute a significant share of the County’s affordable
housing need. If it appears that the North Richmond Specific Plan
cannot be approved within the reporting period of this Housing
Element, the County would evaluate its General Plan to secure a
State HCD Review Comment #6: North Richmond Specific Plan
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
comparable share of affordable housing units elsewhere in the
County.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
North Richmond Specific Plan Continue the preparation and processing of the Specific Plan.
Meet with the North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council, and
other community stakeholder, including key leaders and local
civic and community groups, to cooperatively to complete the
Specific Plan.
Coordinate with local, state, and federal agencies in the Specific
Plan process.
Complete an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the
Specific Plan in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
Conduct public hearings before the County Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors.
Following Specific Plan adoption, initiate plan implementation
activities.
State HCD Review Comment #6: North Richmond Specific Plan
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Insert to Housing Element, page 6-111, Table 6-41, Housing Implementation
Programs Summary, new item 23.a, North Richmond Specific Plan, under the
“Provision of Adequate Housing Sites”; new text underlined and yellow
highlighted
Provision of Adequate Housing Sites
20. Sites Inventory Provide for adequate
housing sites, including ‘as-
right development’ sites for
homeless facilities
Adopt revised zoning
text.
Maintain sites
inventory.
Funding source
to be
determined for
maintenance of
site inventory
Conservation
and
Development
June 2010 for
zoning changes.
Ongoing
maintenance of
site inventory.
21. Mixed-Use
Developments
Encourage mixed-use
developments.
Pursuant to El
Sobrante MAC’s
recommendations,
establish mixed use
designations under
the General Plan for
sections San Pablo
Dam Road and
Appian Way in El
Sobrante.
Conservation
and
Development
/no new funds
required
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
22. Density Bonus &
Other Development
Incentives
Support affordable housing
development.
Offer density
bonuses and other
incentives for
affordable housing.
Conservation
and
Development
/no new funds
required
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
23. Infill Development Facilitate infill development.Identify small vacant
multi-family lots with
potential for lot
consolidation.
Conservation
and
Development
/no new funds
required
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
23. a. North Richmond
Specific Plan
Prepare and process
Specific Plan to convert a
100 (+/-) acre industrial
area in North Richmond to
new residential
neighborhood with
potentially 2100 new
dwelling units.
Meet and coordinate
plan preparation with
stakeholders.
Complete EIR under
CEQA.
Conduct public
hearings.
Board adoption.
Redevelopment
Agency funding
Specific Plan
effort
County
Redevelopment
Agency
Conservation
and
Development
December 2010
State HCD Review Comment #7: Accessible Housing
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Insert new paragraph to County Housing Element at page 6-102 under heading “ACCESSIBLE
HOUSING”, to indicate County will formalize procedures to facilitate housing for persons with
special needs and remove constraints to such housing development and document these
reasonable accommodations procedures. New paragraph and text underlined and highlighted in
yellow.
ACCESSIBLE HOUSING
Persons with disabilities represent a major special needs group in Contra
Costa County. To maintain independent living, disabled persons are likely to
require assistance, which may include special housing design features,
income support for those who are unable to work, and in-home supportive
services for persons with mobility limitations. To provide additional housing
opportunities for the disabled, the County will continue to require inclusion of
accessible units in all new construction projects receiving County financing
(e.g. CDBG, HOME, redevelopment set-aside). Current regulations require
that five percent of the units must be accessible to the physically impaired
and an additional two percent of the units must be accessible to the
hearing/vision impaired.
In order to facilitate the development of appropriate housing for persons with
special needs, the County works to remove development constraints and
provide reasonable accommodations in the development of such housing as
requests are made. The County will formalize this practice as written
reasonable accommodation procedures.
Program Five-Year Program Objectives
Accessible Housing Continue to require inclusion of accessible units in all new
construction projects receiving County financing.
Loan funds are available through the Neighborhood
Preservation Program and the Housing Authority Rental
Rehabilitation Program for accessibility improvements in
existing affordable housing.
Document reasonable accommodation procedures
State HCD Review Comment #7: Accessible Housing
Draft Revision Insert
County Housing Element
Nov. 2009
Insert to County Housing Element at page 6-110 under Table 6-41: Housing Implementation
Programs Summary: Special Needs Housing, add 15 (a) “Reasonable Housing
Accommodation” as new program under sub-heading “Special Housing Needs”.
New text underlined and highlighted in yellow.
Table 6-41 modification
Special Needs Housing
14. Special Needs
Housing
Increase the supply of
special needs housing.
Provide financial
and other
incentives for the
development of
housing for
special needs
populations.
CDBG,
HOME,
HOPWA,
RDA Set-
Aside
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
15. Accessible Housing Increase the supply of
accessible housing.
Require inclusion
of accessible units
in all new County-
funded
construction
projects.
None
Required
Conservation
and
Development
Ongoing
15(a). Reasonable
Accommodation
Increase the supply of
special needs and
accessible housing.
Document
County’s
reasonable
accommodation
activities as
written
procedures
Conservation
and
Development
planning and
CDBG
Conservation
and
Development
June 2011