HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05061997 - SD5 "6`
Contra
• fit, M
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 'ice Costa
/A
FROM: Harvey E. Bragdon, County
Director of Community Development
DATE: May 6, 1997
SUBJECT: Annual Compliance Checklist and Capital Improvement Program for Measure C-1988
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1 . Find that the proposed 1997-2001 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Parks and Sheriff
Facilities is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (see Exhibit A);
2. Adopt the 1997-2001 CIP for Parks and Sheriff Facilities (see Exhibit B);
3. Approve the completed Annual Compliance Checklist (see Exhibit C) and find that the
County's policies and programs conform to the requirement for compliance with the Contra
Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Program; and
4. Authorize the Director of Community Development to proceed with 'a ,General Plan
Amendment to consider revising the General Plan's growth management standard for sheriff
facilities to include support facilities in the definition of patrol and investigation activities.
FISCAL IMPACT
Adoption of the CIP for Parks and Sheriff Facilities and approval of the Annual Compliance Checklist
(Checklist) qualify the County to receive its 1996/97 allocation of Measure C-1988 "return to
source" revenues, estimated to be approximately $1 .5 million.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATU i
ar E. Bragdon
ACTION OF BOARD ON May 6 , 1997 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDEDXX OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
XX UNANIMOUS (ABSENT - TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact Person: Steven Goetz, 335%1240 ATTESTED May 6 .7 199 7
Orig: Community Development PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
cc: Public Works Department THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Sheriff's Office AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
CCTA (via CDD)
BY .�, DEPUTY
Annual Compliance Checklist and CIP for Measure C-1988
May 6, 1997
Page Two
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The County annually submits a compliance checklist to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority
(Authority) to receive the County's portion of the 18 percent of sales tax funds available for local street
maintenance and improvements. Of the over $7 million in "return to source" funds available
countywide for Fiscal Year 1996/97, the County is eligible to receive $1 .5 million.
Two related actions must precede completion and submittal of the Checklist: 1) California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review of the proposed 1997-2001 Capital Improvement Program
(CIPI for Parks and Sheriff Facilities; and 2) adoption of this CIP.
To comply with CEQA, Department staff has found pursuant to adopted County CEQA Guidelines, that
the CIP for Parks and Sheriff Facilities is not a project subject to CEQA (see Exhibit A). This follows
from the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential to cause a significant
adverse effect on the environment. No significant physical change in the environment will result from
adoption of this CIP. All capital facilities programmed are either fully committed, constructed, awaiting
occupancy, or undergoing separate environmental review. Projects that may be funded in the future,
consistent with this CIP, which are as yet undefined will be subject to separate environmental review.
Under the provisions of Section 15061 (b)3, of the State and County CEQA guidelines, it can be seen
with certainty that there is no possibility that adoption of the CIP for Parks and Sheriff Facilities could
have a significant effect on the environment.
The CIP for Parks and Sheriff Facilities (see Exhibit B) was prepared as part of the County's
Development Mitigation Program. This CIP is authorized by Implementation Measure 4-n of the County
General Plan. Any project sponsored by the County and necessary to maintain adopted levels of
performance must be identified in a five-year CIP. Funding sources for the complete cost of the
improvements, and phasing, if any, must also be identified in the CIP. This CIP demonstrates that
development anticipated between 1997 and 2001 will satisfy the performance standards for parks and
sheriff facilities.
This year there was a delay in updating the CIP in order to adequately address compliance with the
performance standard for sheriff facilities. As of 1994 there was sufficient space to comply with the
County's performance standard to the year 2000. However, a revised inventory of sheriff facilities
reduced the space available for patrol and investigation. The Authority discussed this issue during their
review of the County's Checklist last year. At that time the Authority requested the Board of re-
examine the growth management standard for sheriff facilities to determine if it remains an appropriate
measure for the services provided by the Sheriff.
The Board found that, since 1991 , the Sheriff has expanded facilities by 65 percentm (more than
200,000 square feet). However, due to the General Plan's narrow definition of patrol and investigation
facilities, much of this space could not be counted toward meeting the growth management standard.
Furthermore, the Sheriff indicated that the growth management standard did not include certain support
facilities essential to patrol and investigation activities. Board members were also concerned about the
absence of a long-term master plan to guide the expansion of the facilities needed for patrol and
investigation.
On April 1 , 1997, the Board of Supervisors agreed to modify the growth management standard for
sheriff facilities to include support facilities such as dispatch, within the definition of patrol and
investigation. This revised definition, combined with the proposed five-year capital program for sheriff
facilities, is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the growth management standard during the next
five years. County staff will schedule hearings on the revised definition for patrol and investigation
activities and will incorporate the Board's recommendations into the next scheduled consolidated
amendment to the General Plan.
The portion of the Development Mitigation Program that demonstrates compliance with traffic
performance standards is described in the 1993/94-2000/2001 County Road Improvement Program
Annual Compliance Checklist and CIP for Measure C-1988
May 6, 1997
Page Three
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS (continued)
adopted by the Board on June 27, 1995. Monitoring data during 1995 indicate that the reporting
intersections on "Basic Routes" in the unincorporated area operate at Level of Service A and satisfy the
County's traffic performance standard. Projects in the County Road lmprovementProgram will maintain
compliance with traffic performance standards in the unincorporated area in the future based on near-
term growth forecasts. This Program also identifies improvements on Routes of Regional Significance
in a manner consistent with the County's obligations specified in the Authority's recently adopted
Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
Compliance with performance standards for fire, water, flood control, and sanitary facilities must be
demonstrated by the developer prior to granting final discretionary approvals of such development.
The County General Plan provides the policies and program that enable the County to comply with the
Measure C-1988 Growth Management Program. The Checklist (see Exhibit C) was completed based
on these policies and programs. The Authority requires that the Board review and approve the
completed Checklist, and find that the County's policies and programs conform to the Measure C-1988
Growth Management Program. By so doing, the Board will also commit to cooperate with the Sheriff's
Office to review the method of mitigating the impact of new development on sheriff services.
CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION
Failure to adopt the C/P for Parks and Sheriff Facilities or approve the Checklist will prevent the County
from qualifying for its Fiscal Year 1996/97 allocation of "return to source" funds. A delay in this
decision could cause a loss to the County in interest earnings on its allocation of, "return to source"
funds.
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit A: Determination that an Activity is not a Project Subject tot he California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Exhibit B: Contra Costa County Development Mitigation Program, 1997-2001, Capital Improvement Program for Provision
of Parks and Sheriff Facilities
Exhibit C: Contra Costa Transportation Authority Growth Management Program Compliance Checklist
1
EXHIBIT A
DETERMINATION THAT AN ACTIVITY
IS NOT A PROJECT SUBJECT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
FILE NO, CP 97-1
ACTIVITY NAME: Contra Costa County Development Mitigation Program: Caporal
Improvements Program for Parks and Sheriff Facilities
PREPARED BY: Steven L. Goetz DATE: January 23, 1997
This activity is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA pursuant to
Section 15061 (b) (3) of Chapter 3 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a
significant effect on the environment.
DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY:
Adoption of a capital improvements program for the provision of Sheriff and parks
facilities in order to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of Measure C-1988.
No significant change in the environment will result from the adoption of this
program: all capital facilities programmed are either fully committed or constructed,
and awaiting occupancy or are undergoing separate environmental review. Projects
which may be funded in the future consistent with this program which are as yet
undefined will be subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Location of site: Countywide in County of Contra Costa, State of California.
LOCATION:
Countywide in the County of Contra Costa, State of California.
Date: January 23. 1997 Reviewed by:
Community Development Departmen resentative
1 '
EXHIBIT B
Contra Costa County
Development Mitigation Program
1997-2001
Capital Improvements Program for
Provision of Parks and Sheriff Facilities
Prepared by
Contra Costa County
Community Development Department
April 1997
I. INTRODUCTION
This document is Contra Costa County' s Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) for providing park and sheriff facilities in the
unincorporated area of the County. A companion document, the
County Road Improvement Program, describes transportation
projects to mitigate the transportation impacts of new
development as well as to facilitate access to housing
opportunities for all income levels . Both respond to the
requirements of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority' s
Annual Compliance Checklist, which is used to measure how well
individual jurisdictions are complying with the requirements of
growth management program of Measure C-88 .
Because the CIP is based on a five-year horizon, 1997-2001,
growth estimates for that time period are presented in Section
II . Section III of the CIP reviews the performance standards
which were established by the Growth Management Element in the
Contra Costa County General Plan, and describes the status of
County' s compliance with these standards as of December 1996 .
Based on the estimated population growth. Section IV describes
the facilities needed to meet the performance standards set forth
in the Growth Management Element, and the projects, their
estimated costs, and the funding mechanism to meet these needs.
II. POPULATION ESTIMATES
Table 1 provides estimates of past and projected population
growth for the time period covered by the County' s Growth
Management Element. These forecasts are based on ABAG' s
Projections 94, as adjusted by the Community Development
Department to reflect actual growth recorded in the
unincorporated area between 1991 and 1995 .
TABLE 1
PAST AND PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH
IN UNINCORPORATED CONTRA COSTA
AREA 1991-1996 1997-2001
East County 7, 838 13,174
Central County 6,175 10, 895
West County 934 834
TOTAL 14, 947 24, 903
1
a f •
1 n
III. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The Growth Management Element establishes standards for the
provision of certain public services in the unincorporated areas .
These performance standards are applied to all development that
was approved after adoption of the County General Plan in
January, 1991 . The standards are established for the entire
unincorporated area, therefore, the following evaluation is on a
countywide basis.
Park Facilities: The growth management standard for park
facilities is three acres of neighborhood parks per 1, 000
population. Table 2 of evaluates this standard as of 1996 . This
evaluation is based on population growth for the 1991-96 time
period and the park acreage opened during that period.
TABLE 2
EVALUATION OF COMPLIANCE
WITH THE PARR FACILITY STANDARD AS OF 1996
REQUIRED FACILITIES
FACILITIES OPENED SURPLUS/ (DEFICIT)
45 acres 71 acres 26 acres
Since January 1991, the County has opened approximately 71 acres
of new park facilities that meet the neighborhood park
classification. Actual park construction exceeded the growth
management standard by 26 acres . See Appendix A for a
description of these park facilities.
Sheriff Facilities: The growth management standard for sheriff
facilities is 155 square feet of patrol and investigation
facilities per 1, 000 population. Table 3 evaluates compliance
with this standard as of 1996 . The evaluation is based on
population growth for the 1991-96 time period and the square
footage of sheriff facilities opened during that period.
As of 1994, there was sufficient space in the West County Justice
Center dedicated to patrol and investigation to comply with the
County' s performance standard for sheriff services to the year
2000 . However, a revised inventory of sheriff facilities reduced
the space for patrol and investigation activities . This revised
inventory results in a deficit of 158 square feet of facilities,
causing the County to be out of compliance with the growth
management standard for 1996 . See Appendix B for the inventory
of sheriff facilities .
2
• r •
r
TABLE 3
EVALUATION OF COMPLIANCE
WITH SHERIFF FACILITY STANDARD AS OF 1996
REQUIRED FACILITIES
FACILITIES OPENED SURPLUS/ (DEFICIT)
2,317 sq.ft. 2,159 sq.ft. (158) sq.ft.
Pursuant to a request by the Contra Costa Transportation
Authority, the Board of Supervisors re-examined the growth
management standard for sheriff facilities to determine if it
remains an appropriate measure for the services provided by the
Sheriff . Since 1991, the Sheriff has expanded facilities by 65
percent, or more than 200, 000 square feet . However, due to the
General Plan' s narrow definition of patrol and investigation
facilities, much of this space could not be counted toward
meeting the growth management standard. Furthermore, the Sheriff
indicated that the growth management standard did not include
certain support facilities essential to patrol and investigation
activities . Board members were also concerned about the absence
of a long-term master plan to guide the expansion of the
facilities needed for patrol and investigation.
On April 1, 1997, the Board of Supervisors agreed to modify the
growth management standard for sheriff facilities to include
support facilities such as dispatch, within the definition of
patrol and investigation. This revised definition, combined with
the proposed five-year capital program for sheriff facilities, is
sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the growth management
standard during the next five years. County staff is scheduling
hearings on the revised definition for patrol and investigation
activities and will incorporate the Board' s recommendations into
the next scheduled consolidated amendment to the General Plan.
IV. FIVE-YEAR PROGRAM FOR PARR AND SHERIFF FACILITIES
If the County is unable to show compliance with an adopted growth
management standard, Measure C-88 requires that the County show
how it will comply with the standard during the next five years .
This section of the CIP describes a five-year program of projects
to achieve .or maintain compliance with the County' s adopted
growth management standards ., The CIP must include projects,
their estimated costs, and a financial plan for providing the
improvements. The following sections describe the five-year
program for park and Sheriff facilities .
3
1
Park Facilities: Based on projected growth during the 1997-2001
time period, the County will need to construct an additional 75
acres of neighborhood parks. Table 4 describes the park
facilities programmed for construction during the 1997 to 2001
time period. A total of 72 acres of parks are programmed for
construction. By adding the acreage from Table 4 to the current
surplus of 26 acres, planned park construction will exceed the
performance standard by approximately 23 acres based on assumed
growth by 2001 .
Parks are financed largely by park dedication fees assessed
against new development in the unincorporated area. These fees
amount to $1, 350 per dwelling unit in eastern Contra Costa and
$2, 000 per dwelling unit elsewhere . County regulations allow
these fees to be satisfied through direct payments, dedication of
land, or dedication of improved park facilities to the County.
Unless otherwise indicated, the parks shown in Table 4 occur on
County-owned parcels or land dedicated by developers to the
County. Expenditures are for park improvements only.
Sheriff Facilities: To comply with Measure C-88, the County must
show what actions it will take to eliminate the deficit of
Sheriff facilities which is currently at 158 square feet . This
deficit is projected to grow to 4, 718 square feet by 2001 based
on projected growth for that time period.
The Board of Supervisors has taken actions to address facility
expansion requirements for both the near term and the long term.
Near term actions are described in Table 5, which is the five
year program of projects for additional patrol and investigation
facilities . All facilities were donated to the County, except
for the expansion of the dispatch facility which is funded
through the County General Fund. These near term actions will
add 5, 124 square feet of additional facilities for patrol and
investigation activities, meeting and maintaining compliance with
the growth management standard for the next five years .
TABLE 5
FIVE YEAR PROGRAM FOR SHERIFF FACILITIES
SQUARE DATE
FACILITY FEET TO OPEN EXPENDITURE
Rodeo Patrol Annex 790 1997 (Donated)
Helicopter Patrol Facility 2, 500 1997 (Donated)
Dispatch Facility Remodel 1, 834 1998 $1.8 Million
TOTAL 5,124
4
r
r-1 O
O
Co
N
O O
O
O '
N
0) O O O O
CIN O Ln Ln O
a) O [- L` U1
_ r•i � N
O
O
O
4/1. 00 O O O O O O O
01 O O O O O O O
N 01 N O O t- -:14 N M
w
J-)
ri l� O O O O
b 0) Ln Ln Ln U)
w r••i
a
k
W
O r 00 03 ri o0 00 0 00 rn rn rn rn 0) ri r-I
p 41 am am rn rn rn am rn orn m o) rn am am o 0
r♦ ro m an m m m m m m m m o) o) o) o 0
W (� r-L -4 rl '-1 .--1 •-i r-I e-I '-I e--1 ri r-1 ri N N'
J 5
U
u
U-
Y $4 4.) w
Lp o U) M m Ln Ln Ln Ln (- N O O r)
d Z q L 10 O N O VL r� VL 'a+ N Ln n7
LL W •rl •--1 .--1 L�
O U 3 Q
< � U
Q
UI
O
cc ri w
a ro N d o Ln Ln m m Ln Ln Ln Ln r r o 0 ao UJ
0 4-)� p U � 3' � -i � � o N o � r � v� N Ln fnU
Q
W N
>- -L)
>
O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LL ro o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
w �4 �4 �4 �4 �4 �4 �4 �4 �4 �4 �4u �4 �4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a) b) b) b M 0) 0) U) b) m
U) M M U) b)
a r+ •ri •H ro •r
-H , •14 • 1 -11 -14 •rI •ri •r♦ -r♦ -r♦ w
w w w 14 0) w a) w w w w w w w w EO
Z z z N z z z z z z z z z z z ro
ro
w �
a ro ro
z o r)
a 0, s4 a
0 0 a)
114 a �4/) a oa)
Q) En
-- a o > ro
co
a o Ln
o L ul
JJ L N •u # ro A 34
-+ �+ -) ro w
w ro r) U) U x -- w v a r�
r+ �4 0 w x q -- w �4 b) a) k
D4 H h w 4J �40 r, �4 w a10 >,
x U ro ro 04 r-+ O w E •ri •,-I w a
�4 9 N .X * r-I ro l-) a w O w ro > -4 •rl
ro �4 w w x 0 r-+ m w s4 4 w v q o 9 U
a ro Fj w s4 0 a W rO :� U rO :J s4 ro x
a o ro x o ro ro U) G - , w a o �4
ro 0 U a U ►4 >1 >, o c7 a -ri 3 ro
q r L U) M ro g La r-i 3 u n n a
�4 w >, o ro a 4 3 w
s4 > :J w rO B M X 0 P O ri O ,r v E 4 Z r1
ro •rL ro w o ro -,q ro O ro4.3 L �4 roL o 0 a •a
a a a a x z x o U a v) m a 3 3 P z o w
i
i
a r do
1 '
The long term action of the Board of Supervisors centers on
development of the master plan for patrol and investigation
facilities . On April 1, 1997, the Board of Supervisors requested
the Sheriff,� in cooperation with the County Administrator, to
prepare a master plan that addresses the long term needs for
patrol and investigation activities in the unincorporated area
and evaluates potential revenue sources to fund implementation of
the master plan. This master plan will help guide future updates
of the CIP.
Fees are currently in place for new development in the
unincorporated area to provide ongoing support for sheriff
operations. The fees do not cover additional capital facilities
which may be needed in the future. The master plan for patrol
and investigation facilities will examine potential revenue
mechanisms for such facilities .
6
� f •
r.
APPENDICES
Od O r T r r N m t7 V q 'IT N N N N N N CO CC)
�'� O O O O O O CA O CA CA CA CA O m m m O O O CA
M O CA CA CA O CA O CA CA O CA CA CA CA CA CA C) CA C) CA
D T T T T T T T T T T T T T r V-
E
T T T T r
a
z o
Z V
W
W p E
W CA p) O O ti O O st CD OM to CV (V O O O O G
t a
w Q E
w V
O CD
Q
Z e�0 d 0 M M O O M N O N O M O N CA O M O to O N CJO
< � Q 00 CO M 6 N N 666 N N ai
T T r
.Y
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O m
l0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O L
CL LL L L = = = L L L L L L L L L L L .E L w
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N
Q W C0 0 0 0 0 0 a0 0 0 0Q0 Q0 0 0 0n0 0 0 +
o. .rn rn rn.rn.rn.m rn.rn,rn.rn.rn rn.rn.rn .rn.rn.rn.rn.rn.rn �
W
O F- Z z z Z z z z z z z z z z z Z Z Z z Z Z U
a z
a O >.
Q n
a-
0 ...
o �
Q N
W
U
Z rn
V
z W
AT`
0 C C
O
U co
D c = c rn c ami
0 m O C m 0
L N O O
U Cu � V � Y (nU o
O �' a 'a m = a >, .- v
U U w tAUB � y � � YV w w
y m � �G C Y N N N w D O to
Y i a y N a t Q c x
m >, y a m 0) !� U m (D
a ama M == 5 � Oa � Cc o °' my Ya '0 a'� 'cai
c > c m a � d a m m m cL> _ m � N D �'
> O ° '> m O va ' Cf) a. caa > cn o.
J9 O +� •� � y N p L p O O y O = to 0 0
L T y C C m V 2 0 a 0._ E v m E y L L) N U
IL a U O 2 M = 2 U > w 2 a 0 0 0 0- L)Ca z
M ) •
d tm) O O O O O O 0) h M N M
m 0) O r O CO LO co M (O CO) N (h e1 O O r (h O t0 t0
T. •� C r N ' ' - - O CO r t0 .n-..N ' ' ' ' CO ' ' ' ` ' ' ' � (O r ' '- LO M M
Z N r N .r.. r N (� 0 v(n r w
N M `'N N N
r
m O 001- 0) 000 (0 N0NNOCl) 000CM (D O to to N ON N
k0 ,0 OCAS v t0 (nO - N0O10ce) 00 (Mt0 vM0 Oa O) OO) 0)
pOj .p cm OCh r ' rO (OM ' ' N (ACl) to N
Go OOo V M Ih V) ' CO 00 (O ' 0r M
m Cl) N r r C; M.1 (O a c7 M .4 N (f)N M L6 01 f`
MN C N M N N a N
a _
r
w. 1� N OOhO (DOOto N019000000 (Ds10 U') W) N ON Cl)
o p Q O 0) r IT co W) c0 IV N O O O O O 1` of w ("7 O 000 W O 0) t0
0 n 0 O 0 0 O v M N P- M ' CO 00 CO ' to r 1
Q to NN �-' C; MODr (Oto11Mr ^ f'�'1a C bOl
r N V O
m
W m tT OO1` 0000 ^ C- t'M 004N0 OOOle cOAOO 1c
( ) N 1- 0) W)
r A9 OOH O O COM 0Oo �{ O 00M IT ('7 OO 1- OM N N
0) •�, O.m (Q M .- .- N LQ r ' 0) C') OO Ul) ' O c0 v N N 1` M RC ' r- (O r ' 00 O
L U C N N r co r M Q CO M M N g p N CMO CO A N
04 6
N M
�r.
O
N y C� m 001- 000 - 00 O � stO 00000 coAOLf) O CM r- O) 0)
L 00 '- _O O (OO O OD OOr- tO v OO � CAM N A
_W Q O (O M r ' N M N ' CA 1` CO (l) ' Lq O '4 r N n M w ' � (D - ' CO O)
~ .- c7 CV co NCV V) OD CO P- MrCO v N (O M C6"i h h
.p N N M CO N N M
Q m
LL
LL
M LL
W m
m m m m o m
W (n lA CA m Cn 3 CO
4. 11 cc) N N V_M M
n• 0
"O
rnrnr? CO 00 0m 0
A) d d CA O O O y o a O O
O •j Z •j Cl) m N (`6 (` N
H a � � O O � Oo0 OU
w 0 0 0 0 0 15 t5 t5 t° 1° m >,m 0 a m m c m v m y '� y
J J J J J - - t - (�
CL ` U E U U
tm
Z p m � m0anac. ma (iy � � Nyc� ym � LL LL LL cQcoc x, 00
> >
V Cn fn N to tq N m m ,C d d.0 c E c •C E C C o C W C a c c
Z 00000 :X 'x 'x aEEn• EEEEE °oE m ,; -� 2 — 00
M m m m m m 0 0 0 N c o f 'c 'c o 'c o 0) -r- a) 0 0) 0 0 .>_ `0 `0
IL aaaan. 000 aUUaUUUU ¢ XU CS00 0 VUU
>+ co _ Cf 00 m T m
m y > m 0
C D1p 11 y m > ZZ y �
m m m = It > N N N N
N O > O w d N b CA to 4f d C O
4 m m m N X m O O 'U fn co co m v v p m _ o
0 0 m C7 U c m x y N O) (oi vu) (—° °� 5 m m m m m 0 m 0 (�
m mo = � � QQ = UDLLJui CN0) 0ncaa u � UC) m `m U.
J
a co O Lo N T Q 0) N cn CO r O l0 O t0 3 C to Q
Z .V to � O � N m �O � J tO N � � � r r C> M CUO co00 LL N 00 C) � � J O M U � J O
i N •O O l0 0 Q lL N i i Q C `- •p •O Q C
QU LL N i C m a E H j ' N N N N N N N N N N O ' N N
m >, o to > �,r 0 p t m m m m m m m m m 00 a c m m o o 0 m ) 0
o O c m E a o m u p, u c_ c_ c_ c_ c_ c_ c_ c_ c_ c_ F- c o c_ c_ E E m 0 c_ c_ H
U Y E rTc = c u :2 m 06.2 !E i' ti' ti' ti"- r v- -E Tr rttm 0 c Crm
� aQ � O � inoOzai (AQm m m w m m m m m mw oUm m P .2v=i AR� Um mrr=i (7
Exhibit C
CONTRA COSTA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST
Jurisdiction: Contra Costa County
FISCAL YEAR 1996-97 ALLOCATION OF 18% LOCAL
STREET MAINTENANCE & IMPROVEMENT FUNDS
REPORTING PERIOD: CALENDAR YEAR 1996
1. ACTION PLANS YES NO
a. Is the jurisdiction implementing the actions called for in the applicable Action Plan
for Routes of Regional Significance for all designated Regional Routes within the
jurisdiction?
b._ Has the jurisdiction implemented the following procedures as outlined in the
applicable Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance?
i. Circulation of environmental documents, ® 0
ii. Analysis of the impacts of proposed General Plan Amendments and ® El
recommendation of changes to Action Plans,and
iii. Conditioning the approval of projects consistent with Action Plan 0 0
policies?
c. Has the jurisdiction followed the procedures for RTPC review of General Plan
Amendments as called for in the attached flow chart?(Attachment B to Authority
Resolution No. 95-06-G,adopted July 19, 1995).
2. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION PROGRAM YES NO
a. Has the jurisdiction adopted and implemented a local development mitigation
program to ensure that new development pays its fair share of the impact
mitigation costs associated with that development?
b. Is the jurisdiction working with its RTPC to develop and/or implement a regional
mitigation program,including regional traffic mitigation fees,assessments,or other
mitigation as appropriate? (Note:The Authority has set a deadline of July 1, 1997
for jurisdictions to adopt and implement a regional mitigation program.)
Issued January 1997 COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST
PAGE 1
a #`
COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST Jurisdiction: Contra Costa County
Fiscal Year: 1996-1997
Reporting Period: Calendar 1996
3. HOUSING OPTIONS AND JOB OPPORTUNITIES YES NO
a. Has the jurisdiction adopted a Housing Element that has been found by the State ® ❑
Department of Housing and Community Development to comply with State Law?
b. Has the jurisdiction adopted a Housing Element that complies with the ® ❑
requirements of§65583 et seq. of the Government Code,by:
■ Identifying local responsibilities for meeting regional housing needs,
■ Establishing goals and policies for meeting those needs,and
■ Outlining a 5-year program of actions to implement the Housing Element?
c. Does the jurisdiction's General Plan—or other adopted policy document or report 191 ❑
—evaluate the effects of planned land uses on local, subregional and regional travel
patterns and propose land use policies and a pattern of land uses that would -
promote more efficient use of the transportation system?
4. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS YES NO
a. As part of its General Plan,has the jurisdiction adopted a Growth Management ® ❑
Element which is in substantial compliance with the Authority's Model Growth
Management Element?
b. Does the jurisdiction now comply with adopted performance standards,or expect ® ❑
to comply with the standards within the next five years through implementation of
its Capital Improvement Program?
5. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT: TRAFFIC LEVEL-OF-
SERVICE STANDARDS
YES NO N/A
a. Using the Authority's Technical Procedures,have traffic impact studies been ❑X ❑ ❑
conducted as part of development review for all projects estimated to generate
more than 100 peak-hour vehicle trips?
Issued January 1997 COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST
PAGE 2
1
COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST Jurisdiction: Contra Costa County
Fiscal Year: 1996-1997
Reporting Period: Calendar 1996
5. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT: TRAFFIC LEVEL-OF-
SERVICE STANDARDS
YES NO
b. Does the jurisdiction maintain a list of Reporting Intersections on non-regional ® ❑
routes, and measure the level of service at those intersections every two years?
YES NO
c. Do all Reporting Intersections meet LOS standards through actual measurement,or ® ❑
after assuming implementation of five-year capital improvement program and
accounting for changes in travel demand?
YES NO N/A
d. Does a request for Findings of Special Circumstances for those intersections that ❑ ❑ 0
do not and will not meet LOS standards,accompany this checklist?
e. Has the jurisdiction ever been granted a Findings of Special Circumstances by the ❑ ❑ EI
Authority?
6. PARTICIPATION IN COOPERATIVE, MULTI-
JURISDICTIONAL PLANNING YES NO
a. Over the past year,has the jurisdiction's Council/Board member regularly ❑ ❑
participated in meetings of the appropriate Regional Transportation Planning
Committee, and have the jurisdiction's local representatives to the Regional
Transportation Planning Committee regularly reported on the activities of the
Regional Committee to the jurisdiction's council or board? (Note: Beginning
January 1, 1997,compliance with the Growth Management Program will require,
regular attendance of the Council/Board member at RTPC meetings.)
b. As needed,has the jurisdiction made available,as input into the countywide ® ❑
transportation computer model,data on land use and traffic patterns?
7. FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM YES NO
Does the jurisdiction have an adopted five-year capital improvement program ® ❑
(CIP)that estimates project costs and includes a plan that outlines general
mechanisms for financing transportation and public facilities, including fire,
police,parks,sanitary facilities,water and flood control?
Issued January 1997 COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST
PAGE3
1
COMPLIANCE CHECKUST Jurisdiction: Contra Costa County
Fiscal Year: 1996-1997
Reporting Period:Calendar 1996
8. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM YES NO
Has the jurisdiction adopted a transportation systems management ordinance that ❑ ❑
incorporates required policies consistent with the updated model ordinance
prepared by the Authority for use by local agencies? (Note: The Authority's model
TSM ordinance was updated on December 18, 1996. Next year each jurisdiction
will have to update its TSM Ordinance to reflect the new model.)
9. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT YES NO
Has the jurisdiction met the maintenance of effort requirements of Measure C as ® ❑
stated in Section 6 of the Contra Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth
Management Ordinance?
10. POSTING OF SIGNS YES NO N/A
Has the jurisdiction posted signs meeting Authority specifications for all projects ® ❑ ❑
exceeding$250,000 that are funded,in whole or in part, with Measure C funds?
11. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS YES N/A
If the jurisdiction believes that the requirements of Measure C have been satisfied ❑
in a way not indicated on this checklist,please attach an explanation.
Issued January 1997 COMPUANCE CHECKUST
PAGE 4
7
i
COMPUANCE CHECKLIST Jurisdiction: Contra Costa County
Fiscal Year: 1996-1997
Reporting Period: Calendar 1996
12. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF CHECKLIST
This checklist was pre y
Signature: Date:4/29/97
Nano and Title: Harvey E. Bragdon, Director of Conmunity Development
Phone: (510) 335-1276 -
The counciMxwd of[ ]has reviewed the completed checklist and found that
the policies and programs of the jurisdiction as reported herein conform to the requirements for
compliance with the Contra Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Program.
Certified Signature: 404t Date: May 6, ,19 9 7
Name and Title: Mark DeSaulnier, Chair, Board of Supervisors
Attest Signature: Date:.May 6, 1997
Dqx ty Clerk
Name: J. 0. Maglio, Deputy Clerk
Board of Supervisors
Issued January 1997 COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST
PAGE 5
a t •
1
CONTRA COSTA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
ATTACHMENTS TO COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST
Note: This form Is available in electronic media on WordPerfect or Word.
QUESTION INFORMATION REQUESTED _
REFERENCE -
1. ACTION PLANS
a. Please summarize steps taken during last year to implement the actions,programs, and =
measures called for in the applicable Action Plans for Routes of Regional Significance:
See Attachment A -
C. Attach, list and briefly describe any General Plan Amendments that were approved during
the reporting period. Please specify which amendments affected ability to meet the
standards in the Growth Management Element and/or affected ability to implement Action
Plan policies or meet Traffic Service Objectives. Indicate if amendments were forwarded to
the jurisdiction's RTPC for review, and describe the results of that review relative to Action
Plan implementation:
See Attachment B
2. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION PROGRAM
b. Describe progress on development and/or implementation of the regional mitigation
program. If under development, what is the anticipated date of adoption of the program?
Programs have been adopted in East County, Central County and the
San Ramon Valley. A program in West County is scheduled for a public
hearing at the 5/20/97 Board of Supervisors meeting.
CHECKLIST ATTACHMENTS
PAGE 1
i
i
a i •
1
COMPLIANCE CHECKUST Jurisdiction: Contra Costa County
Fiscal Year: 1996-1997
Reporting Period: Calendar 1996
QUESTION INFORMATION REQUESTED
1 REFERENCE
3. HOUSING OPTIONS AND JOB OPPORTUNITIES _
a. Please list the date of State Department of Housing and Community Development(HCD)
compliance finding for the jurisdiction's Housing Element and attach the HCD letter.-
4/30/93
etter.4/30/93 See Attachment C
b. If the Housing Element was not found in compliance, please list the date of adoption and
resolution number of the jurisdiction's resolution finding that the Housing Element complies
with State law. Also state what actions have been taken during the reporting period to
contribute toward achieving the housing allocations established by ABAG for all income
levels.
See Attachment D
-4. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT: PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS
b. If the jurisdiction does not currently meet its adopted performance standards,please
describe what actions the jurisdiction intends to take to bring it into compliance within the
next five years, including actions contained in the adopted five-year capital improvement
program:
See Attachment
5. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT: TRAFFIC LEVEL OF
SERVICE (LOS) STANDARDS
a. Please list all projects that generated more than 100 peak hour trips, indicate whether a
traffic impact study was conducted, and indicate if a Findings of Consistency with
Standards was made(include resolution number): Attachment B lists all
projects approved by the County in 1996. The Straface Restaurant
development was not a general plan amendment but it did require a
Measure C Traffic Study. Impacts to Regional and Basic Routes
were mitigated thru payment of local and regional traffic
mitigation fees.
CHECKLIST ATTACHMENTS
PAGE 2
a r �
1 r.
COMPUANCE CHECKLIST Jurisdiction: Contra Costa County
Fiscal Year: 1996-1997
Reporting Period: Calendar 1996
QUESTION INFORMATION REQUESTED
'REFERENCE
25. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT: TRAFFIC LEVEL OF
- SERVICE (LOS) STANDARDS (continued)
=_b. Please list Reporting Intersections, dates of counts and LOS monitoring results. Also attach.
LOS calculations. Explain reasons for any LOS exceedances and proposed mitigation
through implementation of the 5-year CIP or other mechanism.
See Attachment F
e. Please list intersections for which the Authority has adopted Findings of Special
Circumstances and describe actions taken over the past year to carry out required
conditions of compliance: N/A
7. FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) -
Please list resolution number and date of adoption of most recent five-year CIP. If CIP
implementation is required to meet standards(see 4.b and 5.6 above)state the number of
years for which this condition has prevailed.
CIP -or Parks and Sheriff Facilities, 1997-2001, 5/6/97 County
Road Improvement Program 1994/95 - 2000/2001, 6/27/95 CIP projects
needed to meet sheriff standard since 1994.
- 8. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
- Date of Ordinance Adoption NSA Resolution Number
9. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT (MOE)
Please indicate the jurisdiction's MoE requirement and MoE expenditures for the past
fiscal year.
MOE Standard = $450,000.
MOE Expenditures = $2,471,829.
(FY 95/96)
11. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Please specify any alternative methods of achieving compliance for any components for the
Measure C Growth Management Program.
CHECKLIST ATTACHMENTS
PAGE3
� o c
" o
0 ,0
cc
01 > ., O OD O [V 3 O O >
w .9 E _G OD U �.J" y �y^ Q
E °e' a So a � tiw
3 8
G. q> o a Q yyy a3i `� o �v
mC4
U .fie U U a� U b z ,SW-i
Z i a .� .cu aQ. p cc
Q ICU
U a U v
a Q Q Q Q
c.
O w M c
a
.o ¢ .
c
o
W U �i73
x '►� a a o. '° ;; � ON o
U Z p � N � co •� a � e° M � .�
° 0
'3 yb � � ..
(, o
o Vi oOo y > 'b v M
Z c.
va a1 x oj
ca rA
.,
aw
•� E o
a �+ .. 0 > U
V �iIm N U M 5RS vO
d •i.i:.i' N N
rA
W �
rA y
vow '
ax ox06co
c� o a 0 b °? 0 w 40. 0
Ix
., o a,ca v a� c-i a o
aNi aai °7 a
_. _... .......
� � r� un3 � ern w° v°' � t Qo aXi � C7w
........................
........................
...
= w
3
a o�
..................
00 g
o > c
rl
46
OF 0 .2 y O o x ZAo
C o� y C4 a .5 o000 E" b v 3 '� '°. ¢ o0
cc
b b U c
cc
� �; a � U � � U m8 � c � $_ � 3 � a a� � '3 a •�_ E
a U a> o ocn E "or� �oo °'
EnU U v U 7� 'ti a"
H co
° OJ
U a 5 Z z 'o E
amici f
� ° oz y o " `° p aw 3
..
Fes- U pq�
h
08
z o z o z o z o z o
d ,
b .s
oaci °
c •0Q
U >
a
C p
aC � v $,o � •' •ao � � �
Fry p o w ev o 00
a� a� rn a co N > ;0
p > c ry ° O eFd W o
Q o Q W w U o o
_. a -o a c-� 0 00 M.
......................
........................
>.
0 0 0
� 4w,
9 O OZA
R as N CL o p vQi+ O F
V1 v' a N o .5 N S U, a0 pr to o L
COo co CN
u -g to >, OG O, v,"� 42
ma
a $ 9 a`ugi 55 > r`0u400
OO
5 3 > ¢ Q a o a a E- E
a o
AG v
.
� � 3
� e
x a
e
C
.�J b GJ •U b Op, 'b �j 'moi'".
a 8 '
.ci o
• o � � y d Np c � � -oma
H 3 �b pa ° ry °: o o > ti o
a, '0 UU o 0ti
� .° � �W °'A�
� a,F a� �, a T ° c o$ � U b � O
wv; 5oa a 3b co
al c c � U 'grin o
0 OD
_ :: -,..,
a00 of ° o ao c o v+ Do
wH g pC g a Uq a
O yam•• d O C 4. � O �^„ �" O .0 O � O •^ O w l
U H vn U O a. U ca 0Oo U V u u >00 p U 4
h
Li � ,�.y •O � •O Zy .O O
03
..... co y M O n
G� ° M o. 3 0 > a c
C co y p O
Gar app! �i o � .o ani 3 � �► ��aoi O
O
V O p O C t 0
d 0 O U N p 6)
> 00
ca
.�
o a y '
� yb
'n to
aF v, W to co
N
O O p N cd" y M C p y
C�.
:7
V .
V1
V
lid ::a
L v
H
w �
OC W
y .pp A
d
d
b
as ajo o ° yo o 0
00
00 U
00
00 0 0 0 00 0
coccCZ
Q, � y co
� gyp; A.. �., �, o F '� a. ° H rte,•• 4a e� �
79 as
� aha: °° � � 0 3 •: •� � a. 3 .� •� �
U ca
a
to a a �
0o co
y Q .� e0 a� b d y IV . �; -IV
O v,
c .Cd .n -;�
U U C> o o ° U o o
o v o o
.........................
)km � a; ern 1 SCA o � v°� 0o° f1a 0
........................
........................
........................
fA
c
y � o z o �•o �•o
Q •C' H � H '� H '9 H 33
00
00 � et
00 U .. C :3 a
a wen
rn a O o N
to
L'
C
° may
C w p U
Q o o M 8 E U
• o o o
C
C
a ° coW ca
ct
epi 1 0
.........................
.........................
'L7 p o
V
N > 0. N >
O E O Q E.' .L
O
C
F
u
o � w
a a
e
3
a�
O
_ � •U W � o O O
'�+ '� �Pd H •O � b
>
� .5
fl. 3 $ � .8 V
co
001.9
¢
U a N
c c
N z z w oC z
as G Q
ca �, o
co
r.
> a
VN co U C w
..
O rW N d0 M
4U..
oo
y y O O x '•J y p
U
U U
C14 C14
. o
vi c� �o ¢� oo a o� p.. -•
d:
d
........................
.........................
........................
a 0 �
O y O O O O
�- N 5..U .-� N > d.�? .-: N O
♦r C ¢ .s w p ¢ r= w O -9 'C
O
Gl2v� ¢� 0 a CS vc)- 0 a m 8
L
411
� V
O
NIxoc
C q
rA a a
w �
a .b °3
°i A
w ou a;
Ix U.;,0.
a
a w
.�
O
W
O
0 4y
..........................
U a C.
.........................
0
�d]
W ii M
N
Ix
d p" cD
3 I
c
0
>;rr.
d
I
a
a z
o; c
o
._: cd N
V:
c r rAcc 0
o U
rA
as .� U m
ea.
_o
v
_ A y
03� �
D � O vii
a
cc
H
o 9 .4 O
w w
ea .S an cn c H o
F. cis V V
"'"'' oo � � b b •"O O � c� �: � 3 � :a
cc
y
.�
n; � VIm k- a � Ogon.S a, ,cc
, mob
rA
3 �
O, 05 V
� v o ff Ca w >> ° o
rA
Cn
o
a c � � � U U � C R04
d
Baa
c
tiro
4 •0 Q ° U o U a U p U p
<; H .�
U "o
U "o
� o
C)
° o
00
rA
.� zz
0000 v �U CN
H Wd "� O "s CO o Oq ea
o a o
o h•
`Z :c ' a. o n � o V v
>
; '' > d C) uaNi d cn 0000
tz
� � � � °" Eve wt°
1y cc
y aw
N .b Rf U 00 O d C
ci Coll W
......
o 0
N o O
N
t0 ti CDlip
v > d
jam. a� U
IX
TS O S C u M CS
a
a
o0
w
L
b o 'tiO" cU �pw -U
k U o It;10
10
c -°v v
tri ��rA
rA
« G.
oE� o . b `� �a
c`a > N 0 Im � � aNi � a`i 0 a c t
U a�
in
cc 0
cc coW
O > cz '�' vii
U � � U �'.r � U � � � � � � E to � � •� Q. 0 N
� o
¢
d U L) V
ea p cz c..
3 'c � ca cca
v N ani 3 Q c °' N
00 C C N 3
Q tcc
N� V �} 0
tz"
p �S" p, 00 ^ O
N V .�
v
Cc
rA
a 00
rA
L)
CO N '! N
a
� w
N N
a
a�
0 U y O�
[1.
C^ ...
o u
,c N
� as
x � 3
wL
wb.
a � o
a �
w
w
. ..................
>; 3
a�
cn
•• on cc
b ° u o
de
orA
cc
a a�
U
O
as d N
�
:
.
r .�+
G
U u
c
cc
ou 3 " abi $
c � H -g ca
v o ^o U c,.., M
0 3 ° N
� ani ami c 8E -a
Q, o • d ocz
JU, a O�
> �,
r oQ -0000
3
o �
U
CA
d
AX
o
w
C',
o c
tip v' c
E- a u CA
72
_ .
o :u
o � c
a
U
........ ............
H 3 w a
o 3 8 � an � `" a °
i� •� o ¢ c
: icn
an
o1>1
o
w aoi �"as on > U o
0 a� ¢ 0O �
CN
x .� �'� �
3 '� cC .ba
wLa
U o tj o Doo 0
0 o
...............:.........
�b a is
..........................
;C
co co
y o o U o 0
hi o 0 0 0 0 0
..........................
u UU 3 UU
.........................
Co
� � oU a •Rw
a o a u o o v c N
¢ a 6.
° M
N ¢ o
0 -- ¢
L' .d eo
.=o. �� 3 � � � � U ►N. �° a y R
.�
� 0
U3 o � � o
rn
cz
i o
o
d
Vj Z cn
C.4) � � � [ >
t/1 V O Ac! C0
IVS .� Tc '� oo° � � av' N
aeC3 S CA
a16
Q cc
�... .......:........ G ,�. t0 .��' R A ►. 'O C vOi f.s.i .••.•i !r r-t"y�' Q
C.
ppeg
. �
a a
C
ad
-v
° � o
w
orn
a `° � oEn oma
*� ca
ea
to cc
0 0 0 V3 3 o c
OfS cc b
> e� cc
£ rA
T •omoo '
°A 1° S ^. 3
> a�
.........................
w. rA
U U
0 0
a
V a„
¢ V N
O
> c o y
¢ a o
a
° 00
rn
cc
Ix
Cl. c
0 R p teA C > C1
a
:-44 z �
o 0
to
� e
:o
a
a
d
N N
c �bo b '° o
w ° o
0r N
u0Lj
a
c ;.e
N3 rn � �s°cc
.ti
c 'd 'CZ
U a N4 O a N 9 )6 vim, � � � Z � •v 3 do
�_
a
„o c
d "C- U U d .� U o rA o U o U p
Q y b b U U ^v b U �o U 'Cs
O O O O
U .0 V C 0o U
u u 3 3 uco
vv
0 Q O Rcz
R
� 9:6
°
0 04
v C+ M N � RS o O. N G O tC E) Q4
o � R � -� of 3W
a� N 0 = 0CL -d N o o a RS 0o0 a °
vi
U 00
cc
c a aoi `° p o ==
Q 3 rA a� v � OOQ � .� C u
0 3 °> U eU c R � � 212
w
.:V> ..
a C/]
rA Ca
tn
V � � � a3 •O � � N
_.
d = �
o - >
a
A/
a 3
l 3
U
y
CA
O y U to as
H
op
*�{
� U a,
O
Q CO oM
Ix °' U
03
CL
is
wc
cz
G
a z u N
as
tJ '.
v
ar
'�^ y I C b 3
.�, o 0
wrx°
A U .
. ............... .
.......................
......................
........................
p U o
U
VJ
a
° w o cto—
Hap+ — a
a� aj b0
a� a
o � 0 -gw l
ca 0
to
v o a y a
�, 5w � w o .� •° 410
¢.
y ed «! N
C C G
v
00 0 � c
u � U
05AU° riL U rn� L U
w
y U_
— —
y p
kn
y O 06964
O
O •Ea a� O w o � C .�'
en
v00 o O
W
toa rCO
T a
O v o 'o.w C y w o w �E —
�
00
ao ¢ {O� b
wOoo
—
a
OD
ai � C.101
cn
000 0 0 C-0
¢ 15 Q Q N • •
IV
cn
v
d y
0
to
cd o
a00
o �5 0 0
S y
� U . W W
U
o
U .
0 0
Z Ej ob a w E
r Ql�
cis 5
pQ E .a y
a
xx
E � E" g � `• o a �� E � F o
a��i
a
1 1 8 � v
co
a � C
U �
L � '> o 0
ti0 0 0 0 0
v� C U UUL4 UUCL�
_._.
........................
........................
E
° ..
v 0 w o
o o b p ° -o v a cN
v o w
E " _ y E ._ a a
U L
Q ° � U N U V
3 a w
E 05
0 0 y >
v O0
0 °
E U
Q D cg cV Q fx Q > .S cV W ri Q
;y. O O
N N
y .
d
V
wO O O
0 0
as
.a
w
O
CN
w 'O
v o a
y O C O cn
4w V U00
r w Crr Q
C o eC w w
coV 0 0
M ♦+
Cd
VJ !n
'r r VL1. w w
L O
U f�
... .. ... ...........
a�
o �
c cc o
C .
w
U w a
^' a db b - o a c. u o :c
tn. cr
Ems-
c o
cry � b a a; o
> 3 > 3r�n � � a�
QQ a ae
s S s. E � O a
C
> >
'py �j � Gl V ° u0 CZ
C C C0
UUCP UrAQ uuW
ami �i
to ob E
r cc
a 3 rA .c M
O +
W to
C w p w p y
o O
w w
C tL
as o �b G o 5yb n o a`°i a e
a °� y ani
a
p vo a. p a o ul cn
U W U W U O 00 U
4:
O_ O_ O C
♦+ j O O Ocq
L�.:: N
iJ
r>+ 0 0
y oO O O
to
a
b
a
c
o c
v � za z z m
0
o
Z
h
i/a
b
00
U xxQ
cn X '� H p
on.. w^ o
0 W �, w
U $ a Q 0 o
C CO
V
D p
U 1:4
o ° y o
" p,
>, a. U
a o
ow
a 4.
Rr v 'G v T �' w > x b
06
10
>>i `° o
w w
U
CdCo A
w co �
lul
oj
rA
`° Z F. o .a C
164
cz
o 0 0 op
cvw ri O.� GO~, F h d vi O 5
d
� U
V �
<:V
V
� O
�+ z
d �
,o c
y � 'C
° U) 3a
x
L
d
a a
w. .r
N 1, En
O O
o o
z v �
1S 1 1 �
y
sss���r O
h
U
o C
ti U �
a� p
rte ,_ y o v C w
a
as a5
t" o >,
ed :d M
U
p � �,� •-,rte•• o .� °: b � y � 00
o
O w w o T to« �°e�° w o y
M
a c U o
am
to
o
° U opo
o c c
� H
RF O CoA O y end p >
00 as
0 00 E > .c �
a �
iV
V �
?� Q
........................
.......................
.........................
........................
.........................
........................
>:>RS
E
a
H
00
to
5cts
v, ,{y, .12
TJ 0 'O w $i +� yb'n Lt,
- � oG a a v0,41Q
ca
Ctl
go
Ca
°qy
S � �" c � oU c labo u
ON
En M
8 Cc Cc
o � ' o 10 >, o 13' 0 � r� oo t J8.
bo
oG 3 a v a �3 3 u O
0
v U
acz�' o
iu
a
on.ti o c'o W
as
0 v Q
Z 04
Ya dcn ee .�c o w �'U M
,.a c63 0
Cc
N c 3 b' os Ucn o
z � o to � E � ww
� y
rj y
u w
cc
ci
0 CZ
CO pq A" o o �` o N rA
ddt� a
Awl-
............
l $
o
L r'1 O
5!
H
....�.._......... h
h
O
a r� oa
Q C v rA
w �
o a �
a � °
o -o
.� y
cc
rA
> O °
0c�, av
w > .° o a 5ba w
4.0
c
c
15
?. 3 � •� � a� o � 'ob o, " � v�
d Ol w
a. .y. O r+ Vi
b 0
c � wv� . �oE- F�
h �
C .ts
O
b
d90 Z.
UUGC1
c �
c �t- ❑ a� y N cc op
a�
u Rs c
o �a O V A V
c c w co
> 4) ani ° y �, 'ec�o w `i' �
00
Q.i c w 11 0
rA
cl a� 8 o U� o U cc O
cCN
to
A+i cc
0 3 a as U ani x
0
w U a a 3 N m ' a a •� c c
w
+'' �p Yj C� .-i O V V N vi cc
a
cd
o °' m u
.......................
..........................
... .. .............. ..
...................... .
.........................
.........................
..........................
..........................
.........................
0 r �
� •1.► :iiCi O O
e H. N N
> > O V V '� V
V . N
as W >q w
NO a � Ln
0 S �
o �
U c oCC
rA
jo .
c_
� m o
° CA Q R
w •w.
Gn
aarAcis
�
o WDO Ln
° .a
rA F-
cc
C
CUs", °' ZaW 0
U F 6L'Cocs
°
rp c c
'fl on o
7i y
a U
-q JU c R
ac $ rte. U •°'°to
'° a" >
d o
?, o
F W N
cc
Occea O
Qo
O L1. vi Cd
cc
.� th O, o U as C, y vi
tn cc
cfs
is
d o o �e o o ki o o o� c V c
dU
a a
d O
(V
� v v
k
0 v
h
i 0 �
ox
° •-
cn a 3
a�
y
U "p
p
83
o o n' 0 0
a
U y y
v o
V !b O t o U
LV
aU UUaA
a
� cnoCc
0 00rA
oUca > a ° ^o � ^ ^° ¢
�' c o w W N
Ile
o
� � CN
aN � S E �U cw e3 N
p, o ° o �3 `° o >, o
o ° o
oo = r= y0'� Ua N
°a. w
N �' v� �p W .-i o J >' ,j "CJ eV O
U • rn
EC U io V eo W O V coV m p O
° 0 c c ov; = o °� ° U
a
a d 8
OF cu �
0 0
ii w N N
'O W
I0
O O ,A
w
Ix
w
d d�io h as u
� ^ ccU > __
LL
.... ... ......... ..
.. ..................
..........................
........................
........................
rA
.� Q
rn
0 0 CCU � 'cc $ R U
H
a.
_ U �
. > x
o � Oo. m
cts
w v� � o v�
w
0 cc
cm
Cc
La
... SSU a° � U
.........................
..........................
.........................
_._..__.......
.......................
... ....._....
..........................
..........................
.........................
..........................
.........................
.........................
..........................
.....::....:.=i:.:' .:...
O O
S
ti . >: 0 0 0 0
U U U U m
N bn
tv
cn
cc
N x V
C o w u E °� ° .c o N
o N a o o > AC1 0 N a 0 c o o
E""n
° � � `pUdy, syU C7cp M
C coo • pCD '�O 5 � •E �, '- g N
Vy1 �j o E
a cc
o, ° � �. cw a • awb aw
a a C w g m. Or
Rf00 tC
O � a0i C e0a ,� C � 0 � O r
u 0 2 H b cR
3 Gca m OC1 d
.................... .....
..........................
........................
a
0
V N N
�.. 7 �"
y _ C) C
xi
CO
M
V
OI
a
C
.� V : : to cc
: v
a
a L y
cd
H
ATTACHMENT" B"
MEASURE-C COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST: CALANDAR 1996
COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST ATTACHMENT
(GPAs Only)
Affect the Ability To:
Meet Growth Implement Meet RTPC Results of
Management Action TSOs Reviewed RTPC
General Plan Amendments& Projects Element Plan Review
Consistent with General Plans Standards Policies (GPAs) (GPAs)
1 Dougherty Valley General Plan/Specific
Plan Amendment; Revised Road Network
And Land Use; and Development Plan for
4000 Residential Units
Resolution#95/564 Yes Yes Yes Yes None
2 Wendt Ranch General Plan Amendment
Change Land Use Desgination from
Agriculture to Residential, and Development
Plan for 323 Residential Units Yes Yes Yes Yes None
Resolution#96/540
3 Oakley Old Town Specific Plan
Revised Area Road Network and Land Use
No Net Increase in Trips Generated Yes Yes Yes No No
Resolution# 19-1996
4 Leisure Sports Complex; Replaced Office
Complex in the Pleasant Hill BART Area
with Health Club, Hotel, and Restaurant
Net Increase In Trips Does Not Exceed
100 Peak Hour Trips
Resolution# 12-1996 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
5 Straface Restaurant Development;
Replaced Office Development with
Restaurant in the Oakley Area
Resolution#30-1996 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
6 Subdivision 7679; 97 Residential Units
in the East County Area Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
7 Subdivision 7969; 9 Residential Units Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
in the East County Area
MEASC.XLS Page 1 1/21/97
Contra
..:. County
� �/
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS71 ( " "1`
FILO![: Harvey E. Bragdon
Director of Community Development
DATE: May 25, 1993 ATTACHMENT C
SUBJECT: BCD Review of County Housing Element
SPECIFIC REQUESTS) OR RECOXXENDATIONS(S) i BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT of letter from the State Department of Housing and
Community Development, finding that the County's adopted Housing
Element complies with State Housing Element Law.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
BACKGROUNDIRE_ASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
Article 10.6 of the California Government Code requires cities and
counties to adopt a Housing Element of the General Plan. On December
15, 1992, the County adopted an Amendment to its General Plan Housing
Element. The State Department of Housing and Community Development
has found that the December 15, 1992 Housing Element complies with the
statutory requirements.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _ YES SIGNATURE: ? e1tAAA,0 4::;/
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _ REC ATIO OF BOARD C TTEE
APPROVE OTSSR
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS I8 A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOE8: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABBENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF TSE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON TSE DATE SHOWN.
Jim Kennedy
646-4076
cc: Community Development
County Administrator ATTESTED
County Counsel PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERIC OF
County Housing Authority THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Contra Costa Transportation Authority AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
� � BY DEPUTY
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS.TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY
PETE WILSON.Governor
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTS=�'�r�
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
1E00 7II33RD S'TREM Room 430 ` �0T6 �
P.O BOX 952053 �'f�
SACRA-NMTO,CA 94252-2053 J:f
(916)323-3176 FAX(916)323.6625
April 30, 1993
Mr. Phil Batchelor
County Administrator
Contra Costa County
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street
Martinez, California 94553
Dear Mr. Batchelor:
RE: Review of the County of Contra Costa' s Adopted
Sousing Element
Thank you for submitting the County of Contra Costa' s
housing element,' adopted on December 15, 1992, and received for
.our review on December 31, 1992 . As you know, we are required to
review adopted housing elements and report our findings to the
locality (Government Code Section 65585 (h) ) .
we congratulate the County for establishing an ambitious
schedule of program actions to facilitate the development of
housing in Contra Costa County.
As you know, our December 14, 1992 review letter found the
County's draft element adequately addressed the statutory
requirements of housing element law, provided certain revisions
necessary to accommodate the County's new construction need for
lower-income households were included in the element. The
adopted element includes the necessary chances. We are therefore
pleased to find that the County 's adopted housing element also
complies with State housing element law (Article 10.6 of the
Government Code) , including requirements regarding the
preservation of assisted multifamily housing at, risk of
converting to non-low-income uses pursuant to Chapter 1451,
Statutes of 1989.
Our finding of compliance is based on the County's continued
commitment to accommodate its share of the regional housing need
for lower-income households. The County is planning to achieve
this objective by the following methods: by permitting
multifamily construction at densities sufficient to
Mr. Phil Batchelor
Page 2
-facilitate the development of lower-income housing need, by the
County's continued facilitation of the development of some . 11, 000
total units, including some 2,308 high density multifamily units
in the Dougherty Valley, and by application of the County's
inclusionary ordinance to the Dougherty Valley so that 2, 750
units will be affordable in at least the following ratio: 10
percent very low 25 percent low- and 65 percent noderate-
income.
We strongly encourage the County to promote the early
development of lower-income units in the Dougherty Valley.
Failure by the County to facilitate the availability of the
Dougherty Valley high density sites would leave the County with a
lack of sites for lower-income households. -If they: sites do not
become available as. planned, the County should amend - the element
to include additional sites for lower-income housing sufficient
to meet Contra Costa County's regional share need.
We look forward to following the County's progress in
implementing the housing program when progress repc:ts are filed
with the Department pursuant to Government Code Se .,tion 65400.
As you may know, Chapter 889, Statutes of 1991, now requires an
annual submittal of these reports to this Department.
We wish you continued success in implementing your housing
program. If we can assist the. County in this effort, please
contact Robert Maus of our staff at (916) 327-2640.
In accordance with their requests pursuant to the Public
Records Act, we are forwarding a copy of this letter to the
individuals listed below.
Sincerely,
Thomas B. Cook
Deputy Director
t
Mr. Phil Batchelor
Page 3
cc: James Kennedy, Contra Costa County
Dennis Barry, Contra Costa County
Matt . Tomas, Contra Costa County
Laura Blair, Sedway and Associates
Miye Goishe, Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation
Nancy Strohl, Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation
Gen Fujioka, Asian Law Caucus
Charles Klinge, Attorney at Law
David Booher, California Housing Council
Sue Hestor, Attorney at Law
Gary Hambly, .Building Industry Association
Rolf Pendall, Bay Area Council
Revan A.F. Tranter, Association of Bay Area Governments
Kathleen Mikkelson, Deputy Attorney General
Bob Cervantes, Governor' s Office of Planning and Research
Dwight Hanson, California Building Industry,Association
Kerry Harrington Morrison, California Association of
Realtors
Marc Brown, California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Rob Wiener, California Coalition for Rural Housing
Susan DeSantis, The Planning Center
1 '
ATTACHMENT D
(page 1 of 2)
INFORMATION REQUESTED FOR QUESTION 3 .B.
1 . March 12, 1996 action of the Board of Supervisors (Agenda
Item D.4) approved the Fiscal Year 1996/97 Action Plan for
use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME
Investment Partnership Act funds, ($4, 021, 000 and $2, 686, 000
respectively) and approved the allocation of funds as
described in the Action Plan. Approximately 50 percent of
the CDBG funds will be used for the development and
maintenance of affordable housing opportunities in Contra
Costa.
2 . March 19, 1996 action of the Board of Supervisors (Agenda
Item C. 29) allocating: 1) $200, 000 in Housing Opportunities
for People with AIDS (HOPWA) funds to the Aspen Court
Project, providing 12 units of fully accessibly housing for
. low income persons with disabilities and HIV/AIDS; and 2)
$230, 000 in HOPWA funds for the Idaho Apartments Project
providing affordable rental housing to very low-income
persons, including 10 units reserved for extremely low-
income persons with HIV/AIDS.
3 . October 8, 1996 action of the Board of Supervisors (Agenda
Items C. 38 and C.43) allocating $104, 000 in Emergency
Shelter Grant funds for homeless shelter operations and
services .
4 . October 22, 1996 action of the Board of Supervisors (Agenda
Item C.41) allocating $615, 000 in HOME Investment
Partnership Act funds for the Terrace Glen Apartments
Project providing 32 units of rental housing, including 16
assisted units for extremely low-income and very low-income
households .
5 . August 6, 1996 action by the Board of Supervisors (Agenda
Item D. 8 . ) approving the CDBG Community Revitalization
Strategy for the Community of North Richmond, with the
purpose of creating opportunities for jobs and housing,
viable neighborhood commercial areas, child care, safe
streets, and transportation.
6 . November 5, 1996 action of the Board of Supervisors (Agenda
Item C.40) approving a contract with the City of Oakland
utilizing $435, 000 in federal funds for housing and
supportive services for people with HIV/AIDS for the period
November 1, 1996, through October 30, 1998 .
a t •
r.
1
ATTACHMENT D
(page 2 of 2)
7 . November 19, 1996 action of the Board of Supervisors (Agenda
Item D. 31) approved vesting tentative maps for 4 , 074
dwelling units in the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan area
with a condition of approval that requires, prior to filing
of final subdivision maps, demonstration of consistency with
the Dougherty Valley Affordable Housing Strategy which
mandates that approximately 1, 000 of these dwelling units be
available to low and moderate income households .
8 . Contra Costa County HOME Program Annual Performance Report
for FY 1995/96 narrative is included as Exhibit 1 of this
attachment .
9 . Contra Costa County Consortium HOME Program Annual
Performance Report for FY 1995/96 narrative is included as
Exhibit 2 of this attachment .
10 . Contra Costa County FY 1995 Annual Performance Report
describing Community Development Block Grant-funded projects
that include affordable housing programs and activities is
included as Exhibit 3 of this attachment .
List of Exhibits to Attachment D
Exhibit 1: Contra Costa County HOME Program Annual Performance Report, FY
1996/96 - Narrative
Exhibit 2: Contra Costa Consortium HOME Program Annual Performance Report FY
1995/96 - Narrative
Exhibit 3 : Contra Costa County FY 1995 Annual Performance Report
SLG:attach.d
EXHIBIT 1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HOME PROGRAM
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT
FY 1995/96' - NARRATIVE
The following Annual Performance Report (APR) covers projects funded through the FY
1992 and 1993 Contra Costa County HOME Program only. In FY 1994 Contra Costa County
joined with the jurisdictions of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek to create the
Contra Costa HOME Consortium. Contra Costa County has been designated as the
Consortium Representative and is responsible for implementation of the Consortium's HOME
Program. In accordance with federal requirements, Consortium activities are reported in a
separate APR.
I. COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY
The Contra Costa County Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) identifies the
following priorities for housing programs and activities:
o Maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing affordable housing stock.
o New construction to expand the supply of affordable housing.
o Increased access to affordable housing for very-low, low and moderate income households
through homeownership and rental subsidy programs.
. 0 Provision of emergency and transitional housing for homeless populations.
o Provision of increased housing opportunities for the County's special needs populations.
Within the context of these priorities, the Board of Supervisors approved the following priorities
for the allocation of HOME funds in the County's CHAS and in the FY 1992 and 1993 HOME
Program Descriptions:
o Acquisition, rehabilitation and construction of affordable multifamily rental housing.
o Housing rehabilitation loans for very-low and low-income households.
o First-time homebuyers' program to assist very-low and low-income households in
obtaining affordable housing.
In accordance with these priorities, the HOME funds were allocated to a total of 12 projects,
including: new construction of two multifamily rental projects affordable to very-low and low-
income senior households (130 units); new construction of three multifamily rental projects
lAnnual report period is April 1, 1995 through April 30, 1996.
a r •
affordable to very-low and low-income households, including units suitable for large families(92
units); three programs to provide loans for the rehabilitation of housing affordable to and
occupied by lower income renter and owner-occupant households (33 units); one project to
provide first-time homebuyer assistance to lower-income households acquiring homes in new
housing developments (11 HOME-assisted units); one project to provide transitional housing for
battered women and their families (6 units); two projects to provide administrative and operating
support for Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs); and one project to
provide predevelopment assistance to a CHDO in developing an affordable multifamily rental
proj ect.
A description of each project, the approved HOME funding, and a statement of project status are
included in Attachment A.
2
II. PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION
County efforts to solicit public and private sector participation in the FY 1992 and 1993 HOME
Program were described in detail in the FY 1993 Annual Performance Report. Specifically, the
Community Development Department hosted Countywide meetings to discuss the County's
HOME Program, including funding priorities, policies, eligibility issues, and the application
process. Further, Department staff met throughout the year with nonprofit and for-profit
affordable housing developers potentially interested in participation in the HOME Program to
provide technical assistance on project feasibility, design issues, and potential sources of
financing, including HOME funds. Additional meetings were held with other jurisdictions, public
agencies, and affordable housing organizations to discuss the County's HOME Program and
projects. Finally, applications for HOME funds were sent to over 85 interested public agencies,
affordable housing developers, and relevant interest groups.
3
III. COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS (CHDOs)
As described in the FY 1993 and 1994 APRs, the Community Development Department has
encouraged area nonprofits to qualify as CHDOs for purposes of participation in the County
HOME Program. As a result of this effort, the following nonprofit organizations were designated
as CHDOs: Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond(CHDC); Pacific
Community Services, Inc.; Lao Family Community Development, Inc; Resources for Community
Development; Shelter, Inc.; and St. Vincent de Paul. The Department worked with each
organization to assist them in meeting the basic CHDO requirements as specified in federal
regulations.
In addition to efforts to qualify CHDOs, the County has allocated HOME funds to provide
administrative and operating support for the following CHDOs: CHDC - $32,000 in FY 1993
HOME funds; and St. Vincent de Paul - $15,000. Finally, the Department has also distributed
HOME program materials and information concerning technical assistance work shops hosted by
the San Francisco Regional Office of HUD for CHDOs in an effort to ensure that County
nonprofits benefit from available assistance concerning the implementation of affordable housing
projects within the context of HOME.
4
IV. AFFIRMATIVE MARKETING
Contra Costa County adopted affirmative marketing procedures as a component of the FY 1992
and FY 1993 HOME Program Descriptions. At the Countywide HOME meetings and at meetings
with projects awarded FY 1992 and 1993 HOME funds, it was made clear that all federally
funded housing projects including those funded with HOME resources must comply with federal
fair housing laws and the County's affirmative marketing procedures. In addition, an applicant's
proposed affirmative marketing program is one of the criteria adopted by the Board of
Supervisors and employed by the County in evaluating projects applying for HOME funding.
Finally, requirements concerning fair housing and affirmative marketing have been incorporated
into the HOME Project Agreement and loan documents. The County monitors compliance with
these requirements as projects are implemented.
5
V. MINORITY OUTREACH
A minority and women's business outreach program was adopted as a component of the County's
FY 1992 and FY 1993 HOME Program Descriptions and discussed at the Countywide HOME
information meetings and at individual meetings with projects awarded FY 1992 and FY 1993
HOME funds. In addition, requirements concerning minority and women-owned business
participation in County-funded HOME projects have been incorporated into the HOME Project
Agreement and loan documents. A Directory of Minority, Women, and Disadvantaged Business
Enterprises is maintained by the County for use by County Departments and recipients of County
funds, including HOME Project Sponsors.
As indicated in HUD Table 40107 (attached), for projects completed during the APR reporting
period:
0 53 percent of all contracts were with minority-owned business enterprises (MBEs),
including 6 percent with Black-owned firms and 47 percent with Hispanic-owned firms.
The remaining contracts (47 percent) were with White/Non-Hispanic-owned firms. The.
dollar value of contracts with MBEs represented 52 percent of the total for all contracts:
47 percent of the total contract amount went to Hispanic firms and 6 percent to Black
firms.
0 12 percent of all contracts were with Women-owned business enterprises (WBEs). The
remaining contracts (88 percent) were with Male-owned business enterprises. The dollar
value of WBE contracts as a proportion of total contracts was similar (11 percent to
WBEs and 89 percent to Mail-owned businesses).
Consistent with policies established by the Board of Supervisors, the Community Development
Department will continue to work with project sponsors to improve the participation of minority
and women-owned businesses in the HOME Program.
6
VI. TENANT ASSISTANCE/RELOCATION
Priority in the allocation of funds under the County's HOME Program is assigned to projects
which do not involve permanent relocation or displacement. However, projects involving
relocation may be funded if required to eliminate unsafe or hazardous housing conditions, reverse
conditions of neighborhood decline and stimulate revitalization of a specified area, and/or to
accomplish high priority affordable housing projects. The County and project sponsors will
adhere to the requirements of the Uniform Relocation Act (URA) in all projects involving
permanent or temporary relocation and displacement. In addition, wherever feasible, displaced
households and organizations will be offered the opportunity to relocate into the affordable
housing project upon completion.
There was no displacement or relocation of households or businesses required as a result of the
implementation of HOME-assisted projects during the current reporting period.
VII. SHORTFALL FUNDS
Not applicable to Contra Costa County (allocation in excess of $500,000).
KH/C:APR95-6B
7
NOTES TO TABLES
APR HOME PROGRAM (HUD Form 40107) - Part III
Table includes information for projects completed during FY 1995/96 only. Information on the
Pinole Grove Project, Alves Lane, and for loans completed through the rehabilitation programs
in FY 1994/95 was reported in the FY 1994/95 APR.
HOME MATCH REPORT (HUD Form 40107-A)
The reporting period for the FY 1995/96 Annual Performance Report(APR)for the Contra Costa
County HOME Program is the County's current program year (April 1, 1995 through April 30,
1996). However, in accordance with HUD requirements, the information contained in the HOME
Match Report represents the County's match liability and contribution for Federal Fiscal Year
1995/96 (October 1, 1995 through October 1, 1996).
In prior year APRs, the County incorrectly submitted the match information for the County's
program year rather than the federal fiscal year. In addition, some matching funds were not
reported. Therefore, the County is submitting corrected match tables for FY 1993/94 and FY
1994/95 with the current year report. In addition, in accordance with direction provided in a
November 1996 letter from HUD, the County will transfer $700,000 in excess match earned
under the County HOME Program to the Consortium Program to match Consortium projects
funded in future years as follows:
Match contributed by County HOME Projects - all years $1,055,395
Less realized and potential match liability - County
HOME Projects, all years $ 350,750
Equals excess HOME match from County Program available
for transfer to Contra Costa Consortium HOME Program $ 704,645
Therefore, $700,000 in transferred match funds($700,000) have been subtracted from Part II line
5 of HUD form 40107-A ("excess match carried over to next fiscal year") in the County's FY
1995/96 APR and added to Part II line 5 of HUD form 40107-A in the Consortium's FY 1995/96
APR.
8
I •
/annual Performance Report U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development
HOME Program Office of Community
Planning and Development OMB No.2501-0013 (exp.3/30/93)
Public Reporting Burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 2.5 hours per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of
information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing
this.burden, to the Reports Management Officer, Office of Information Policies and Systems, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Washington, D.C. 20410-3600 and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (2501-0013), Washington, D.C.
20503. Do not send this completed form to either of these addresses.
This form is intended to collect numeric data to be aggregated nationally as a complement to data collected through the Cash and Management
Information (C/MI) System. Participants should enter the reporting period in the first block. The reporting period is October 1 to September 30.
Instructions are included for each section if further explanation is needed.
Submit this form on or before November 30.Send one copy to the appropriate This report is for period:(mm/dd/yyl Date Submitted:
HUD Field Office and one copy to: _
Starting: Ending:
HOME Program, Rm 7176, 451 7th Street,S.W.,Washington, D.C.20410. 04/01/95 04/30/96 11/22/96
Part 1: Participant Identification
1.Partici a t Number 2.Participant Name
1 080203 Contra Costa County.
3.Name of Person Completing Report
4. Phone No.(Include Area Code)
Kathleen K. Hamm 1 (510) 335 -1257
6.Address 651 Pine Street 6.city 7.State6.Zip Code
Community Development Dept. 4th Floor, N. Win Martinez CA 94553
Part 11: Program Income
Enter the following program income amounts for the reporting period:in block 1 the balance on hand at the beginning;in block 1 a the amount
generated;in block 1b the amount expended;and in block 2 the amount for Tenant-Based rental Assistance.
1.Balance on Hand at Beginning 2.Amount Reeehred During 3 Total Amount Expended 4.Amount Expended for Tenant- b.Balance on Hanil at En
of Reporting Period: Reporting Period: During Reporting Period: Based Rental Assistance: of Reporting Reriod
(1 + 2-3) - 5
0 0 0 0 0
Part III: Minority Business Enterprises (MBE) and Women Business Enterprises (WBE)
In the table below,indicate the number and dollar value of contracts for HOME projects.completed during the reporting period.
Minority Business Enterprises(MBE
a.Total b.Alaskan Native or c.Asian or d.Black t.White
..........................
American Indian Pacific Islander Non-Hispanic e.Hispanic Non-Hispania
A. Contracts
1. Number 17 0 0 1 8 8
2. Dollar Amount 311,523.00 0 0 25,000.00 136,723.00 149,800.00
B. Sub-Contracts
1. Number 0 0 0 0. 0 0
2. Dollar Amount 0 0 0 0 0 0
.. ....... ..... ...........................
a.Total b.Women Business c.Mak
- Enterprises(WBE)
..........
C. Contracts
1. Number 17 2 15
2. Dollar Amount 311,523.00 34,595.00 276,928.00 .
D. Sub-Contracts
1. Number 0 0 0
2. Dollar Amount 0 0 0
Page 1 of 2 form HUD-40107 (11/92)
1
r'nrl Iv. wu.w.ur VYY.IY.J ... .w.uu. rwNa.♦y
In the table below, indicate the number of HOME assisted rental property owners and dollar value of HOME assisted rental properties during
the reporting period.
_^ Minority Property Owners --�'
a.Total b.Alaskan Native or e.Asian or d.Black I.White
American Indian Peciflo Islander Non-Hispanic s.HispanicNon Hispanic
1. Number 0 0 0 0 0 0
2. Dollar Amount 0 0 0 0 0 0
Part V: Relocation and Real Property Acquisition
Indicate the number of persons displaced, the cost of relocation payments, the number of parcels acquired, and the cost of acquisition.The data
provided should reflect only displacements and acquisitions occurring during the reporting period.
a.Number b.Cost
1. Parcels Acquired 1 299,567.00 Golden Oak Manor
2. Businesses Displaced 0 0
3. Nonprofit Organizations Displaced 0 0
4. Persons Temporarily Relocated, not Displaced 0 0
Minority Perrone f.white
Pentons Displaced a.Total b.Alaskan Native or c.Asian or d.Black a Hispanic Non-Hispanic
American Indian Pacific Islander Non-Hispanic
S. Persons Displaced: No. 0 0 0 0 0. 0
6. Persons Displaced: Cost 0 0 0 0 0 0
Page 2 of 2 form HUD-40107
p `
C� � O• N .
s cn
N
r N
CC)
.. c� Cy.
N ►
Val
•
'� Y 8 M
" b Ow w
Ito
tit ► `°=
a o
o�o. 1 Cl.)
p a'
s,:m og
V . Ln
s
ttl O p Cf+ M
N
t ""' h Lid v U.U.
„U. N
�U 41 U OMA O
O Q O � � G+ ie `� .r► .�- m CA
Cf y '"► �' V m c os �. co
lull. M
O
ON cT Cf) M
st oo.7, -too a M co r., O
Alpm °° N
D N
+'� a: 5 c° o v d
5�`3 0.
o� G M Z E s r O
-54 1 v O
O $ �� 10 Q o Gj O
o °3 wtoO O r' ON` s
60 O Q r^� fir ' Cr)`r c^ `n
Is 0
r cn
C4 y. s M'
75 �+ ti �s O
0
cis Za
C6 ts
w +
�Fs 15a0
C3
m o. "'�
L ,
d
•
rC►
r
0
p \
O �
C&O, \
i
i
a
d
G
m i
A
a
iY� G g
0
Was
g � .
a� `r
va
C
v a ,
v
v -,6
06s
o p o•,
p O M r+ oma,
$ .�O
o
PtY 6 O
of
$m r g
cn
n O � o
Zygp� Z t a
a �
p m�
lit
P.VA ce)
G
*C6
io� . d o
amso �g o 0
C O
c c �
�i.� � E
m
N
00
p p su p is i
0 m
p �c �. O S
ut
VO rs C-1
tsIPA cis
a � 0
.G es M N
o 'o�w o u G co
`� ✓ 'f^ ga �t3 ✓ y v gip' � o �
s
1027, " o �s c �• �c s �6 o N N cr �r o
Q ti I3 s � 'E c�i o � � ✓ie "Fi'p o c� c3 rN- � c�+'� `�
Q$ "� $ .q� 710,. i .: T- �! O
'S G i ✓ �a $ � s� i �' o
P � � Zi N�L ,►.� i
s
4 �
� ..,
�
%
—
%
■
ƒ� t
. §
\ «�
5
. �
e
_
$%
� `
%
�
%
0
®t
% . .
t
6
. 16
' k
p p• -� O C3
r< tt':
r`
p, M
co
it CE
.3 It
Or
r
0 9
t < tf
dC
M° lo,
t�
a
S.
t� A s VI
o rn
°
ce-
y r o f o 0
iGmE
Nw
.00
ti
8 �G s P �O• "�0 � � f � �
c-" O O O Z
3 s o 00
Jlok
m va r � b cj cin s
' � r S u o $�
tA
y.1
:r
i-A �, :
i
O
r G
x
9g
o
N
�r
� r
�SG 1
�y
U
d
7�
�m
0
A
= a �
�U
W r;
.2S
'Z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W N O O O O O O O
O c N N N O cN
= O
LL
69 E9 64 E9 69 EA 69
r+ O0 00 W chN N L 0
v
O d (D co 00 r p 0 f�
cm lqt 00
G. V N ODr � N
4, m tC to CV et
H
¢, fA 69 E9 6H 69 tf! 69
3
>' N a) 4) 3 N
>, E �` E = � ' c c 3
o 8 c =° � E w
CL
v�i � ani oM = E rn y, c ° > aL '2Qv cc
° o ar
N 0 a? ° co a� E CO c rn CL aL� ca rn
N a) N ca > :. N N — 3 C 3 O N p 'c N p
cc c t CL o � Q ,�U L a� c h o y
° a n E .. _
a) CO O ' O. Cj T ai N y ►' O o N 03 O
Q ui CL v E > U v v vo, aEi °� c O M ami = ani t n L n0
W ° y c 'u� `o U >, a> c ° E ai a �. Q c X v v� c
Cn E 'o �.- Q 'O E O)+. O �c (D N (D
aso > � < 75 ac) � N c ca)
>+
o
cu
C c Cc W Co
D c c 0 0 v 2 Oo0 p (� dj c N o c. O
CL w 0 m m L L N o co. �, 3 a N O S m ` co ° '0 o
aW .aaiW � c �_ � o gNo � 5 = o� earn cE � o
« EO 'Np w 7 N = cc ` N w c w w N = a)
o.2 c Z ° o v> c ami c 0 m p. � aoi c a,5 � � � � � 8 v
m3 cc
cv "N- II o � z c � a CW —1D (D
ocw *5 (D
i
vin cD noa0 nW � � Ern > w nc a� c aces aci > "- a� v>
o f > E a c y E N a> :? o (D E amu' E E a> n y +r ca
d v c cn v o ca o O o aci ` ani ° v c w �_ c ° N _0 4 a
t5 03 N = - >, d ° - E c m O v m to to t�
� (D (DiEa�°im � N a�°iMLoc ccu' aoCEvrN0 sc E
E0 * EEc ooco o 'in � oc° co� w :: c >, a? Qno
c» (L CL a=0 a v°i cc UO L) u) a` env 3co c-2y) W caves
N C
C '0 C C 'N w p c
O 07 O p p LU to O a) C V p 0
L t C
cO N O c
= = _ca o 0 3 c0
O aaFoul
LtV o tNJ Ci
a � N 75
fl
a)
-2 0
CO o O O E "� Ci � "'Cc OS � N (,D = C O CD � ��. � _ W cc
Z V V C N O W C >. O O c M W > >, a) n
c � o a �c E .6 c�
O W c I —>`a W —'' Z` �ch cp a0 p oca
ro N3 Ecc Ecc 3: W cc ( nC = cm = 03: a0 cc
0c
F- c0 -0 c = c � � O 75 a. (D Eo "a CL >
_ c 0 U N 2
Cl) Neo ucu Ems= E � � a - 0cac0 � c ncQ
O c ° 3 co w > v >,r- M 0 wc - ca %.. .. co ° �
(� o °c ° �' ° oc� c ° '2 0WE0 � " ° ° WUo
C aLO
�iaZi oy 2m o0 44) oor° o �, � om °' c33
v a > c > c U n c4 m ami 15 1 ° e c o
I— N E'
U) `o an 2 '2 m2aon 2a, co �' ov2 ° 0 � 0
Z D o "- =V oC c oz o .. c 0� U � m c 0
cc
O cELo a o. 8 C �' D c� n °� n cgww c c �' c0
V o e rn c 3 w � 5 3 � EE c 3 w ? 3 c � 3 6
o.. O n a c�o Z
(Oh a Z a li coo Z E Z U eco Z t v°i Q Q
V o
>, r
O E o 0 E cu N aci =
c
cc O c cv cc m e
•' m 0 My
a •• O C O� = a O C U
W c°n � ° a. = L) 2c3 g � � wEoo We
c a) c 4- U L c y c r_ N n c>
O °aaa) > >°,U E 0 ° ` o - V < oLo
= y d a w o = m > cava y a)
(1) o m m c _
� R 0UU t ° N o2 QU zxm Q) > cum aNi
N Z a o y Q O L c E c > O °
►+ O E p�U (� 111 2) O) N p 7 O C >_
ems- aa)iscLvn c .cE ai0 cc ) E a' c (D0
H 0 Cl) a c c o N 0 E c E � � 0
'y o N O O O C �' � o > o o 2 0 O N
aza _c = U am az Q = UF-
� Q C� 4
O O O O OOOO O
LU 47 O O O O O O Oa 0 0
o 0NU)N 0) 00 0) O
_ lL N
iA 69 4% fA fA 6% fly EH E9
O � O co
N O oo O M 00 to
OL 0 N � N O ti N
CL 'Q c0 le N N N M
w m .47 'O O M
O
� EA EA bH fA �A fA V?
0 �� c 0 O N o W
C C > O Cl.c 0 S`
° � c�u c>u2 = ° oy 3 = > U.
c2 >` U �; � LhCU ctr a) o " $ cc
eo cca`ui (Do cO 'o � � cu oa a°) Ey
0) wm 2 E a coiU a) or >. cu � v CL c >
= CM r- L o cm E a O oa � N � ) °
O C 03 ., a) c () a) > 0
c� n 4c 30 c ° � voc 0. z acinic
.r .- � n � LZaN > � � ° o0 'm o � ca
a coa a) �C � cy ° ao Qaa) comic c - a
ai Occ ' O a) = U) .� — a) 0 cu cm 0 0 a) M '" 7 In
cu
La > �. 3Ucv
(D u) eta °va) Lo co = Eooo oNo
a o a Q ° E c a; 3 c o U = H o N o
0 0 .. cow -
•= cc CL 3 ani ami � a N v co '6i o O m o a r- u) a
c a) �. o r cu 4- CD 0 0) CD �i � cu c m 0
CL � � a N c c > - - >%6 m �,= '3 = cm<cc w
t cc T) o � � L E o a�°i n ° n ° = coo ��0 CC o
pa .r E o � W .. a) � � c � a
a= °= °' _ > N a o c v aLi o c o a)
c U cu O .. a) c rn a) 0 �. 3 '0 .+ ui O N 03 L
(a co 'EL� � cN °D0m0 ° d c � Ma - '� rn
d c U c co Q II O fN0 C cc L 0 O y 0 0) j L cru V "• C N
C
C J o n C .r V 0. E 0 O 0 Q t/) N OS
IL L o c oma = N p ai = c 8 0 m = -o _ = `° a
H � � = a � o C > U a) c '3 • i L- W °) cc.co i vi �
L 'S E � O � o E= c oUo g E = .60 co
.° — c� mo 0 a) 0 = o >, � La) Ocg � c " 0C)
to Q cu ao U aU U o ° M a ° v� m - Qw� a y �
0 _ a) o o c c c
c c g a ac°i c c 0 ami o w U) -
W o �- 0 0 = m c 0 o c
' ca3 00cu — 0)mom = Q0
c uNi CU co = .0 ° S 0 CD 0a) co U c �' N cc o R O
> c E c a
j,W n lCD i ca (D(D o o M •0 rn C c = O p Q
EO - cu .?` en cru o c 2 c cL V) o E Ec _ �
Q cru = g E vCo
Cc .;� ii Las O � O � c 0 -0 0 <
Q go
o `° ma CL cru 0 c -., 0 c 3 c o v»°iac0�
~ N � vi ° ana � a�i > v � c ° o 'rncOn ca
p c "' c 3: C) o o 5 � > c 2 cc > ca o co Z` 0 `�I c a'
V 0 (.) N = O > O > r �� cu a 0 � > 0 O W Nca
Q •� 0 �� '� 6 � 'N •° 0) Oo` occu aoic "- rn co oc0 cc C13 '2
¢ 0 a� cu a �.� c w L N v, > o o c 3 w = cu w
F- d2 � a) � � s = 'N 'cc a � n °) � = E � c ° mvi2ON � cu
Z Q O _L = L .� N
O �' 00 W O O L L t o ? o 0 ' o U C. cc O D 0 m 0 O 0
U ami v a o ani E ` m C a) >'m ai L n c 0 c v c o
' m cc cc (n ° 0 0 0 a .° a 0 E E ° 0 > m ac) cu 0 0 w
w w o ° ao ° o O a� L � tZ 0 .c_ '3
a Z (A co < cu a cu .. a 0 4- n. z v w.
V c
W °
to 6 E d c CU N M
c E o c rn rn
� Eo ? 2- c�u oo :° � � 0) 0)
IL L o Li c ^ EVO c > � I}itri
W 0 = U �c o•a E . 'a Qom = c o 0 0
CL
c M —>'0 0) ° > U aa)i co 0) 0 0 L a) �_ .. .
O O E c cnm E0c cnc � � n • W c`uE
Q � 'N .. c o mw E ..
2 yoaCc c � o0 cmZ c0 w0 E 'E
N Z cu E c U a� W o c U a. o = m Q Q
c o 00 O mL o � O � c 2' E rn J E E
r. dcNa, EO O 3 � 0Eo 0E `o = CLO ac Q t`ut`u
>) oU 2 S w oZ o = I o o
o o ao cc o ~O o 0
aof = oU � c > a = 0UUUU as m = F•- aa
Q
'G C
S � N
v
y �
o
t-
C
Q
co
a
a
0
N
N
0?
U'►
a
�a
N
�2
0
U
d
O °
N
d
0
r.
t,.
Q ! Z N
0 7 ZN
� N S3• V '
Z d g a o X
cn
Soo p -a
a�
C).o ,�
� r •
1
EXHIBIT 2
CONTRA COSTA CONSORTIUM HOME PROGRAM
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT
FY 1995/96' - NARRATIVE
I. COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY
The FY 1995-99 Contra Costa Consortium Comprehensive Plan identified the following
priorities for housing programs and strategies:
o Expand housing opportunities for lower-income households through rental assistance
and an increase in the supply of affordable rental housing.
o Increase homeownership opportunities for low-income households.
o Preserve and maintain the affordable housing stock.
o Increase the supply of appropriate and supportive housing for special needs
populations, including seniors, the.disabled, recovering substance abusers, battered
women, individuals with HIV/AIDs, runaway youth, and farmworkers.
o Assist the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless by providing emergency
and transitional housing, permanent affordable housing, and appropriate support
services.
o Alleviate problems of housing discrimination.
o Remove constraints to affordable housing.
Within the context of the Annual Consolidated Plan, the Board of Supervisors has approved
the following priorities for the allocation of HOME funds:
o Acquisition, rehabilitation and construction of affordable multifamily rental housing.
o Owner-occupied housing rehabilitation programs for very-low and low-income
households.
o First-time homebuyers' programs to assist very-tow and low-income households in
obtaining affordable housing.
During the FY 1995/96 HOMEProgram Year, the County Board of Supervisors allocated FY
1In accordance with HUD instructions, the FY 1995-96 Annual Performance Report covers the County's
Program Year which extends from April 1, 1995 through April 30, 1996.
1
1995 HOME funds' for the following projects consistent with priorities established in the
Consolidated Plan:
$500,000 to provide acquisition/housing rehabilitation loans to an estimated 40 first-
time homebuyers in Bay Point and North Richmond;
$300,000 which, in combination with other federal and City resources will provide
housing rehabilitation loans to over 60 very-low and low-income' households in
Pittsburg (15 to 20 HOME-assisted);
$105,000 in additional funds to develop six transitional housing units for battered
women and their families in Central County;
$488,000 for the acquisition and rehabilitation of 28 units of multifamily rental
housing in Walnut Creek, including 24 units affordable to very-low and low-income
households (10 HOME-assisted);
$50,000 in operating support for a local nonprofit to develop two additional HOME-
assisted projects in North Richmond;
In addition, $231,300 in HOME funds was allocated for HOME Program administration. All
remaining FY 1995 funds ($1,043,700) were reserved in the HOME Housing Development
Assistance Fund (HOME/HDAF) for use in funding additional affordable housing projects
which develop during the program year. During FY 1995/96, the Board approved $135,000
in HOME/HDAF for the acquisition and new construction of a multifamily rental housing
project for very-low income seniors in Brentwood/East County (40 affordable units, 19
HOME-assisted).4
The allocation of FY 1995 HOME funds is fully consistent with the priorities and strategies
approved by the Consortium in the FY 1995-99 Consolidated Plan.
PROGRESS REPORT AND CURRENT STATUS - FY 1994 AND 1995 CONSORTIUM
HOME PROJECTS
The following contains a brief description of all currently active projects together with a
summary of project progress during the current APR reporting period (April 1, 1995 through
z
Includes $135,000 in previously unallocated FY 1994 HOME funds.
3Very-low income households are defined as households with incomes at or below 50 percent of the
Area Median Income (AMI) for the Oakland PMSA adjusted for household size. Low-income households are
defined as households with incomes at or below 80 percent AMI.
4The Board of Supervisors took action to allocate FY 1996 HOME funds in March of 1996 which is
within the current APR reporting period. These projects were contained in the Consortium's Annual Plan,
submitted to HUD in March and approved for the Consortium Program year beginning May 1, 1996. Therefore,
these projects will be reported upon in IDIS and/or the FY 1996/97 APR as required by HUD.
2
1
April 30, 1996).
H-94-01 Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) Operating Support -
$30,000 in FY 1994 HOME funds to provide CHDO operating support for
Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond (CHDC) to
develop affordable housing opportunities in North Richmond and the
surrounding area. CHDC was certified as a CHDO for purposes of
participation in the HOME program by the County in 1993 and has previously
received County HOME funds for CHDO operating support. HOME funds
were fully expended for staff working on the implementation of two HOME-
assisted projects - the North Richmond Senior Housing Project and Parkway
Estates (see discussion of progress under these projects). In addition to HOME
funds, CHDC received operating support from the City of Richmond, Contra
Costa County Redevelopment Agency, and private foundations.
H-94-02 North Richmond Senior Housing Project - $300,000 in FY 1994 HOME funds
provided to CHDC to assist in the development of a 52-unit multifamily
housing project affordable to lower-income seniors in North Richmond. These
funds are in addition to $288,000 in County Community Development Block
Grant and $582,000 in County Redevelopment Agency (RDA) funds allocated
to this project. In December 1994, the County entered into a HOME Project
Agreement and a Disposition, Development and Loan Agreement with CHDC
and Eden Housing, Inc. as co-developers to secure the loan of County and
Consortium .funds for this project. As specified in the loan documents,
following completion of the development, 25 units will be designated as
HOME-assisted and required to be affordable to very-low income seniors; all
remaining units will be affordable to low-income seniors. Affordability will be
maintained for a minimum of 55 years. During the current reporting period,
the County worked with CHDC and Eden Housing to assemble the project site
and obtain the remaining financing required to successfully complete this
project. A Section 202 Senior Housing application was submitted to HUD for
funding during the FY 1995 funding cycle, but was not successful. The
County and project sponsors are working to refine and improve the project
structure and will submit a new application for FY 1996 Section 202 funds.
Total development cost for this project is estimated at $4.9 million.
H-94-03 Columbia Manor Senior Housing._Project - $255,000 in FY 1994 HOME funds
was allocated to Satellite Senior Homes and Pittsburg Preschool Coordinating
Council to assist in the new construction of 78 units of multifamily rental
housing affordable to very-low income seniors in Pittsburg/East County (38
HOME-assisted). Additional funding sources for this project include HUD
Section 202, County Housing Authority resources, State CDBG funds, and fee
waivers; total development cost estimated at $6.9 million. During the reporting
period, the Project Sponsors entered into a HOME Project Agreement with the
3
7
County for the HOME funds, and obtained architectural plan approvals from
the City and HUD, and land use/zoning approvals from the City. Construction
is anticipated to begin in winter 1996, with the project completed and ready for
occupancy in June 1998.
H-94-04 Church Lane Apartments - $445,000 in FY 1994 HOME funds' allocated to
Church Lane Housing Corporation (CLHC), a subsidiary of Rubicon Programs,
Inc., for the Church Lane Apartments Project in San Pablo. When complete,
this project will provide 22 units of rental housing affordable to lower-income
households, including 11 HOME-assisted units for very-low income households.
Additional funding sources for this project include County CDBG funds
($245,000), private lender financing ($600,000), LISC ($50,000) and Low-
Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs, $1.6 mil.); total development cost
estimated at $3.2 million. Following negotiation of the HOME Project
Agreement and related loan documents, County CDBG and HOME funds were
used to acquire the site in March 1995. Site stabilization work was initiated in
December 1995. Construction on the building has been delayed by negotiations.
with the City of San Pablo over building permit requirements and with the tax
credit investor concerning terms of the LIHTC financing. However, these
problems are being resolved and Rubicon anticipates closing the remaining
financing in May with construction on the building to immediately follow. The
building is expected to be completed and ready for occupancy by November
1996.
H-94-05 Riviera Place Apartments - $400,000 in FY 1994 HOME funds was allocated
to Affordable Housing Associates (AHA) for the development of 30 units of
affordable multifamily rental housing for very-low income households in
Walnut Creek. Project was withdrawn due to a loss of site control and an
inability to complete the required funding package. Funds were returned to the
Consortium for reallocation.
H-94-06 Pittsburg Neighborhood Homeownership Program - $160,000 in FY 1994 funds
was allocated to Pacific Community Services, Inc. (PCSI) to provide first-time
homebuyer assistance in the form of a deferred/equity-share second loan to an
estimated 11 lower-income households acquiring existing homes in a target area
in the City of Pittsburg. The HOME funds will be matched by $40,000 in City
of Pittsburg RDA funds. The County entered into a HOME Project Agreement
with PCSI to implement the project in February 1995 and subsequently
developed model loan documents for use in this program. As of the end of the
Consortium's program year, no loans were made. The County is working with
PCSI and the City to develop a more effective marketing and implementation
5
Includes $245,000 in FY 1994 HOME funds awarded during the regular funding cycle and an additional
$200,000 from previously unallocated HOME funds approved for this project in August 1995.
4
strategy for this program and anticipates provision of loans to income-qualified
households in the near future.
H-94-07 Rumrill Gardens Apartments - $250,000 in FY 1994 HOME funds was
allocated to Lao Family Community Development, Inc. (LFCD) and Oakland
Community Housing, Inc. (OCHI) to develop 32 units of newly constructed
multifamily rental housing units affordable to lower-income households,
including 15 HOME-assisted units (six affordable to very-low income
households, nine to households with incomes at/below 60 percent AMI). The
FY 1994 funds are in addition to previous allocations of FY 1993 County
HOME ($275,000) and CDBG funds ($240,000) and City of San Pablo RDA
funds ($157,500). Total development cost is estimated at $4.8 million. All
required financing has been approved and the site has been acquired.
LFCD/OCHI is in the process of obtaining construction permits and anticipates
Rumrill Gardens will be completed and ready for occupancy by April of 1997.
H-9.4-08 Brentwood Senior Housing - $135,000 in FY 1995/96 HOME/HDAF funds was
allocated to Rural California Housing Corporation (RCHC) to develop 40 units
of newly constructed multifamily rental housing affordable to very-low income
seniors (19 HOME-assisted). Additional funding sources include HUD Section
202 ($2.9 mil.), County CDBG ($265,000), and Brentwood RDA ($314,550);
total development cost currently estimated at $3.8 million. During the
reporting period, RCHC worked with the City and HUD to finalize project
plans. The HUD Section 202 loan is expected to close in September 1996,
with construction scheduled to start immediately after. The project is
anticipated to be complete and ready for occupancy by October of 1997.
H-95-01 First-time Homebuyer Program - $500,000 in FY 1995 HOME funds was
allocated to the County RDA to provide affordable homeownership
opportunities for an estimated 40 lower-income households in Bay Point and
North Richmond. Funds will be provided in the form of a shared-equity loan
and used in combination with County RDA funds ($120,000) and the HUD
Section 203(k) Program to enable qualified households to acquire and
rehabilitate homes in the two target areas. During the reporting period, the
Department entered into an Agreement with the County RDA and worked with
the RDA to develop model shared-equity loan documents and a marketing
strategy for this program. It is anticipated that this program will be initiated in
the fall of 1996.
H-95-02 Pittsburg Revitalization Prosect - $300,000 in FY 1995 HOME funds was
allocated to the City of Pittsburg to assist in the revitalization of a targeted
neighborhood and to maintain the supply of affordable housing through the
provision of housing rehabilitation loans for very-low and low-income
homeowners. This project represents a continuation of the City's ongoing
5
a r •
revitalization efforts and was previously funded with FY 1993 County HOME
funds. The County entered into a new Project Agreement with the City in
April 1996 and anticipates that the FY 1995 HOME funds together with
$75,000 in City RDA matching funds will be adequate to provide housing
rehabilitation loans to an additional 20 homeowners.
H-95-03 Community Housing_Development Organization (CHDO) Operating Support -
$50,000 in FY 1995 HOME funds to provide CHDO operating support for
Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond (CHDC) to
develop affordable housing opportunities in North Richmond and the
surrounding area. In addition to HOME funds, CHDC receives ongoing
operating support from the City of Richmond, Contra Costa County
Redevelopment Agency, and private foundations. This project represents a
continuation of prior CHDO operating support provided to CHDC using FY
1993 County HOME funds. FY 1995 HOME funds are currently being used to
support CHDC staff working with experienced-joint venture partners to develop
capacity and to implement two HOME-assisted projects - the North Richmond
Senior Housing Project and Parkway Estates. It is anticipated that construction
on these two projects will begin in 1997. Developer fees from these and other
CHDC projects in the City of Richmond should be sufficient to enable this
CHDO to become a viable, independent nonprofit housing developer in the near
future.
H-95-04 Transitional Housing for Battered Women and their Families - $105,000 in FY
1995 HOME funds was allocated to Battered Women's Alternatives (BWA) to
develop six units of transitional housing for very-low income battered women
and their children in Central County. These funds are in addition to $105,000
in FY 1993 County HOME funds; total development cost is estimated to be
$687,000. All required funding has been approved for this project, the site has
been acquired, and construction initiated. BWA anticipates the housing will be
completed and ready for occupancy by December 1996. In addition to
transitional housing, BWA will provide support services for residents, including
counseling, childcare, and employment and job readiness training.
H-95-05 Sierra Garden Apartments - $488,000 in FY 1995 HOME funds was allocated
to Affordable Housing Associates (AHA) for use in acquiring and rehabilitating
28 units of multifamily rental housing in Walnut Creek. Twenty-four units will
be required to be affordable to lower-income households, including 10 HOME-
assisted units for very-low income households. The remaining four units will
be rented at market. Additional funding sources include the City of Walnut
Creek ($592,000) and private lender financing ($1.1 mil.); total development
cost is estimated at $2.3 million. During the reporting period, AHA acquired
the site and initiated rehabilitation. The project is expected to be completed
and fully occupied by October 1996.
6
1
i
o HOME Housing Development Assistance Fund - $1,043,700 in recaptured and
previously unallocated HOME funds were placed in the HOME Housing
Development Assistance Fund for use in funding affordable housing
development projects as they develop during the program year. (See preceding
discussion of Brentwood Senior Housing Project).
7
1
II. PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION
The Community Development Department continued efforts to solicit public and private
sector participation in the HOME Program during FY 1995/96. Department staff hosted a
technical assistance meeting in May 1995 and met throughout the reporting period with local
jurisdictions, public agencies, and affordable housing developers potentially interested in
participation in the Consortium HOME program. The focus of these meetings was to provide
technical assistance on project feasibility, design issues and potential sources of financing,
including HOME funds. Separate meetings were held with members of the financial
community to discuss lender Community Reinvestment Act programs and affordable housing
funding opportunities through the County's HOME program.
In addition, in accordance with federal requirements, the County held a noticed public
meeting in December of 1995 to receive input on the County's community development and
affordable housing needs and programs for the FY 1995/96 program year. In addition to
broader community development and public service needs, representatives from the nonprofit
community commented on the need for additional supportive housing for disabled populations.
Finally, Consortium members also participated in numerous public forums and planning
processes, including:
o the Contra Costa HIV Planning Council AIDS Forum;
o Alameda/Contra Costa EMA Jurisdiction meetings on HOPWA and development of a
plan to address the affordable housing needs of individuals with HIV/AIDS;
o the Association of Housing and Homeless Service Providers;
o the Farmworker Housing Task Force;
o the Tri-Valley Affordable Housing Committee;
o the Mobile Home Advisory Committee;
o the Contra Costa Conference on Homelessness; and
o hearings held in connection with preparation of the County's five year Continuum of
Care Homeless Plan.
8
� I •
I
III. COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS (CHDOs)
The following nonprofit organizations have been qualified as CHDOs for purposes of
participation in the Consortium's HOME Program:
o Community Housing Development Corporation of North Richmond (CHDC)
o Pacific Community Services, Inc. (PCSI)
o Saint Vincent de Paul Society
o Shelter, Inc.
o Lao Family Community Development, Inc. (LFCD)
o Resources for Community Development (RCD)
o Rural California Housing Corporation
o Northern California Land Trust (NCLT)
o Affordable Housing Associates (AHA)
Efforts to qualify additional nonprofit organizations as CHDOs are ongoing and include the
distribution of relevant program information and the provision of technical assistance to
potentially interested nonprofits. During the project application process, the requirements for
CHDO certification are discussed at length in a special HOME technical assistance meeting
hosted by the Department. In addition, CHDO applications are also included with the
Consortium Notice of Funding Availability for HOME distributed to over 40 area nonprofit
housing organizations.
In addition to efforts to qualify new CHDOs, the Consortium allocated $50,000 in FY 1995
HOME funds to provide CHDO administrative and operating support to Community Housing
Development Corporation of North Richmond. Finally, the Consortium has also approved
funding for two CHDO projects in FY 1995/96, including the Brentwood Senior Housing
Project ($135,000 to Rural California Housing Corporation), and Sierra Gardens ($488,000 to
Affordable Housing Associates).
6Note that although RCHC is a CHDO, the Brentwood Senior Housing Project was not entered into CMTS
as a CHDO project.
9
a r •
IV. AFFIRMATIVE MARKETING
The Contra Costa Consortium adopted affirmative marketing procedures as a component of
the FY 1994 HOME Program Description and the County's Annual Action Plan. In all
technical assistance materials and at all meetings held to discuss the HOME Program, it is
made clear that all federally funded housing projects including those funded with HOME
resources must comply with federal fair housing laws and the County's affirmative marketing
procedures. In addition, an applicant's proposed affirmative marketing program is one of the
criteria adopted by the Board of Supervisors and employed by the County in evaluating
projects applying for HOME funding. Finally, requirements concerning fair housing and
affirmative marketing are incorporated into all HOME Project Agreement and loan
documents. The County monitors compliance with these requirements as projects are
implemented.
10
a I �
V. MINORITY OUTREACH
A minority and women's business outreach program was adopted as a component of the
Consortium's FY 1994 HOME Program Description and the County's Annual Action Plan and
discussed at the Countywide HOME information meetings and at individual meetings held
with projects awarded FY 1995 HOME funds. In addition, requirements concerning minority
and women-owned business participation in Consortium HOME projects are incorporated into
all HOME Project Agreement and loan documents. A Directory of Minority, Women, and
Disadvantaged Business Enterprises is maintained by the County for use by County
Departments and recipients of County funds, including HOME project sponsors.
There were no completed Consortium projects during the APR reporting period. Therefore,
there are no MBE/WBE contracts reported for completed projects in HUD Table 40107
(attached).
Consistent with policies established by the Board of Supervisors, the Community
Development Department will continue to work with project sponsors to ensure the
participation of minority and women-owned businesses in the HOME Program.
11
a r •
1
1
VI. TENANT ASSISTANCE/RELOCATION
Priority in the allocation of funds under the Consortium's HOME Program is assigned to
projects which do not involve permanent relocation or displacement. However, projects
involving relocation may be funded if required to: eliminate unsafe or hazardous housing
conditions; reverse conditions of neighborhood decline and stimulate revitalization of a
specified area; and/or to accomplish high priority affordable housing projects. As specified in
all HOME Project Agreements and related loan documents, the County and project sponsors
will adhere to the requirements of the Uniform Relocation Act (URA) in all projects involving
permanent or temporary relocation and displacement. In addition, wherever feasible,
displaced households and organizations will be offered the opportunity to relocate into the
affordable housing project upon completion.
During the reporting period, there was no permanent relocation or displacement of
households, businesses, or nonprofit organizations as a result of the implementation of the
HOME-assisted projects. However, the Sierra Garden Apartment Project did require the
temporary relocation of one household during rehabilitation of the rental units. The
household consisted of a single person (female, Hispanic) who was temporarily moved from
her apartment to another unit in the project while her apartment was rehabilitated. Following
completion of the work, she was moved back into her original residence. The total cost of
the temporary relocation was $2,500.
VII. SHORTFALL FUNDS
Not applicable to the Contra Costa Consortium (allocation in excess of $500,000).
kh/C/APR95-6a
12
� r •
i
Annual Performance Report U.S.Department of Housing
and Urban Development
iAOME Program Office of Community
Planning and Development OMB No.2501-0013 (exp. 3/30/93)
Public Reporting Burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 2.5 hours per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of
information.Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing
this burden, to the Reports Management Officer, Office of Information Policies and Systems, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Washington, O.C. 20410-3600 and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (2501-0013), Washington, D.C.
20503. Do not send this completed form to either of these addresses.
This form is intended to collect numeric data to be aggregated nationally as a complement to data collected through the Cash and Management
Information (C/MI) System. Participants should enter the reporting period in the first block. The reporting period is October 1 to September 30.
Instructions are included for each section if further explanation is needed.
Submit this form on or before November 30.Send one copy to the appropriate This report is for period:(mm/dd/yy) Date Submitted:
HUD Field Office and one copy to: starting: Ending:
HOME Program,Rm 7176,451 7th Street,S.W.,Washington, D.C.20410.' 4/1/95 4/30/96 12/3/96
Part l: Participant Identification
1.Participant Number 2-Participant Name
DC060231 Contra Costa Consortium
3.Name of Person Completing Report 4.Phone No.IIncluda Area Coda)
Kathleen K. Hamm 1 510-335-1257
S.Address Gomixlnity Development Dept. 16.caw 7.state S.Zip Code
651 Pine St. , N. Win-, 4th F1. , Martinez CA 94553 Martinez CA 94553
Part If: Program Income
Enter the following program income amounts for the reporting period:in block 1 the balance on hand at the beginning;in block 1.a the amount
generated;in block 1b the amount expended;and in block 2 the amount.for Tenant-Based rental Assistance.
1.Balance on Hand at Beginning 2.Amount 11"olved During 3.Total Amount Expended 4.Amount Expanded for Tenant- bi Balance on s at n
of Reporting Period: Reporting Period: During Reporting Period: Based Rental Assistance: of Reporting Rer(od
(1 + 2-3) - 5
-0- -0- -0- -0- -0-
Part III: Minority Business Enterprises (MBE) and Women Business Enterprises (WBE)
In the table below,indicate the number and dollar value of contracts for HOME projects completed during the reporting period.
Minority Business Enterprises(MBE)
a.Tom ;b.Alaskan Native or a Asian or d.Black t.White
= American Indian Pacific islander Non-Hispanic e.Hispanic Non-Hispanic
A. Contracts
1. Number -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0-
2. Dollar Amount -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0-
B. Sub-Contracts
1. Number -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0-
0-.. 2. Dollar Amount -0- -0- -0- � -0- -0- -0-
..
a.Total b.Women Business c.Male
...... ........................
Enterprises(ME)'
C. Contracts
1. Number -0- -0- -0-
2. Dollar Amount -0-
0. Sub-Contracts
1. Number —0— —0— —0-
2. Dollar Amount —0_ -0- -0-
Page 1 of 2 form HUD-40107 (11/92)
In the table below, indicate the number of HOME assisted rental property owners and dollar value of HOME assisted rental properties during
the reporting period. '
Minority Property Owners
a Total b.Alaskan Native or c.Asian or d.Black f.White
American indlan Pacific Islander Non-Hispanic a Hispanic Non-Hispanic
1. Number -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0-
2. Dollar Amount . -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0-
Part V: Relocation and Real Property Acquisition
indicate the number of persons displaced, the cost of relocation payments, the number of parcels acquired, and the coat of acquisition. The data
provided should reflect only displacements and acquisitions occurring during the reporting period.
- a.Number b.Cost
1. Parcels Acquired * 1 $300,000
2. Businesses Displaced -0- -0-
3. Nonprofit Organizations Displaced —0— —0-
4. Persons Temporarily Relocated,not Displaced
Minority Persona
Persons Displaced a,Total f.White
b.Alaskan Native or a Asian or d.Black s.Hispanic Non-Heepanic
American Indian Pacific Islander Non-Hispanic
5. Persons Displaced: No. 1 -0- -0- -0- 1 -0-
6. Persons
0-6. .Persons Displaced: Cost $2,500 -0- -0- -0- $2,500 -0-
Sierra Gardens - acquisition/rehabilitation of 28 rental units requiring
temporary relocation of one household.
Page 2 of 2 form HUD-40107
�
cn ck
Q0 VA
�A co
0 r^ s C; T- C',
c)-
-.-*...............................
,CPA C6 ON
Q A
0%
....................
cq
cn
T2 AA cn
C-1 r—
Fail
16 40
t
4
1A t3
PA to
c1r)
y sio
Aw
co
cn
ON
O 0
s C-4
irte,t ci
4.4 r4
vo,.
ON
14 ON 7:6
"A :�
ON
- S
'o
St o C,4
76
AA C)
— N O O Q O O
rll.o0
cn roa ll M �-A
is
0. 0
SO 0
1117
C4
-rA A ;
yDSt
t -
0
'o
Z
� � a
7� r•
B \
• W .
9m�]5 \
cr
CA
e
m o
o.
d�
�5
a.
d
00
Y-V"
s
ft
lb p
O C�
t� N�}
3
s
Z
a r �
ON 0
r,. c� { cMn o g gi
un �; r N ., rx
m
-::
-all tr� ()0� r
N
Qa .
I r � 1
I m
do C'4
n �' o
cn
N m
S
cs
Z a "'
o � W Y
�p 975�mgg u � �8 •
C c = <t
c
,-4 c
_�- o fM+
s o g
m � m o 0
E a ►� pt U �v N
oIla _
Q.V
d m nom G - U a 1 ►,°sum.
crime ; sol � as
T 4
8 a� m -- m
m Q+
N N O r.4 o
« r8b" r u1 +. 17 N
cq CO `Sa ,mo m a. V N O
-2 1E
ci's Ln
7K r1_4
a O dl `m o 4 G
�-' .. ..
'00 � m
m W to � `r'
co"
�S c • ps m `o .p aDp O
00
o ois Z` E orN-+ p O
cc 0
S 0tr.
m to3 :a a»oo YVtxO fir} th N N N
lowa. .. 0. a - K '° so o p g 8
litz :� � C
I Ln
�
cnW ONcd
St OCL
h O o
0 a-
t - ,
a
L /
d
d
'S
w
i
m�$
N
t�O of . ./
G
m o
g CAa
i'M
� a
m
Y �
Om
i
v m
caU
110
a
s
s
Z
TABLE NOTES
HOME MATCH REPORT (HUD Form 40107-A)
The reporting period for the FY 1995/96 Annual Performance Report (APR) for the Contra
Costa Consortium HOME Program is the County's current program year (April 1, 1995
through April 30, 1996). However, in accordance with HUD requirements, the information
contained in the HOME Match Report represents the Consortium's match liability and
contribution for Federal Fiscal Year 1995/96 (October 1, 1995 through October 1, 1996).
In prior year APRs, the County incorrectly submitted the match information for the
Consortium's program year rather than the federal fiscal year. In addition, some matching
funds were not reported. Therefore, the County is submitting corrected match tables for FY
1993/94 and FY 1994/95 with the current year report. In addition, in accordance with
direction provided in a November 1996 letter from HUD, the County will transfer $700,000
in excess match earned under the County HOME Program to the Consortium Program to
match Consortium projects funded in future years as follows:
Match contributed by County HOME Projects - all years $1,055,395
Less realized and potential match liability - County
HOME Projects, all years $ 350,750
Equals excess HOME match from County Program available
for transfer to Contra Costa Consortium HOME Program $ 704,645
Therefore, $700,000 in transferred match funds ($700,000) have been subtracted from Part II
line 5 of HUD form 40107-A ("excess match carried over to next fiscal year") in the County's
FY 1995/96 APR and added to Part 11 line 5 of HUD form 40107-A in the Consortium's FY
1995/96 APR.
16
a � •
J
EXHIBIT 3
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
FY 1995 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT
This report is the fourth component of the Annual Performance
Report (APR) as required by 24 CFR 591.52 on the Contra Costa
County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program
administered by Contra Costa County. As required, this report
provides an analysis of the progress the County has made in
carrying out the FY 1995-1999 Consolidated Plan and the FY 1995-
96 Action Plan for the CDBG program. -
The other components of the annual performance report are the FY
1995 CDBG Activity/Financial Summary (also known as the GPR) , and
the APR's for the Contra Costa Consortium Home Investment
Partnership Act (HOME) and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG)
programs . The 1995 CDBG Activity/ Financial Summary and this
report are intended to be used in conjunction with each other in
order to obtain a complete overview of the activities carried out
during FY 1995 .
All four documents should be utilized when assessing the overall
progress made in carrying out the FY 1995-1999 Consolidated Plan
and -the FY 1995 Action Plan.
This performance report is the first analysis based on the
consolidated planning process implemented in 1995. Prior to this
time only the activity/financial summary was required for CDBG
programs . The activity/financial summary provides information on
each of the activities funded during the program year. This
includes projects that were funded in prior program years that
were carried out during the most current program year or
activities that were completed but reimbursed during the most
current program year.
The information contained in the activity/financial summary
includes : activity name and number; activity description and
location; activity sponsor; regulation citation; date of initial
funding; national objective; accomplishment/status in narrative
form; and the amount budgeted and expended during the program
year. When applicable a data box is also shown which includes
the number of households or persons assisted in various
categories, including; low and moderate income; low income;
ethnicity; and female head of household. All relevant financial
information in also summarized in the document.
While the Consolidated Plan is based on the 1995-1999 planning
period, only those activities funded during the 1995 program year
are applicable to this report. Therefore, some activities
included in the activity/financial summary are not included in
the narrative portion. However, it should be pointed out that
several activities, especially housing and infrastructure
1
projects funded prior to 1995 were considered during the
development of goals and objectives of the Consolidated Plan.
The Contra Costa Consolidated Plan identifies local priority
needs and objectives developed through citizen participation, a
review of local planning documents, and discussions with the
cities composing the Contra Costa Consortium', and the Urban
County2, as well as public and non-profit agencies .
This report summarizes the activities funded during the program
year and how they are applicable in meeting the needs,
objectives, and strategies outlined in the Consolidated and
Action Plans .
Housing
The Contra Costa Consortium five-year strategy establishes the
following priorities for affordable housing programs for the
participating cities and the Urban County.
• Expand housing opportunities for lower-income households
through rental assistance and an increase in the supply of
affordable rental housing
• Increase home ownership opportunities for low-income
households
• Preserve and maintain affordable housing stock
• Increase the supply of appropriate and supportive housing
for special- needs -populations, including seniors, the
disabled, recovering substance abusers, battered women,
individuals with HIV/AIDS, runaway youth, and farm workers.
• Assist the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless
by providing emergency and transitional housing, permanent
affordable housing, and appropriate support services .
• Alleviate problems of housing discrimination
• Remove constraints to affordable housing development.
'The Consortium includes the Urban County plus the
entitlement cities of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut
Creek.
2The Urban County includes all unincorporated areas of the
County and the cities of Brentwood, Clayton, Danville, E1
Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez, Moraga, Orinda, Pinole,
Pleasant Hill, San Pablo, and San Ramon.
2
� r •
The Urban County has established the following as High Priority
Housing needs consistent with the above strategies for the Urban
County as identified in the FY 1995/96 Action Plan.
• Maintain and rehabilitate the existing affordable housing . .
stock
• Provide additional affordable housing units through new
construction
• Increase access to affordable housing for very-low, low-and
moderate-income households through home ownership and rental
subsidy programs
• Increase housing opportunities for Urban County special
needs populations
• Provide emergency and transitional housing with appropriate
support services for homeless populations
• Alleviate problemsof housing discrimination
The following is a summary of programs funded during the FY
1995/96 CDBG housing programs and how they meet the
aforementioned strategies .
• MAINTAIN AND REHABILITATE THE EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
STOCK
The County has assigned a high priority to programs and projects
designed to maintain and rehabilitate affordable housing for
very-low and low-income households in the Urban County. In
addition to CDBG funds, other resources are program income
generated by the County's currently operating rehabilitation
programs, and private resources.
Consistent with the County's housing strategies, three
rehabilitation programs received additional funding during FY
1995, while a fourth continued to operate with CDBG and Federal
Rental Rehabilitation Program Income. Project numbers 21-01
Pleasant Hill Owner-occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program, 21-
09 San Pablo -Owner-occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program, and
21-10 Neighborhood Preservation Program - Contra Costa County
Building Inspection Department, provided rehabilitation loans to
homeowners . A total of $1,486,165 was made available to very-
low, low- and moderate income homeowners. Funds are as follows
$420,000 CDBG, $459,310 Program Income, and $606,855 in prior
year funds . Additional funds include City and Redevelopment
Agency resources . Two programs provide loans to residents of the
City of Pleasant Hill and San Pablo. The third program is
operated by the County's Building Inspection Department and
serves the remainder of the Urban County.
3
a r
The table below represents the actual number of rehabilitated
owner-occupant housing units completed during FY 1995.
Household Very-Low- Ethnicity Female
assisted Low-income White Black Hispanic Asian/PacIs Headed
Projected Hshld
/Actual
35/36 28 26 8 1 1 16
Project number 21-05 Rental Rehabilitation Program- Housing
Authority of Contra Costa County, provided loans to property
owners for the rehabilitation of rental housing affordable to
very-low- and low-income households. Under this program, the
Housing Authority also provides existing, qualified tenants with
Section 8 certificates in order to prevent potential
displacements once rehabilitation is complete. Rent restrictions
are applied to the assisted units in order to ensure that they
remain affordable to very-low and I.ow-income households following
rehabilitation. The program is available throughout the Urban
County.
Rental Units Very-Low- Ethnicity Female
Assisted Low-income White Black Hispanic Asian/PacIs Headed
Projected/ Hshld
Actual
20/37 29 13 12 12 10
Pittsburg Neighborhood Revitalization Project received $300,000
in FY 1995 HOME funds to provide approximately 20 housing
rehabilitation loans to very-low and lower-income households in
the City of Pittsburg. (see HOME APR Project No. H-95-02)
Sierra Gardens Rental Housing Project -$488,000 in FY 1995 HOME
funds to acquire and rehabilitate 28 units of affordable
multifamily rental housing in Walnut Creek (see HOME APR Project
No, H-95-05
• PROVIDE ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS THROUGH NEW
CONSTRUCTION
The County allocated $565,000 in FY 1995 CDBG funds to support
the new construction of two multifamily housing projects which,
when complete will provide affordable housing opportunities to
approximately 90 lower-income households. CDBG funds will be
used for site acquisition. Implementation of the Bay Point
Multifamily Housing Project (50 units/CDBG Project Number 21-12)
has been delayed pending resolution of environmental issues
associated with the proposed site. The County is working with
BRIDGE Housing Corporation to resolve these issues and/or
4
identify an alternative site in the Bay Point/East County area.
The Brentwood Senior Housing Project (21-14, 40 units) has
secured all required funding, including an allocation of HUD
Section 202 funds . It is anticipated that the site will be
acquired during 1996, with the project built and ready for
occupancy in mid-1997 . The project is located in the City of
Brentwood. A third project ( 21-13) involving the new
construction of 184 units of multi-family rental housing in the
City of E1 Cerrito was awarded $100,000 in CDBG funds . This
project has since been determined to be infeasible, with the
result that the CDBG funds reserved for this project will be
reallocated through the Housing Development Assistance Fund.
• INCREASE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR VERY-LOW, LOW-AND
MODERATE-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS THROUGH HOME OWNERSHIP AND RENTAL
SUBSIDIES PROGRAMS
First-time Homebuyer Program - $500,000 in FY 1995 HOME funds was
allocated to the County Redevelopment Agency (RDA) to provide
affordable homeownership opportunities for an estimated 40 lower-
income households in the community of Bay Point located in East
County and the community of North Richmond located in West
County. (see HOME APR Project No. H-95-01)
During. FY 1995/96, the Housing Authority of Contra Costa County
provided Section 8 rent vouchers and certificates to 5,650 very-
low and low-income households . (These figures include 2,735
households in the Urban County. ) Although this figure represents
an increase in the amount of rental subsidy, it is less than the
amount anticipated. An additional 225 households received
assistance through the Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program.
The 'Mortgage Credit Certificate program (MCC) was sharply
curtailed due to a drastic decrease in the allocation of funds to
the County. The County received approximately 17 million dollars
in 1995 compared to 75 million in 1994 . During the period March
through June 1995 the County issues 141 MCCs .
The .Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bond Program issues 62 loans
equaling 8 . 2 million dollars.
• INCREASE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE URBAN COUNTY SPECIAL
NEEDS POPULATIONS
During FY 1995 funds were provided to acquire a residence to
house four adults with severe developmental disabilities, project
# 21-03 Las Trampas Group Home for Developmentally Disabled
located in the City of Pleasant Hill. Funds were also provided
to project number 21-91 Idaho Apartments to provide affordable
permanent SRO Housing for Homeless adults, including individuals
with HIV/AIDS, the mentally disabled and individuals recovering
from substance abuse. The project is located in the City of E1
5
Cerrito. Project number 21-14 Brentwood Senior Housing is
discussed above.
• PROVIDE EMERGENCY AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING WITH APPROPRIATE
SUPPORT SERVICES FOR HOMELESS POPULATIONS
CDBG funds were provided for two projects to provide emergency
and transitional housing with appropriate support services during
1995 : $20,000 provided to Ujima for rehabilitation of the
Rectory, a 15-bed group home for women recovering from substance
abuse and their families (Project No. 21-06) ; and $16,500
provided to Battered Women's Alternatives (BWA) for
rehabilitation of a 20-unit transitional housing facility for
battered women and their families in Central County (Project No.
21-08) . In addition, $105,000 in FY 1995 HOME funds were
provided to BWA for the new construction and rehabilitation of a
6-unit transitional housing project in Central County. The
latter project was previously awarded $150,000 in CDBG funds for
a 24-bed emergency facility adjacent to the transitional housing.
CDBG funds in the amount of $15,000 were made available through
the OPEN category for improvements to playyard and grounds at
Mountain View House a 36 to 42 bed shelter for single women and
families (project #21-32)
See non-housing objectives for more information on homeless
services.
• ALLEVIATE PROBLEMS OF HOUSING DISCRIMINATION
All Contra Costa County housing programs and projects are
required to undertake affirmative marketing activities and to
provide access to housing on an equal opportunity basis without
regard to race, religion, disability, sex, sexual orientation,
martial status, or national origin.
During FY 1995 the County through its fair housing programs,
project numbers 21-02, 21-07 and 21-11 provided assistance to
households experiencing discrimination. Services include
verification and documentation of the complaint, negotiations
with property owners, and where appropriate legal assistance.
The County has also initiated a multi-year testing program to
systematically identify fair housing problems in the Urban
County. A 'total of $70,000 was granted for fair housing programs
The following table represents the number of households assisted
during FY 1995
6
i 7 1
Household Very-Low- Ethnicity Female
Assisted Low-income white Black Hispanic Asian/PacIs Headed
Hshld
69 62 41 18 9 1 39
Non-Housing Community Development
Non-housing community development activities are those that
provide for a safe and livable environment as identified by the
community. The County funds activities under three different
categories to address identified needs; economic development,
public service, and OPEN which is the designation for capital
projects such as infrastructure improvements and community
facilities .
The Urban County is committed to allocating funds that serve the
needs of the 'lowest income and most disadvantaged residents. The
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has identified as a
priority, in the allocation of block grant funds, the needs of
children/families and the homeless, those segments of the
population that are the most at-risk and powerless.
The following are long-term goals identified in the consolidated
plan and activities that support meeting those goals.
• CONTINUE TO IDENTIFY AND ASSESS NON-HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT NEEDS IN RESPONSE TO CHANGING DEMOGRAPHICS.
As part of an overall effort to identify and properly fund
activities that benefit low-income persons and communities, CDBG
staff has worked with the County demographer to compile
statistical information on the Urban County. Information by
census tract is being gathered on: low-and moderate-income,
poverty levels, and unemployment. Other areas such as ethnicity,
education, homeownership, and median income are expected to
completed in the next program year.
• COOPERATE WITH OTHER LOCAL JURISDICTIONS TO PROMOTE THE MOST
COST EFFECTIVE METHODS OF PROVIDING PUBLIC FACILITIES
NECESSARY FOR SUPPORTING THE ECONOMIC, . SOCIAL, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL WELL BEING OF THE URBAN COUNTY.
As part of the requalification process for participation in the
CDBG program, CDBG staff met with city representatives to discuss
local needs. City staff .was very responsive and discussion is
continuing on an ongoing basis to identify activities that could ,
be funded under the CDBG program. CDBG staff will be compiling -. .
census data to use in discussion with each city to identify
future needs .
7
• DEVELOP COOPERATIVE LINKAGES WITH OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL
PROGRAMS TO MAXIMIZE AND LEVERAGE CDBG FUNDS.
As part of the CDBG application process all applicant proposals
must identify matching funds . Non-profit agencies are required
to have a 10% match, governmental agencies a 25% match and for-
profits a 100% match. This process has encouraged projects to
utilize a variety of funding sources including redevelopment
agency funds, federal transportation funds, and other state and
federal funds .
In addition CDBG staff has worked with other County departments
especially Health Services and Community Services to identify
areas of need and cooperative relationships to funds various
programs.
• PROVIDE PARK AND RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES TO LOW AND
MODERATE INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS INCLUDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR
THE ELDERLY, AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.
il
CDBG funds were provided to restore a playground structure, which
had been vandalized, in the unincorporated community of Montalvin
Manor. Montalvin Manor is an identified low-income area in West
County (project #21-41) .
• ASSIST WITH INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS THAT INCREASE THE
HEALTH AND SAFETY OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME RESIDENTS AND
SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS.
As described above, CDBG staff has established ongoing
discussions with the cities in the Urban County to identify
infrastructure needs . Infrastructure improvements would include
flood and storm drain improvements, street and sidewalks,
utilities, and accessibility needs in areas that house or provide
services to Tow-income persons. In many instances the cost of
infrastructure improvement requires multiple funding sources.
Staff will work with public agencies, local municipal advisory
councils, and non-profits to identify, develop and prioritize
infrastructure activities, and assist in identifying potential
funding sources .
Projects funded in 1995 to improve access and safety include
project numbers 21-35, 21-36, 21-37 . See short terms goals and
GPR for more complete information
• PROVIDE HIGH QUALITY CHILD CARE IN A SAFE AND STIMULATING
ENVIRONMENT WITH CERTIFIED INSTRUCTORS AND OTHER EXPERIENCED
PROFESSIONALS.
As part of the effort to provide long term quality child care a
total of $342,017 CDBG funds was allocated to child care and
child care related activities . Funds in the amount of $83,894
8
were allocated for the acquisition of two facilities in West
County that house Head Start and Child Development programs
(project number 21-34) . Portable buildings were acquired at a
third Head Start and Child Development site to house support
programs related to the Head Start and Child Development programs
(project # 21-89)
CDBG funds in the amount of $18,348 were also provided for ADA
improvements to Martinez Early Childhood Center, located in the
City of Martinez, which is a state and federally funded child
care and development program. Child care is provided to very-low
and low-income families (project # 21-30) .
Project number 21-29 Child Health and Nutrition program was
allocated $10,300 under the economic development category to
provide training to child care providers in order to meet new
state child care licensing requirements.
To support the Head Start and Child Development programs CDBG
funds in the amount of $145,581 were provided to upgrade and
expand the Brookside Kitchen which provides meals and snacks to
the various Head Start and Child Development programs in the
County (Project #21-39) .
• SUPPORT PROGRAMS THAT PROMOTE PREVENTION AND EARLY
INTERVENTION TO ALLEVIATE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND
CHILDREN, AND TO TREAT VICTIMS AND PERPETRATORS THROUGHOUT
THE URBAN COUNTY.
In November of 1994 the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors placed
on the ballot, as an advisory measure, a countywide Action Plan
to prevent violence in Contra Costa County. The advisory measure
was approved by the electorate and the Action Plan serves as a
foundation for reducing and preventing violence in the County.
The Action Plan is carried out and administered -by the County
Health Services Department.
Three prevention programs have been funded that provide classroom
forums for children to be educated on and prevent physical and
sexual abuse: A total of $55,500 was provided to project numbers
21-43 Child Parent Enrichment, 21-59 Teens Need Teens, and 21-63
Child Assault and Prevention —Teen Program.
Funds in the amount of $7,500 were also provided to project
number 21-44 which provides in-home parenting education
instruction to families with histories of abuse. See also
project number 21-62 which provides supportive services to
victims of rape.
• ASSIST SPECIAL NEEDS GROUPS SUCH AS THE HOMELESS, PERSONS
WITH DISABILITIES, PERSONS WITH AIDS, AND PERSONS WITH
SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROBLEMS BY PROVIDING SERVICES THROUGHOUT
9
a r •
1 r.
THE URBAN COUNTY.
Homeless- Five public service programs were funded to assist
homeless or those in jeopardy of becoming homeless . Programs 21-
47, 21-6.5, 21-78, 21-81, 21-87 were funded a total of $110,074 .to
carry out programs that either provided shelter or basic
necessities such as food and clothing.
Persons low Ethnicity Black Am Asian/ Female
Assisted income white Indian/ Hispanic Pac.Isld Head
Alaskan Household
153 105 125 15 1 9 3 52
Additionally,. during FY 1995/96 the County operated homeless
shelters, providing 22,266 shelter bed nights to 363 homeless
adults at the Central County shelter, and 18,659 shelter bed
nights to 303 homeless adults at the Brookside Shelter. Shelter
was also provided to 20 homeless families and 19 homeless single
women through the Mountain View Transitional Housing Program, and
11 single men and four families at the San Joaquin II
Transitional Housing Program.
Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG)
ESG funds were allocated to the following projects to provide
emergency and transitional housing and appropriate supportive
services for homeless populations: $100,000 to the County Health
Services Department for operating expenses at the Central County
and Brookside Emergency Shelters with a combined capacity of 116
emergency shelter beds; $10,000 to Catholic Charities of the East
Bay to provide operating support for Amara Hbuse, a transitional
group home for up to six very-low income homeless persons with
HIV/AIDS; and $18,000 to Crisis and Suicide Intervention to
operate a 24-hour, toll free countywide homeless hotline. See
also the APR for this program.
• ASSIST LOW AND MODERATE INCOME PERSONS BY DEVELOPING
COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES FOR TRAINING
AND JOB PLACEMENT.
Funding in the amount of $355,550 was provided to a total of
eight training and placement programs in both the public service
and economic development categories. Of those, sponsors of
project numbers 21-20 Hospice Shoppe and 21-86 Bay Point Job
Skill Training were unable to carry out their projects . Both
projects targeted the East County area. Funds in the amount of
$22,500 will be recaptured and placed in the Economic Development
Assistance Fund for reallocation. A third project, number 21-27
Urban Garden is proceeding slower than expected and has not
trained or placed any individuals. Among the remaining projects
(21-16, 21--23, 21-24, 21-26, 21-88) a total of 373 persons were
10
1 4W
placed in permanent employment.
1995 was the first program year in which a substantial number of
training and placement applications were approved under the
economic development category. An analysis of the successes and
failures of programs has resulted in refinement of criteria used
to evaluate programs. It is anticipated that specific strategies
for reaching this objective will be developed in program year
1996/97 . See the following discussion.
• EXPAND OPPORTUNITIES TO RESTORE ECONOMIC VITALITY TO THE
URBAN COUNTY'S POOREST AREAS THROUGH JOB CREATION, TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE AND OUTREACH IN CONJUNCTION WITH ONGOING ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES.
In June of 1995 the County Board of Supervisors established a
nine member economic development committee, composed of small
business, labor, education, training, public utilities, non-
profit, and banking representatives, to advise the Board on
economic development within the unincorporated areas of the
County and to make recommendations to the Board on CDBG related
economic development activities.
The Committee works closely with CDBG staff and is in the process
of developing a mission statement and workplan for economic
development for both CDBG and County related economic development
activities .
Funds were provided to the City of San Pablo (project # 21-25) to
assist small business owners in improving their storefronts. The
target area is within the City of San Pablo's redevelopment area.
Funds for technical assistance were provided to the County
Redevelopment Agency (project # .21-28) for a market study of the
feasibility of locating neighborhood serving businesses within a
senior housing project. The senior housing project is located in
the North Richmond redevelopment area.
Funds were also provided to project number 21-22 Rubicon Bakery
for expansion of baking facilities. The expansion of the
facility lead to the creation of five new jobs .
Short Term goals
• PROVIDE PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES WHICH BENEFIT LOWER INCOME
PERSONS.
The Contra Costa County CDBG programs operate under four
categories, housing, economic development, OPEN which is the
County's designation for infrastructure and public facilities
improvements, and public service. It is the intent of the
program that all projects and programs funded under the CDBG
11
program primarily serve very-low- and low income persons . All
housing projects serve lower-income households. In addition the
majority of non-housing programs funded are targeted to
communities and/or persons who have been identified as low-
income.
• PREVENT OR REDUCE DETERIORATION IN DESIGNATED NEIGHBORHOODS
Three projects were provided funding during FY 1995 to assist in
maintaining and upgrading existing neighborhoods . All three
projects are located in areas of benefit. Project # 21-36 and
21-37 were provided with a total of $26,300 in CDBG funds to
install fire hydrants and sidewalks in the community of Knightsen
in East County. The third project was provided with $12,750 to
install sidewalks in the Community of Bay Point in East County.
The location of the sidewalk is adjacent to a 14 unit multi-
family affordable housing project completed in October of 1995.
• PRESERVE THE EXISTING HOUSING STOCK AND INCREASE HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOWER INCOME PERSONS
In addition to the housing projects, two projects have been
funded under the public service category to preserve housing and
increase opportunities for housing for seniors. Program #21-53
provides. opportunities for seniors to obtain reverse mortgages to
remain in and maintain their homes. Project #21-55 augments the
cost of congregate care for very-low-income seniors.
Persons low Ethnicity Am Asian/ Female
Assisted income white Black Indian/ Hispanic Pac.Isld Head
Alaskan Household
153 105 125 15 1 9 3 52
• PROVIDE INCENTIVES FOR BUSINESS EXPANSION AND STABILIZATION
IN ORDER TO EXPAND EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOWER INCOME
PERSONS.
The County has provided funding to three programs that are
designed to assist micro-enterprise development through technical
assistance and low or zero interest loans. To date the programs
have experienced limited success. Program number 21-17 and 21-19
were located a combined total of $206,719 in CDBG funds,
. including $61,783 . 19 in program income. Funds may be used for
loans to micro-enterprises, or startups businesses owned and
operated by low-moderate-income persons or for business expansion
loans to create jobs for low-moderate-income persons .
Program # 21-18 was funded $40,500 to provide technical
assistance and training to micro-enterprise and startup
businesses. To date program participants have been unable to
12
secure sufficient funds to establish or expand a business . See
the GPR for more specific details of these programs .
A separate project was provided a loan of $75,000 to establish a
for-profit business within its non-profit corporation. After
completing a business plan the non-profit experienced financial
and capacity problems . The funds were designated to be
recaptured and used for future economic development projects .
See project number 21-21 for further information.
The County continues to work with the subrecipients to make the
programs more viable.
• IMPROVE THE PUBLIC WORKS INFRASTRUCTURE, INCLUDING STORM
DRAINAGE AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN LOWER INCOME AREAS.
See discussion under long term goals
• DEVELOP NEIGHBORHOOD FACILITIES TO SERVE LOWER INCOME AREAS
CDBG funds in the amount of $19,725 from the OPEN category were
provided to replace the roof and refurbish the gym floor of the
Boys and Girls Club located in a residential area of Martinez
that qualifies as an area of benefit.
Funds in the amount of $10,000 were provided for improvements to
a facility that houses an integrated family service center in Bay
Point (area of benefit project # 21-40)
Funds in the -amount of $45,000 were also provided for operating
expenses to Project number 21-76 Neighborhood House of North
Richmond. This facility serves as a site for senior programs,
the North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council, and several other
neighborhood oriented programs . The community of North Richmond
is a redevelopment area in unincorporated West County
• PROVIDE HOUSING COUNSELING AND INFORMATION SERVICES AND
FURTHER FAIR HOUSING
To complement the fair housing programs CDBG funds were also
granted to three projects to provide housing counseling and
advocacy. The primary purpose of the programs are to assist and
prevent persons and families from becoming homeless. The
programs provide landlord tenant counseling, financial support
from other funding sources, and legal representation when
appropriate. Programs are accessible to all residents of the
Urban County.
Total funding for the programs is $47,500 (project #21-57, 21-69,
and 21-75) .
13
i
House- low Ethnicity Am Asian/ Female
holds income white Black Indian/ Hispanic Pac.Isld Head
Assisted Alaskan Household
1269 1083 713 378 13 127 38 627
• REMOVE ARCHITECTURAL BARRIERS TO THE HANDICAPPED AND
INCREASE OPPORTUNITIES FOR DISABLED PERSONS TO PARTICIPATE
IN SOCIETY.
CDBG funds were provided to the cities of San Pablo and Orinda to
construct curb ramps and pathways respectively, for access by
disabled and seniors (project # 21-35 and 21-42) .
• PROVIDE APPROPRIATE PUBLIC SERVICES TO ASSIST LOWER INCOME
PERSONS AND AGENCIES TO MEET CLIENT NEEDS.
All activities listed below were funded under the public service
category. Annual funds allocated under public service activities
are limited to a 15% statutory cap.
Seniors
Funds in the amount of $15,000 were provided for rehabilitation
of a facility that houses an Alzheimer Center in Central County
(project #21-33)
Five social service programs have been funded in the amount of
$47,500 to address needs associated with seniors . Programs
provide assistance in health, legal, and supportive services for
seniors (project # 21-46, 21-49, 21-54, and 21-64) .
Persons low Ethnicity Am Asian/ Female
Assisted income white Black Indian/ Hispanic Pac.Isld . Head
Alaskan Household
817 749 645 90 36 46
Two other programs described under housing programs provide
housing related services to seniors (project # 21-53 and 21-55)
Youth
Funds in the amount of $105,00d were allocated for a delinquency
diversion project located in Central County and alternative
housing for runaways . Project number 21-45 works cooperatively
with the county juvenile probation department (project #21-45 and
21-71) .
Funds in the amount of $10,000 were allocated to project number
21-74 midnight basketball . This program targets youth age 17 to
14
25 in the East County area and provides recreation as an
alternative to gang or other high risk activities . The average
age of participants is 18 years.
In addition a total of $56,000 was allocated to five programs
that provide recreational/educational programs in central and
west county (project numbers 21-50, 21-60, 21-68,21-73, and 21-
83, )
Disabled
Funds in the amount of $40,000 was allocated to two programs to
assist disabled persons maintain their independence (project
numbers 21-58, 21-85) .
AIDS/HIV
Funds in the amount of $60,000 were provided to assist persons
with AIDS through all phases of the disease including Hospice
Care (project numbers 21-61, 21-72,,- and 21-82) .
Immigrants
Funds in the amount of $76,500 were provided for programs that
served immigrant or non-english speaking populations. Services
included information and referral, housing and employment
assistance, and assimilation. Programs were offered throughout
the Urban County (project numbers 21-51, 21-52, 21-67, 21-70, and
21-84) .
Other
Three programs 21-79 and 21,80 Contra Costa Food Bank and 21-56
Retired and Senior Volunteer Program, are programs that provide
service indirectly to low-income persons . Food bank programs
provide food and prepared meals to a number of organizations
within the Urban County that provide direct services . The
volunteer program recruits and matches volunteers to
organizations in the Urban County that provide direct services.
Two other programs 21-77 Crisis and Suicide Intervention and 21-
48 Conflict Resolution Panels provide both direct and indirect
services to low-and moderate-income persons in the Urban County.
Conclusion
Based on the activity/financial summary, 86 percent of total
expenditures benefited low-and moderate income persons. The
County will continue to evaluate and refine the goals, objectives
and strategies outlined in the Consolidated Plan.
15
ATTACHMENT E
Information Requested for Checklist Question 4b.
As of 1994, there was sufficient space in the West County Justice
Center dedicated to patrol and investigative services to comply
with the County' s performance standard for sheriff services to
the year 2000 . However, a revised inventory of sheriff
facilities has identified a current deficit of 158 square feet .
This deficit will grow to 4 , 718 square feet by the year 2001 if
projected population growth occurs .
Pursuant to a request by the Contra Costa Transportation
Authority, the Board of Supervisors re-examined the growth
management standard for sheriff facilities to determine if it
remains an appropriate measure for the services provided by the
Sheriff . Since 1991, the Sheriff has expanded facilities by 65
percent, or more than 200, 000 square feet . However, due to the
General Plan' s narrow definition of patrol and investigation
facilities, much of this space could not be counted toward
meeting the growth management standard. Furthermore, the Sheriff
indicated that the growth management standard did not include
certain support facilities essential to patrol and investigation
activities . Board members were also concerned about the absence
of a long-term master plan to guide the expansion of the
facilities needed for patrol and investigation.
On April 1, 1997, the Board of Supervisors agreed to modify the
growth management standard for sheriff facilities to include
support facilities such as dispatch, within the definition of
patrol and investigation. This revised definition, combined with
the proposed five-year capital program for sheriff facilities, is
sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the growth management
standard during the next five years . County staff will schedule
hearings on the revised definition for patrol and investigation
activities and will incorporate the Board' s recommendations into
the next scheduled consolidated amendment to the General Plan.
i
ATTACHMENT F
Information Requested for Checklist Ouestion 5b.
LIST OF REPORTING INTERSECTIONS AND LOS RESULTS
1995 LOS
Central County AM PM
1 . Solano/Imhoff/Arnold Industrial Way A A
2 . Solano Avenue/Olivera/Marsh Drive A A
3 . Oak Road/Las Juntas Way A A
4 . Oak Road/Jones A A
5 . Oak Road/BART Station Entrance A A
6 . Oak Road/Wayne Drive A A
7 . Buskirk Avenue/Wayne Drive A A
8 . Newell Avenue/Olympic Boulevard N.A. N.A.
9 . Tice Valley Boulevard/Olympic Boulevard N.A. N.A.
Southwest County
10 . Blackhawk Road/Blackhawk Plaza A A
11 . Blackhawk Road/Silver Maple A A
East County
12 . Port Chicago Highway/Riverside A A
13 . Cypress Road/Sellers Ave . (see footnote) A A
West County
14 . Willow Avenue/Hawthorne Drive A A
15 . Parker Avenue/4th Street A A
16 . Parker Avenue/2nd Street A A
17 . Pomona Avenue/2nd Street A A
NOTES :
Intersections 8 and 9 were not monitored due to construction
activity.
Intersection 13 added pursuant to TPAC' s comments on an earlier
checklist .
file:LOS95.tl