Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MINUTES - 05202008 - D.2
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/ L-- Contra REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Costa FROM: JOHN CULLEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR "• ' DENNIS BARRY, AICP, INTERIM DIRECTOR �a' -z "' CountyCONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: May 20, 2008 SUBJECT: Joint Public Hearing Regarding the Sixth Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area. SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: If no written objections are received, as the Board of Supervisors ADOPT Resolution certifying the Negative Declaration, and ADOPT an Ordinance approving the Sixth Amendment to the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan. If no written objections are received, as the Governing Board of the Redevelopment Agency, ADOPT Resolution certifying the Negative Declaration, and ADOPT Resolution approving the Amended Five-Year Implementation Plan. If written objections are received, no action can be taken at this meeting. Consideration of the Board of Supervisors and Agency Resolutions and Ordinance will occur at a later scheduled meeting and the Board of Supervisors will also consider findings in response to the written objections. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: R"YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ❑ RECO E ATION OF OARD COMMITT ['APPROVE ❑ OTHER r SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BO ON GJA U4 ARPR iG B pc�-001tnME1QDEB ❑ THER VOTE Of�IoIRER I1%0RS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/AGENCY ON THE DATE SHOWN. AYES: _ NOES:ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTESTED Contact: James Kennedy JOHN CULLEN, LERK OF THE BOARD OF (925) 335-1255 SUPERVISORS/AGENCY SECRETARY orig: Redevelopment Agency cc: CAG By: eputy County Counsel Community Development Redevelopment Agency Via Redevelopment: • Goldfarb& Lipman • RSG C:\Documents and Settings\plam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK62\BP Board RDA Order 5 20 08 draftl.doc FINANCIAL IMPACT: The Report on the Redevelopment Plan amendment has identified the potential effects of revenue diversion to the County General Fund and to County controlled funds. Currently the County General Fund and most County controlled agencies do not receive a pass thru payment. The Contra Costa Consolidated Fire Protection District does currently receive a 100% pass-thru, which would be retained with this Sixth Amendment. Staff has recommended that the Board of Supervisors elect to receive the statutory pass-through allowed by California Redevelopment Law. The Sixth Amendment permits the Agency / County to affirmatively continue to address the significant economic and physical blight that act as a drain on County Programs and resources. BACKGROUND: The Bay Point Redevelopment Project ("Project Area") is located in the unincorporated area of east Contra Costa County, State of California. Neighboring cities include Pittsburg and Concord. The Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") is comprised of an existing residential area of approximately 23,000 people, and a light/heavy industrial empioyment area, a waterfront area, and an area for transit-oriented development near a BART Station. The area presents a significant opportunity for transit — oriented development. Requirements for adopting, amending, and implementation redevelopment projects are established in the California Community Redevelopment Law ("CRL"), which is part of the Health and Safety Code. Report to Board of Supervisors Section 33352 of the CRL provides that when the Agency submits a Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan Amendment") to the Board of Supervisors for the joint public hearing required by the CRL, the Agency must also submit a report on the Plan Amendment, entitled the Report to Board of Supervisors ("Report"). The purpose of this Report is to provide in one report all information, documentation and evidence regarding the Plan Amendment to assist the Board of Supervisors in consideration of the proposed Plan Amendment and in making various findings and determinations that are required to adopt the Plan Amendment. An Executive Summary of the report has also been prepared and is incorporated herein as Attachment A. This Report has been prepared in accordance with all the requirements of Section 33352 of the CRL and includes the reasons for the adoption of the Plan Amendment; a description of proposed projects and programs and how these projects and programs will improve or alleviate blighting conditions existing in the Project Area; an implementation plan describing specific projects and programs that will alleviate or improve blighting conditions; an explanation of why the elimination of blight cannot be accomplished through private enterprise acting alone or through other financing alternative other than tax increment financing; the method of financing and economic feasibility of the Plan Amendment; the statement of conformation to the County's General Plan; the Environmental Determination; and a summary of consultations with affected taxing agencies. Redevelopment Plan Amendment The Plan Amendment has been prepared pursuant to Section 33000, et. seq. of the CRL, the California Constitution, and all applicable laws and ordinances. It does not present a specific plan for the redevelopment, rehabilitation and revitalization of the Project Area. Instead, it establishes a process and framework for implementation and the alleviation/elimination of blighting conditions in the Project Area over a long period of time. In general, the Plan Amendment is proposing the following amendments: (1) Increase the limit on the amount of bonds secured by a pledge of tax increment from the Project Area that may be outstanding at one time from $60 million to $220 million; (2) Increase the limit on the total amount of tax increment that the Agency may receive over the term of the Redevelopment Plan from $116 million to $689 million; Environmental Review A Negative Declaration was posted for the proposed plan amendment on February 14, 2008. The public review period ended on March 17, 2008. No comments were received. On April 22, C:\Documents and Settings\plam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK62\BP Board RDA Order 5 20 08 draftl.doc 2008, the County Planning Commission voted to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that it.. 1) Find the Negative Declaration adequate for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 2) Find that the proposed plan Amendment conforms to the General Plan (CRL Section 33346, 33354.6(a), and 33453; and Government Code Section 65402) The Planning Commission Resolution 13-2008 is included as Attachment B. Joint Public Hearing The joint public hearing is intended to provide a forum for the receipt of public comment on the Plan Amendment. If written objections are not received prior to or during the joint public hearing, the public hearing may be closed, and the Board of Supervisors may approve the Resolution certifying the Negative Declaration, and adopt the ordinance approving the Sixth Amendment to the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan, and the Agency may adopt the Resolutions certifying the Negative Declaration and approve the Amended Five-Year Implementation Plan. If any written objections to the Redevelopment Plan are received, the public testimony portion of the joint public hearing may be closed. Section 33364 of the CRL requires that the Plan Amendment may only be adopted by the Board of Supervisors after consideration of written objections, and the adoption of written findings in response to written objections. Written objections may be delivered at any time prior to the May 20, 2008 joint public hearing of the Board of Supervisors and the Agency. The Agency staff must then prepare written responses to written objections as required by the CRL, which will be presented at a subsequent Board of Supervisors meeting, entered into the record and adopted by Board of Supervisors Resolution. Resolutions The attached Board of Supervisors Resolution would make findings and approvals required by the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") in connection with the Negative Declaration Prepared for the Adoption of the Sixth Amendment to the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan. The attached Agency Resolutions would make findings and approvals required by CEQA in connection with the Negative Declaration Prepared for the Adoption of the Sixth Amendment to the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan, and approve an Amended Five-Year Implementation Plan. Ordinance The attached ordinance is a mechanism by which the Board of Supervisors would adopt the Sixth Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan. It makes certain findings regarding the conditions and needs for the Sixth Amendment to the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan. C:\Documents and Settings\plam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK62\BP Board RDA Order 5 20 08 draftl.doc I ADDENDUM D.3 May 20, 2008 Six Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan, Bay Point Written objections to the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project area were received from Norman and Dorothy Siegfried, and from Mr. John C. Stoneking. Redevelopment law requires that resolution making findings be presented for consideration before a final decision is made. Chair Glover opened the hearing. There were no requests to speak. Chair Glover closed the public hearing. Jim Kennedy said the item may return at the next meeting on the consent calendar. By unanimous vote, with all Supervisors present, the Board CLOSED the joint hearing of the Board of Supervisors and the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency to consider a Sixth Amendment to the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan to raise caps on the amount of tax increment the Agency may receive, and the amount of bonded indebtedness that may be outstanding; and DEFERRED action to June 3, 2008 to receive staff findings in regard to written objections received. EXHIBIT A DRAFT SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE "WEST PITTSBURG" REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA) Adopted May 20, 2008 Ordinance No. 2008-19 I. INTRODUCTION The Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa has adopted the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan by Ordinance No. 87-102, adopted on December 29, 1987, as amended by Ordinance No. 94-64, adopted on December 6, 1994, as amended by Ordinance No. 99-05, adopted on February 23, 1999, as further amended by Ordinance No. 99-54, adopted on October 19, 1999, as further amended by Ordinance No. 2006-33, adopted on July 18, 2006, as further amended by Ordinance No.2007-25, adopted on June 5, 2007 (the "Plan"). The Plan establishes a redevelopment project area (the "Project Area"). The Project Area is shown on the boundary map attached hereto as Exhibit A and described in the attached Exhibit B. The Plan contains limits on (1) the amount of bonds secured by a pledge of tax increment from the Project Area that may be outstanding at one time; and (2) the total amount of tax increment that the Redevelopment Agency of the County of Contra Costa(the "Agency") may receive over the term of the Plan. This Amendment will increase the amount of bonded indebtedness that may be outstanding at one time, and will increase the limit on the total amount of tax increment that the Agency may receive over the term of the Plan. II. MODIFICATIONS TO PLAN Part VII.C, page 31, paragraphs numbered 2 and 3, of the Plan are deleted and replaced with the following language: "2) No more than $689 million of tax increments may be divided and allocated to the Agency without further amendment of this Plan. 3) No more than $220 million in bonded indebtedness to be repaid in whole or in part from tax increments may be outstanding at any one time without further amendment of this Plan." III. NON-SEVERABILITY If any provision, section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause or phrase of this Amendment is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder of the provisions shall continue in full force and effect. 320\24\508144.2 1 IV. EFFECT OF AMENDMENT All provisions of the Plan not specifically amended or repealed in this Amendment shall continue in full force and effect. 320\24\.508144.2 2 EXHIBIT A BOUNDARIES OF PROJECT AREA 320\24\508144.2 A-1 EXHIBIT B LEGAL DESCRIPTION 320\24\508144.2 B-1 ATTACHMENT A Executive Summary - Bay Point Redevelopment Plan Amendment C:\Documents and Settings\plam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK62\BP Board RDA Order 5 20 08 draftl.doc Executive Summary Bay Point Redevelopment Plan Amendment The Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") has initiated a redevelopment plan amendment process to amend the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan"). The proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan ("2008 Bay Point Amendment") would accomplish the following: 1. Increase the total amount of tax increment revenues the Agency may receive in Bay Point from $116 million to $689 million; and 2. Increase the amount of bonds that can be outstanding at any one time from $60 million to $220 million. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment will enable the Agency to more effectively implement redevelopment projects and activities eliminating blighting conditions within the Project Area. The proposed amendment does not increase the territory of the Project Area, or alter the Redevelopment Plan's eminent domain and property acquisition provisions. By receiving additional tax increment revenue and increasing the bonding capacity the Agency will be able to substantially enhance its' ability to reinvest funds in Bay Point, enhance the job base by revitalizing commercial and industrial areas, and increasing, improving, and preserving the supply of affordable housing. All redevelopment activities will be subject to future review and approval by the Agency, and/or Board of Supervisors. The Agency has also established the Bay Point Project Area Committee to work with it in establishing priorities, and developing projects and programs Plan Amendment Process: A Report to the Board of Supervisors ("Report") is one of several documents the Agency is required to prepare during the amendment process. The Report is intended to provide the decision makers with comprehensive information concerning the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. The Agency Report contains all of the elements required by law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq). Reasons for Amending the Redevelopment Plan: Since its 1987 adoption of the Redevelopment Plan the Agency has made progress in revitalizing the Bay Point. The Agency has made progress in eliminating blight throughout the Project Area by actively pursuing revitalization opportunities and assisting in redevelopment activities such as: • North Broadway Infrastructure Program; • Bella Monte Apartments/Nantucket Cove homes; • Elaine Null Apartments; • Willow Pass Road improvement program • Bailey Road/Willow Pass Road Banner Program • BART Station land assemblage for Transit-Oriented Development (TOD); and • Community Group Funding Program Unfortunately, blighting conditions still remain within Bay Point and the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment is necessary to continue the Agency's efforts in eliminating physical and economic blight and attracting private investment to the community. The benefits of the 2008 Bay Point Amendment would affect the immediate and long-range economic viability of the entire Bay Point community. If implemented, the 2008 Bay Point Amendment would provide the needed resources to the Agency to ensure that community revitalization and improvement goals are fully realized. Redevelopment activities are subject to future review and approval by the Board, of Supervisors. The Agency uses an annual budgeting process that includes local community input to determine goals and priorities, as well as the projects and activities to be funded. C:\Documents and Settings\plam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK62\BP Board RDA Order 5 20 08 draftl.doc Proposed Projects and How Blight will be Addressed: The Agency has identified a number of projects which would aid current revitalization efforts, and in particular, eliminate deficiencies in the existing infrastructure systems. Through these public investments the Agency hopes to further stimulate private sector investment in Bay Point. These projects include, but are not limited to, the following: Public Infrastructure and Facility Improvements • Neighborhood Infrastructure Upgrades • Port Chicago Highway/Pacifica Intersection Improvements • East Willow Pass Road Improvements • Willow Pass Road (Bailey - Clearland) • BART Area redevelopment and infrastructure enhancements, including Bailey Road/Orbisonia Heights • Pacifica Avenue Extension Infrastructure • Railroad Overcrossing To Waterfront • Waterfront Improvements • Park and recreation improvements • Alves Lane Extension Infrastructure • Pacifica Avenue Frontage Improvements • Clearland Avenue Assemblage/Infrastructure • Hertz Property Infrastructure • Bike Lanes • Delta De Anza Trail Community Improvement Programs Projects in the Community Improvement Program, such as, additional code enforcement support, a garbage remediation program, and a community group funding program for projects such as graffiti removal and vacant lot/yard cleanup, and the closure of trail gaps are all anticipated to indirectly reduce crime. Low-/Moderate-Affordable Housing Programs The Agency is required to set aside no less than twenty (20) percent of its annual revenue for the creation/preservation of affordable housing. These funds are to be used to increase, improve and preserve the supply of affordable housing in the community. Administration and Operations Revenues are needed to ensure that a sufficient level of staff support and equipment is available to operate and maintain the Bay Point Program at an efficient level. C:\Documents and Settings\plam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK62\BP Board RDA Order 5 20 08 draftl.doc REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Exhibit A-1 z 3 L T_ D 1 N a 3 0 3 a o Z P2i Aaue© } M Q 0 Z D m m Q 3 Uj o Q 3 U /IMI-I "LO 1J W O Ix a F Pnlg o�JeW Ues Z W E a T O W C > o io W m a W ar T to Ix a a` a F J0 pOOMI)IJQ a. U U a Z 3v a O 0 0 a C a` a Z (D a Q J Z m RSG A14 C:\Documents and Settings\plam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK62\BP Board RDA Order 5 20 08 draftl.doc ATTACHMENT B County Planning Commission Resolution #13 -2008 C:\Documents and Settings\plam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK62\BP Board RDA Order 5 20 08 draftl.doc RESOLUTION NO. 13-2008 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the County of Contra Costa, State of California, recommending to the Board of Supervisors and the Redevelopment Agency of the County of Contra Costa adoption of California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Findings and adoption of the Sixth Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project (formerly known as the "West Pittsburg" Redevelopment Project), and making various findings in connection with such recommendations. The Contra Costa County Planning Commission RESOLVES THAT: The Redevelopment Agency of the County of Contra Costa (the "Agency") has submitted to the Contra Costa County Planning Commission (the 'Planning Commission") the proposed Sixth Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project (formerly known as the "West Pittsburg" Redevelopment Project) (the 'Plan Amendment"); and Part V of the Redevelopment Plan incorporates the General Plan land uses, land use standards, development criteria, goals and objectives into the Redevelopment Plan; and The effects on the environment caused by implementation of the Plan Amendment are covered by the Negative Declaration; and Sections 33346, 33354.6(a), and 33453 of the Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code, Section 33000 et se .) provides that the Planning Commission is to review the proposed Plan Amendment and make its report and recommendation thereon to the Agency and the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (the 'Board"), including a determination whether the Plan Amendment conforms to the General Plan of the Contra Costa County (the "General Plan"); and Section 65402 of the Government Code provides in part: "(a) If a general plan or part thereof has been adopted, no real property shall be acquired by dedication or otherwise for street, square, park or other public purposes, and no real property shall be disposed of, no street shall be vacated or abandoned, and no public building or structure shall be constructed or authorized, if the adopted general plan or part thereof applies thereto, until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition or disposition, such street vacation or abandonment, or such public building or structure have been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof...." "(c) A local agency shall not acquire real property for any of the purposes specified in paragraph (a) nor dispose of any real property, nor construct or authorize a public building or structure, in any county or city, if such county or city has adopted a general plan or part thereof and such general 320\24\546614.1 1 plan or part thereof is applicable thereto, until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition, disposition, or such public building or structure have been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency having jurisdiction, as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof...."; and The above required Planning Commission report and recommendation, including matters referred to in Health and Safety Code Sections 33346, 33354.6(a) and 33453 and Government Code Section 65402, are to be made to the Agency and the Board within thirty days of the Planning Commission's receipt of the Plan Amendment, for their consideration in acting on the adoption of the Plan Amendment; and The Planning Commission has reviewed the Contra Costa County General Plan, the proposed Plan Amendment, the Negative Declaration, and the staff report accompanying this Resolution pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, and the Report to the Board on the proposed Plan Amendment; and Part V. of the Redevelopment Plan incorporates the County's General Plan land uses and land use standards into the Redevelopment Plan, and the Plan Amendment would facilitate redevelopment of the Bay Point Redevelopment Project in a manner consistent with the General Plan. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that: (a) All required public notices have been given in connection with the actions set forth in this Resolution. (b) The proposed Negative Declaration is adequate for the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt same. (c) Pursuant to Sections 33346, 33354.6(a), and 33453 of the Community Redevelopment Law, the proposed Plan Amendment conforms to the General Plan. (d) Pursuant to Section 65402 of the Government Code, with respect to public activities which may be undertaken pursuant to the Plan Amendment, and that are referred to in Section 65402, such activities and undertakings conform to the General Plan. Section 2. Report and Recommendation. The Planning Commission recommends to the Board of Supervisors the approval and adoption of the Plan Amendment and in the event that prior to its adoption of the Plan Amendment, the Board desires to make any minor, technical, or clarifying changes to the Plan Amendment, the Planning Commission hereby finds and 320\24\546614.1 2 I determines that any such minor, technical, or clarifying changes need not be referred to it for further report and recommendation, and hereby waives its report and recommendation under Section 33455 of the Community Redevelopment Law concerning any such change; and Section 3. Transmittal. The Planning Commission's Secretary shall transmit a copy of this Resolution to the Agency and the Board for consideration as part of the Agency's Report to the Board pursuant to Section 33352 of the Community Redevelopment Law, and this Resolution shall be deemed the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission concerning the proposed Plan Amendment and contemplated public projects and activities thereunder, as required by applicable provisions of law. The instructions by the County Planning Commission to prepare this resolution were given by motion of the County Planning Commission on Tuesday, April 22, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Wong, Terrell, and Snyder NOES: Commissioner Murray ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioners Battaglia, Clark and Gaddis BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the County Planning Commission shall respectively sign and attest the certified copy of this resolution and deliver the same to the Board of Supervisors all in accordance with the Planning Laws of the State of California. Michael Murray, Chair County Planning Commission County of Contra Costa State of California ATTEST: Dennis M. Barry, Secretary County Planning Commission County of Contra Costa State of California 320\24\546614.1 3 ATTACHMENT C Board and Agency Resolutions Certifying the Negative Declaration C:\Documents and Settings\plam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK62\BP Board RDA Order 5 20 08 draftl.doc THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on May 20, 2008,by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Resolution No.: 2008/337 SUBJECT: A Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County Making Findings and Approvals Required by the California Environmental Quality Act in Connection with the Negative Declaration Prepared for the Adoption of the Sixth Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area (formerly known as the "West Pittsburg" Redevelopment Project). The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors RESOLVES THAT: The County of Contra Costa (the "Board"), serving as "lead agency" under the California Environmental Quality Act and the applicable state and local implementing guidelines ("CEQA"), has prepared a negative declaration (the "Negative Declaration") that has evaluated the proposed Sixth Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area(the "Plan Amendment"); The Redevelopment Agency of the Contra Costa County(the "Agency") has served as a "responsible agency" under CEQA in connection with processing and consideration of the Negative Declaration. The Negative Declaration, a copy of which is on file with the Clerk of the Board and Agency Secretary, has served as the CEQA documentation for consideration and approval of the Plan Amendment; The Board has reviewed the Negative Declaration and the proposed Plan Amendment; By staff report accompanying this Resolution and incorporated into this Resolution by this reference (the "Staff Report"), the Board has been provided with additional information upon which the findings and actions set forth in this Resolution are based, including any public comment received on the Negative Declaration. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board certifies its review and consideration of the Negative Declaration, and any public comments received thereon, in accordance with CEQA, and states its intention that the Negative Declaration serve as the environmental documentation for the Board's consideration of the Plan Amendment in compliance with CEQA. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board hereby finds and determines, based on the whole record before it (including the Negative Declaration, the initial study and any comments received) that there is no substantial evidence that the Plan Amendment will have a significant effect on the environment and that the Negative Declaration reflects the County's independent judgement and analysis. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board approves and adopts the Negative Declaration. 320\24\555847.1 1 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Clerk of the Board shall be the custodian of the record upon which the Board's findings and approvals herein are based; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Clerk of the Board is hereby authorized and directed to file a Notice of Determination in accordance with 14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Section 15075, evidencing the Board's use of the Negative Declaration in connection with its consideration of the Plan Amendment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall take immediate effect upon its adoption. 320\24\555847.1 2 THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on May 20, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Resolution No.: 2008/338 SUBJECT: Resolution of the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Making Findings and Approvals required by the California Environmental Quality Act in Connection with the Negative Declaration Prepared for the Adoption of the Sixth Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area (formerly known as the "West Pittsburg" Redevelopment Project) The Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency RESOLVES THAT: The County of Contra Costa(the "County"), serving as "lead agency" under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the applicable state and local implementing guidelines, has prepared a negative declaration (the "Negative Declaration") that has evaluated the Sixth Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area (the "Plan Amendment"); The Redevelopment Agency of the Contra Costa County(the "Agency ") has served as a "responsible agency" under CEQA in connection with the processing and consideration of the Negative Declaration; The Negative Declaration, a copy of which is on file with the Clerk of the Board and Agency Secretary, has served as the CEQA documentation for consideration and approval of the Plan Amendment, and for the Agency's subsequent actions to implement the Plan Amendment; The Agency has reviewed the Negative Declaration and the Proposed Plan Amendment; By staff report accompanying this Resolution and incorporated into this Resolution by this reference (the "Staff Report"), the Agency has been provided with additional information upon which the findings and actions set forth in this Resolution are based; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Agency certifies its review and consideration of the Negative Declaration, and any public comments received thereon, in accordance with CEQA. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Agency hereby finds and determines that the Negative Declaration adequately addresses the environmental issues pertaining to the Plan Amendment and property concludes that the Plan Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Agency approves and adopts the Negative Declaration. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Agency Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed to file a Notice of Determination in accordance with 14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Section 15075, evidencing the Agency's use of the Negative Declaration in connection with the Plan Amendment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall take immediate effect upon its adoption. 320\24\555857.1 1 it ATTACHMENT D Agency Resolution Approving the Amended Five-Year Implementation Plan C:\Documents and Settings\plam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK62\BP Board RDA Order 5 20 08 draftl.doc THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on May 20, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Resolution No.: 2008/339 SUBJECT: A Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency of Contra Costa County Approving an Amended Five-Year Implementation Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project (formerly known as the "West Pittsburg" Redevelopment Project) The Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency RESOLVES THAT: The Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of the County of Contra Costa has adopted a redevelopment plan for, and the Redevelopment Agency of the County of Contra Costa(the "Agency"), is implementing the redevelopment program for the Bay Point redevelopment project area (the "Project Area," formerly known as the "West Pittsburg" Redevelopment Project Area), all in conformance with the requirements of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.; the "CRL"); and On January 17, 2006, the Agency adopted the current five-year implementation plan for the Project Area covering the period from 2004/2005 through 2008/2009, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33490 (the "Current Implementation Plan"); and The Agency has now prepared and submitted for the Board's consideration an Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area (the "Plan Amendment"); and Health and Safety Code Section 33352(c) (as made applicable to the processing of the Plan Amendment by Health and Safety Code Sections 33354.6(a) and 33457.1) and Health and Safety Code 33451.5(c)(7) require that the Agency prepare an amendment to the Agency's implementation plan in connection with the processing and consideration of the Plan Amendment; and The Plan Amendment, if adopted by the Board, would provide additional financial resources to the Agency for the Project Area; and To comply with the requirements of Health and Safety Code Sections 33352(c), 33451.5 and 33490, the Agency has prepared an amendment to the implementation plan for the Project Area (the "Amended Implementation Plan"), which amends the Current Implementation Plan, and is intended to take effect if and when the Board adopts the Plan Amendment and the Plan Amendment becomes effective; and A copy of the Amended Implementation Plan is set forth as Section C and Appendix A of the Report to the Board for the 2008 Amendment to the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area, dated May 7, 2008, and is incorporated in this Resolution by this reference; and On May 13, 2008, the Agency conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the mid-term review of the Current Implementation Plan and the Amended Implementation Plan in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33490; and The Agency finds that the Amended Implementation Plan, with any modifications as considered and approved in connection with the public hearing, constitutes a statement of the 320\24\555956.1 1 Agency's goals and objectives for the Project Area, a summary of the specific programs and estimated expenditures proposed to be made by the Agency during the applicable five-year planning period, including programs contemplated as part of the Plan Amendment, and an explanation of how the goals and objectives, projects, and expenditures will eliminate blight within the Project Area and implement the affordable housing requirements of the CRL; and Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33490, approval of the Amended Implementation Plan does not constitute a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA"), and therefore no environmental documentation is required pursuant to CEQA. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Agency hereby approves and adopts the Amended Implementation Plan for the Project Area, and directs the Agency Secretary to maintain on file a copy of the Amended Implementation Plan in the form hereby approved by the Agency. The Amended Implementation Plan shall be come effective if and when the Board adopts the Plan Amendment and the Plan Amendment becomes effective in accordance with the CRL. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall take immediate effect upon its adoption. 320\24\555956.1 2 ATTACHMENT E Ordinance C:\Documents and Settings\plam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK62\BP Board RDA Order 5 20 08 draftl.doc Recording Requested by and When Recorded Return to: Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite 190 Martinez, CA 94553 Attn: Redevelopment Director NO RECORDING FEE PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27383 ORDINANCE NO. 2008-19 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LAW OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA The Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa, State of California (the "Board"), ordains as follows: SECTION I. Recitals and Background Information. Pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et sec.) (the "Redevelopment Law"), the Board adopted the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan by Ordinance No. 87-102, adopted on December 29, 1987, as amended by Ordinance No. 94-64, adopted on December 6, 1994, as amended by Ordinance No. 99-05, adopted on February 23, 1999, as further amended by Ordinance No. 99-54, adopted on October 19, 1999, as further amended by Ordinance No. 2006-33, adopted on July 18, 2006, as further amended by Ordinance No. 2007- 25, adopted on June 5, 2007 (the "Plan"). The Plan established the Bay Point redevelopment project area(formerly known as "West Pittsburg")(the "Project Area"), within the County of Contra Costa (the "County"). Pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California (the "Redevelopment Law"), the Redevelopment Agency of the County of Contra Costa (the "Agency"), has prepared and submitted to the Board for review and consideration of adoption a sixth amendment to the Plan (the "Plan Amendment") that would (1) increase the limit on the amount of bonds secured by a pledge of tax increment from the Project Area that may be outstanding at one time; and (2) increase the limit on the total amount of tax increment that the Agency may receive over the term of the Plan. A copy of the Plan Amendment is on file with the Clerk of the Board and is incorporated in this Ordinance by this reference. 320\24\556076.1 The Plan Amendment is necessary to provide the County, the Agency, and the community with additional financial resources to complete the program of redevelopment initiated under the Plan in order to remove remaining blighting conditions in the Project Area. The additional financial capacity will enable the Agency to promote the revitalization of the Project Area through stimulation of economic development activities; support the overall revitalization and improvement of the Project Area through a wide-range of redevelopment activities, including blight removal, building rehabilitation, public infrastructure improvement, economic development; and promote the development, rehabilitation, and preservation of affordable housing in and of benefit to the Project Area and its residents. The Project Area is situated in the County, and is more particularly described in Exhibit A and Exhibit B of the Plan Amendment. The boundaries of the Project Area are not modified by the Plan Amendment and remain the same as those established by the Plan. The Agency has made studies of the impact of the Plan Amendment on the physical condition of structures, environmental influences, land use, and social, economic, and cultural conditions in the Project Area, and has determined that the program of redevelopment to be continued and completed pursuant to the Plan Amendment will promote the proper redevelopment of the Project Area in accordance with the goals, objectives and policies of the County of Contra Costa's General Plan (the "General Plan"), the Plan, and the Redevelopment Law. By resolution of April 22, 2008, the Planning Commission of the County (the "Planning Commission"), which is the duly designated and acting official planning body of the County, has submitted to the Board and the Agency its report and recommendation (the "Planning Commission Report") regarding the Plan Amendment in which, among other matters, it recommends adoption of the Plan Amendment, and finds that the Plan Amendment conforms to the General Plan. The Bay Point Project Area Committee, appointed by the Agency to provide input on redevelopment matters in the Project Area, including the Plan Amendment, conducted a community meeting on the Plan Amendment on May 14, 2008, and has submitted its report and recommendation in favor of adoption of the Plan Amendment. The Agency has prepared and submitted and the Board has reviewed and considered a Report to the Board on the Plan Amendment dated May 7, 2008 (the "Report"), as may be supplemented by a Supplement to the Report to the Board on the Plan Amendment (the "Report Supplement" and, together with the Report, the "Plan Amendment Report") pursuant to Section 33352 of the Redevelopment Law, a copy of which is on file with the Clerk of the Board. The Plan Amendment Report is hereby incorporated in this Ordinance by this reference. On May 20, 2008, the Board and the Agency conducted a joint public hearing on the Plan Amendment and related documents, which was duly noticed in accordance with the requirements of the Redevelopment Law. The County and Agency staff have prepared and submitted to the Planning Commission and the Board for review a Negative Declaration which has served as the documentation for 320\24\556076.1 2 review of the environmental impacts of the proposed Plan Amendment. The Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended ("CEQA"), and the Official State Guidelines as amended for the implementation of CEQA. A copy of the Negative Declaration is on file with the Clerk of the Board. The Negative Declaration is hereby incorporated in this Ordinance by this reference. The Planning Commission by Resolution on April 22, 2008 found the Negative Declaration adequate for the purposes of CEQA, and recommended adoption. Prior to introduction of this Ordinance, by resolution dated May 20, 2008, the Board and the Agency approved and adopted the Negative Declaration for use in consideration of adoption of the Plan Amendment. Prior to introduction of this Ordinance, by resolution dated May 20, 2008 (the "Amended Implementation Plan Resolution"), the Agency adopted an amended five-year implementation plan for the Project Area (the "Amended Implementation Plan") in accordance with Sections 33451.5(c)(7) and 33490 of the Redevelopment Law. SECTION II. Findings and Determinations. In accordance with Sections 33354.6(b), 33367 and 33457.1 of the Redevelopment Law, and based upon the evidence contained in the Plan Amendment, the Planning Commission Report, the Plan Amendment Report, the Negative Declaration, the Amended Implementation Plan, and other documents prepared in the Plan Amendment adoption process and on evidence presented at the public hearings of the Board, the Agency, and the Planning Commission on the Plan Amendment and related documents (collectively, the 'Record"), it is hereby found and determined that: a. The above recitals and background information are true and correct. b. In connection with the initial adoption of the Plan in 1987 and based on information and analysis contained in the Report originally submitted with the Plan, the Board found and determined pursuant to Ordinance No. 87-102 that the Project Area was a blighted area, the redevelopment of which was necessary to effectuate the public purposes declared in, and the Project Area therefore qualified as an eligible area under, the Redevelopment Law. Significant blight remains in the Project Area at the time of adoption of the Plan Amendment, and such blight cannot be eliminated without the establishment of additional debt and the increase in the limitation on the number of dollars to be allocated to the Agency pursuant to the Plan Amendment. This finding is based on information and analysis set forth in the Record, with particular reference to Sections A, B, D, and E of the Plan Amendment Report, and as briefly summarized below. The Project Area continues to exhibit conditions of physical blight and economic blight recognized under current Redevelopment Law standards, as detailed in Section B of the Plan Amendment Report. The effects of the identified remaining blighting conditions are pervasive throughout the Project Area. As shown throughout Section B of the Plan Amendment Report, the Project Area suffers from buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy to persons to live or work such as deteriorated and dilapidated buildings and buildings with serious code violations. In addition, factors that prevent the viable use of buildings or lots are evident, such as defective and obsolete design. Economic blighting conditions such as depreciated or stagnant property values, a high 320\24\556076.1 3 business vacancy rate, and high crime rate, are equally prevalent in the Project Area. These characteristics inhibit the viability of individual affected lots and structures, as well as the economic vitality of the entire Project Area. The remaining significant blighting conditions found in the Project Area are not new,but the product of decades of social and economic struggle. The private sector has had ample opportunity to improve the area through parcel assembly or structural rehabilitation, but has not. The physical and economic conditions continue to deter private investment. Correspondingly, the projects identified in the Plan Amendment Report to eliminate remaining blighting conditions require millions of dollars of investment, and the County would not be able to apportion these resources to the Project Area without redevelopment. Section D of the Plan Amendment Report offers additional information and analysis about the historic and anticipated future inability of the private sector and government to eliminate the documented remaining blighting conditions without the continuing availability of redevelopment resources that can only be made possible through adoption and implementation of the proposed Plan Amendment. C. The time limitations and the limitations on the number of tax increment dollars to be allocated to the Agency that are contained in the Plan Amendment are reasonably related to the proposed projects to be implemented in the Project Area and to the ability of the Agency to eliminate blight within the Project Area. This finding is based on information and analysis set forth in the Record, with particular reference to Sections A, B, D, and E of the Plan Amendment Report. Section A of the Plan Amendment Report sets forth a series of additional redevelopment projects and activities (the "Redevelopment Projects") that are directly linked to the elimination of the identified remaining blighting conditions in the Project Area (as documented in Section B of the Plan Amendment Report). Because the Agency is about to reach the cap on receipt of tax increment revenue under the Plan, the proposed blight-eliminating Redevelopment Projects can not be undertaken without the proposed increase in the limits (or "caps") on tax increment receipts and outstanding bonded indebtedness under the Plan Amendment. As further detailed in Sections D and E of the Plan Amendment Report, the increased caps on receipt of tax increment and issuance of bonded indebtedness will generate sufficient additional revenue to enable the Agency to undertake a significant portion of the Redevelopment Projects. d. The Plan Amendment would redevelop the Project Area in conformity with the Redevelopment Law and would be in the interest of the public peace, health, safety, and welfare; and the implementation of the Plan Amendment would promote the public peace, health, safety and welfare of the County and would effectuate the purposes and policy of the Redevelopment Law. This finding is based on information and analysis set forth in the Record, with particular reference to Sections A, B, C, D, E, and M of the Plan Amendment Report. e. The Plan Amendment conforms to the General Plan including,but not limited to, the Housing Element of the General Plan. This finding is based on findings, information and analysis set forth in the Record, with particular reference to Sections H, and J of the Plan Amendment Report, and the Planning Agency Report. 320\24\556076.1 4 f. The adoption and implementation of the Plan Amendment is economically sound and feasible. This finding is based on information and analysis set forth in the Record, with particular reference to Section E of the Plan Amendment Report. g. The Agency has a feasible method or plan for the relocation of families and persons which may be displaced from the Project Area if the Plan Amendment may result in the temporary or permanent displacement of any occupants of housing facilities in the Project Area. This finding is based on information and analysis set forth in the Record, with particular reference to Sections F and M and Appendix B of the Plan Amendment Report. h. There are, or shall be provided, in the Project Area or in other areas not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means of the families and persons who may be displaced from the Project Area, decent, safe and sanitary dwellings equal in number to the number of, and available to, such displaced families and persons and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. Families and persons shall not be displaced prior to the adoption of a relocation plan pursuant to Sections 33411 and 33411.1 the Redevelopment Law. Dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate income shall not be removed or destroyed prior to the adoption of a replacement housing plan pursuant to Sections 33334.5, 33413, and 33413.5 of the Redevelopment Law. These findings are based on information and analysis set forth in the Record, with particular reference to Sections F, M and Appendix B of the Plan Amendment Report. i. Pursuant to Section 33367(e) of the Redevelopment Law, the Board is satisfied that permanent housing facilities will be available within three years from the time occupants of the Project Area, if any, are displaced and that pending the development of such facilities, there will be available to such displaced occupants adequate temporary housing facilities at rents comparable to those in the community at the time of their displacement. This finding is based on information and analysis set forth in the Record, with particular reference to Sections F, M and Appendix B of the Plan Amendment Report. J. The Project Area contains approximately 900 acres and 1,202 contiguous parcels. The Project Area does not contain any noncontiguous areas; therefore, the finding that all noncontiguous areas of the Project Area are blighted or necessary for effective redevelopment, and are not included in the Project Area for the purpose of obtaining tax increment revenues from the area pursuant to Health and Safety Section 33670, is not relevant. This finding is based on information and analysis set forth in the Record, with particular reference to Sections A and B of the Plan Amendment Report. k. The inclusion of any lands,buildings, or improvements which are not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare is necessary for the effective redevelopment of the Project Area of which they are a part; and these lands, buildings or improvements are not included for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenues from such area pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 without other substantial justification for their inclusion. This finding is based on information and analysis more fully set forth in Sections A and B of the Plan Amendment Report. 320\24\556076.1 5 1. In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the Plan Amendment hereby approved and adopted, certain official action must be taken by this Board with reference to, among other things, the establishment of new street patterns, the location of sewer and water mains, lighting and utility lines and other public facilities and other public action, and accordingly, this Board hereby: 1. pledges its cooperation in helping to implement the Plan Amendment; 2. requests the various officials, departments, boards, and agencies of the County having administrative responsibilities in the Project Area likewise to cooperate to such end and to exercise their respective functions and powers in a manner consistent with the Plan Amendment; 3. stands ready to consider and take appropriate action upon proposals and measures designed to effectuate the Plan Amendment; and 4. intends to undertake and complete any proceedings necessary to be implemented by the community under the provisions of the Plan Amendment. in. The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project Area could not reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone without the aid and assistance of the Agency. This finding is based on information and analysis set forth in the Record, with particular reference to Sections A, B, D, and E of the Plan Amendment Report. As detailed in Sections B and D of the Plan Amendment Report, private sector activity and investment in the Project Area has seriously lagged activity and investment elsewhere in the vicinity of the Project Area, and the documented needs for elimination of blight far surpass the reasonably foreseeable levels of private investment, leaving redevelopment as the only viable alternative to help fill the investment shortfall to overcome the documented remaining adverse physical and economic conditions in the Project Area. n. The Plan Amendment does not alter the Agency's power of eminent domain (condemnation) set forth in the Plan. On June 5, 2007 the Agency adopted Ordinance No. 2007- 25 which contained a description of the Agency's program for the acquisition of real property using eminent domain. The Agency at that time also recorded on all properties within the Project Area a new statement of institution containing a general description of the Plan's eminent domain provisions. o. The development of the public improvements set forth in the Plan Amendment are of benefit to the Project Area and to the immediate neighborhood in which the Project is located; no other reasonable means of financing such improvements are available to the community; and the payment of funds for the acquisition of land for and the cost of such improvements will assist in eliminating one or more blighting conditions in the Project Area or provide housing for low- or moderate-income persons, and is consistent with the Agency's Amended Implementation Plan adopted pursuant to the Amended Implementation Plan Resolution and Sections 33352(c), 33451.5(c)(7) and 33490 of the Redevelopment Law. Based on these findings, the Agency is 320\24\556076.1 6 authorized to pay all or a part of the value of the land for and the cost of the installation and construction of the public improvements set forth in the Plan Amendment, as permitted by Section 33445 of the Redevelopment Law. These findings are based on information and analysis more fully set forth in Sections A, B, C, D, and E of the Plan Amendment Report. P. The Project Area is predominantly urbanized as defined by subdivision (b) of Section 33320.1 of the Redevelopment Law. This finding was initially made in connection with adoption of Ordinance No. 87-102 adopting the Plan, based on information and analysis fully set forth in original Report that the Project Area was predominantly urbanized at the time of initial adoption of the Plan in 1987. This finding is further supported by the information and analysis fully set forth in Section B of the Plan Amendment Report documenting that the Project Area remains predominantly urbanized within the current Redevelopment Law definition. q. The implementation of the Plan Amendment will improve or alleviate the physical and economic conditions of blight in the Project Area, as described in the Plan Amendment Report. This finding is based on information and analysis set forth in the Record, with particular reference to Sections A, B, D and E of the Plan Amendment Report, and briefly summarized as follows. As detailed in Sections A and B of the Plan Amendment Report, significant blight remains in the Project Area that cannot be addressed without the additional financial and legal tools made possible by the Plan Amendment. For instance, as explained in Section E of the Plan Amendment Report, the increased cap on tax increment revenue made possible by the Plan Amendment will enable the funding of a significant portion of the Redevelopment Projects. In turn, the Redevelopment Projects are expressly designed to improve or alleviate the identified remaining physical and economic blight conditions in the manner described in Sections A, B, D and E. SECTION III. Overruling of Objections. All written and oral objections to the Plan Amendment are hereby overruled. SECTION IV. Approval of Plan Amendment. It is hereby found that the amendments to the Plan embodied in the Plan Amendment are necessary and desirable. The Plan, all amendments and restatements and all ordinances adopting or previously amending the Plan are hereby amended in accordance with the Plan Amendment. The Plan Amendment is hereby adopted and approved and the Plan, as amended by the Plan Amendment, is designated as the official redevelopment plan for the Project Area. The Plan Amendment, consisting of two pages and two exhibits, is incorporated in this Ordinance by reference and made a part of the Ordinance as if set out in full in the Ordinance. The Clerk of the Board of the County is hereby directed to file a copy of the Plan Amendment with the minutes of this meeting. The Agency is vested with the continuing responsibility to implement the Redevelopment Plan, as amended by the Plan Amendment. SECTION V. Severability. If any provision, section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or the Plan Amendment is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion or portions of the Ordinance or the Plan Amendment. 320\24\556076.1 7 SECTION VI. Recordation. The Executive Director of the Agency is hereby directed to record the Plan Amendment and related documents in compliance with the provisions of Sections 33373 and 33456 of the Redevelopment Law and Government Code Section 27295. SECTION VII. Publication; Effectiveness. This Ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published once in the Contra Costa Times, a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in Contra Costa County and circulated in Contra Costa County, within fifteen (15) days from and after its adoption. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED on May 20"', 2008, by the following vote: AYES: NOTES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Board Chair ATTEST: John Cullen Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By: Deputy 320\24\556076.1 8 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 i. ii ify^ 'n4tr Report to the Board of Supervisors for the Amended Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project May 7, 2008 O RSG INTELLIGENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP INC. T 714 541 4585 151\12\518085.2 309 WEST 4TH STREET F 714 541 1175 SANTA ANA.CALIFORNIA E INFO P'WEBRSGCOM 92701.4502 W EBRSG.COM TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Background.......................................................................................................................... iii The Plan Amendment..................................................................................................... iii PlanAmendment Process..............................................................................................iv Contentsof this Report.........................................................................................................vi SECTION A Reasonsfor the Amendment.......................................................................................................1 Reasons for Amending the Redevelopment Plan...................................................................1 Project Area Location ............................................................................................................2 Proposed Projects and How Blight Will Be Addressed...........................................................6 Public Improvement Programs.........................................................................................6 Community Improvement Programs..............................................................................13 Low- / Moderate- Affordable Housing Programs............................................................16 Administration and Operations.......................................................................................16 Summary.............................................................................................................................17 SECTION B Description of the Physical and Economic Conditions Existing in the Project Area....................18 Study Approach and Methodology.......................................................................................18 BlightingConditions.............................................................................................................19 Urbanization ..................................................................................................................19 PhysicalBlight...............................................................................................................19 EconomicBlight.............................................................................................................20 Physical Blighting Conditions in the Project Area...........................................................20 Economic Blighting Conditions in the Project Area.........................................................57 Summary of Physical and Economic Blighting Conditions ...................................................67 SECTION C Five-Year Implementation Plan.................................................................................................70 SECTION D Explanation of Why the Elimination of Blight In the Project Area Cannot Be Accomplished by Private Enterprise Acting Alone or Through Other Financing Alternatives Other Than Tax Increment Financing ..........................................71 Reasons for Continuing to Include Tax Increment Financing...............................................71 Relationship Between the Need to Amend the Financial Limits and the Cost of the Continuing Program of Redevelopment...............................................................................72 Why Other Governmental Funding Sources Are Inadequate To Eliminate Blight.................73 Why Private Enterprise Alone Cannot Eliminate Blight........................................................74 Reasons for Continued Use of Tax Increment.....................................................................76 SECTION E Proposed Method of Financing, Including the Economic Feasibility of the Amendment.............77 ProgramCosts ....................................................................................................................77 Tax Increment Revenues...............................................................................................78 Proposed Financing Method and Economic Feasibility..................................................79 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION F Methodof Relocation................................................................................................................86 SECTION G Analysis of the Preliminary Plan................................................................................................87 SECTION H Report of the Planning Commission..........................................................................................88 SECTION I Report & Recommendation of the Redevelopment Advisory Committee ..................................89 SECTION J Statement of Conformance with the General Plan.....................................................................91 SECTION K EnvironmentalDocumentation .................................................................................................92 SECTION L Report of the County Fiscal Officer...........................................................................................93 SECTION M NeighborhoodImpact Report....................................................................................................94 SECTION N Summary of Agency's Consultations with Affected Taxing Entities and Response to Said Entities' Concerns Regarding the Plan ................................................101 APPENDIX A Amended Five-Year Implementation Plan...............................................................................102 APPENDIX B Adopted Relocation Policies....................................................................................................103 APPENDIX C 1987 Analysis of Preliminary Plan & Original Preliminary Plan................................................104 APPENDIX D NegativeDeclaration...............................................................................................................105 APPENDIX E 1987 Neighborhood Impact Report.........................................................................................106 ■ INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND The Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") has initiated the redevelopment plan amendment process to amend the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan (formerly known as West Pittsburg Redevelopment Plan) ("Redevelopment Plan"). The Redevelopment Plan, adopted in accordance with California Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et. sea. ("CRL"), establishes the parameters for all redevelopment activities within the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area (formerly known as the West Pittsburg Redevelopment Project Area) ("Project Area"). The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ("Board") acts as the legislative body of the Agency and is responsible for implementing the Redevelopment Plan. The Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the Board on December 29, 1987, by Ordinance No. 87-102. The Redevelopment Plan was subsequently amended on December 6, 1994, by Ordinance No. 94-64 to bring various financial time limits into conformance with those required by State Law pursuant to AB 1290. On February 23, 1999, the Board adopted Ordinance No. 99-05 which extended the time limit to receive tax increment by an additional ten years. Ordinance No. 99-54 was subsequently adopted by the Board on October 19, 1999, to extend the time period during which the Agency may commence eminent domain proceedings. Subsequently, the Board adopted Ordinance No. 06-33 on July 18, 2006, which extended the effectiveness, receipt and collection time limits for an additional year and removed the debt establishment time limit. The Plan Amendment The proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan ("2008 Bay Point Amendment") will, if adopted by the Board, accomplish the following: 1. Increase the total dollar limit on the amount of tax increment revenues the Project Area may receive; and 2. Increase the limit on bonded indebtedness that can be outstanding at any one time. The proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment will enable the Agency to more effectively implement redevelopment projects and activities eliminating blighting conditions within the Project Area. The Redevelopment Plan's current cumulative tax increment cap is $116 million and the bonded indebtedness limit is $60 million. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment proposes to increase these caps to $689 and $220 million, respectively. Table i-1 summarizes the existing time and financial limitations of the Redevelopment Plan and Table i-2 summarizes the Redevelopment Plan limitations as proposed by the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. o RSG REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Table i-1 EXISTING REDEVELOPMENT PLAN LIMITATIONS Time Limitations Indebtedness Limit Eliminated Plan Effectiveness 12/29/2028 Debt Repayment 12/29/2038 Financial Limititations Bond Debt Limit $60,000,000 Cummulative Tax Inc. $116,000,000 Source:Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Table i-2 PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN LIMITATIONS Time Limitations Indebtedness Limit Eliminated Plan Effectiveness 12/29/2028 Debt Repayment 12/29/2038 Financial Limititations Bond Debt Limit $220,000,000 Cummulative Tax Inc. $689,000,000 Source:Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency,and Fraser&Associates Receipt of additional tax increment revenue and increased bonding capacity provides additional capital to implement blight eliminating projects. These projects include upgrading and improving public infrastructure, working toward the continued enhancement of property values, enabling economic revitalization of commercial and industrial enterprises, and increasing, improving, and preserving the Project Area's supply of affordable housing. All redevelopment activities will be subject to future review and approval by the Agency, Board, and/or other agencies, committees, and interested parties as appropriate or required by the CRL. Plan Amendment Process This Report to the Board of Supervisors ("Report") is one of several documents the CRL requires the Agency to prepare during the amendment process, and is intended to provide the decision makers with comprehensive information concerning the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment. Section 33354.6 (a) of the CRL sets forth that a redevelopment plan amendment which increases financing limits or adds significant additional capital improvement projects must be conducted under the "plan adoption process". Section 33354.6 (b) clarifies that increasing the limitation on the number of dollars allocated to an agency requires that amendment documents (e.g., the Preliminary Report, and this Report) must contain a description and identification of remaining blight in the project area. Furthermore, CRL Sections 33450 through 33458 permit the Agency to recommend amendments to existing redevelopment plans, subject to: 1) the preparation of documents by the Agency to substantiate the need for the amendment(s); 2) the convening of a joint public hearing of the Board and the O RSG iv REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Agency on the proposed amendment(s); and 3) consideration and adoption of an ordinance by the Board approving such amendment(s). This Agency Report contains all of the elements required by Section 33352 of the CRL, to the extent required by Section 33457.1 of the CRL. Other Key Documents The Agency has also prepared other key documents in connection with preparation of the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. On February 14, 2008 the Agency forwarded to all taxing entities the following: 1) Statement of Preparation of the 2008 Bay Point Amendment, 2) the 2008 Bay Point Plan Amendment, 3) the Preliminary Report (on CD), 4) the Notice of Public Review and Intent to adopt a proposed Negative Declaration, and 5) the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the 2008 Bay Point Amendment for review and consultation. The results of taxing agencies consultations are described in Section N of this Report. On March 24, 2008 the Agency sent to the Department of Finance and the Department of Housing and Community Development notice of a public hearing and a Report on Blight detailing the requirements set forth in CRL Section 33451.5. An associated Negative Declaration for the Amended Plan was circulated for public comment on February 14, 2008 in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. The comment period on the Negative Declaration closed on March 17, 2008. A Final Negative Declaration, including responses to all comments received, will be considered at the joint public hearing. Joint Public Hearing This Report, which has been prepared by the Agency pursuant to Section 33352 of the CRL, the Final Negative Declaration (incorporating responses to comments), and the final Amended Plan will be presented to the Agency and the Board at the joint public hearing, scheduled for May 20, 2008. All Bay Point Project Area property owners, residents, business owners, and affected taxing agencies will be sent notices of this public hearing by mail on or before April 15, 2008. In addition, public notices were published in local newspapers, all consistent with the requirements of the CRL. O RSG v REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT The contents of this Report are presented in fourteen sections, which generally correspond to the subdivisions presented in Section 33352 of the CRL. The sections are as follows: Section A. Reasons for the Amendment Section B. Description of the Physical and Economic Conditions Existing in the Project Area Section C. Five-Year Implementation Plan Section D. Explanation of Why the Elimination of Blight in the Project Area Cannot be Accomplished by Private Enterprise Acting Alone or Through Other Financing Alternatives Other Than Tax Increment Financing Section E. Proposed Method of Financing Including the Economic Feasibility of the Amendment Section F. Method of Relocation Section G. Analysis of the Preliminary Plan Section H. Report of the Planning Commission Section I. Report and Recommendation of the Redevelopment Advisory Committee Section J. Statement of Conformance to the General Plan Section K. Environmental Documentation Section L. Report of the County Fiscal Officer Section M. Neighborhood Impact Report Section N. Summary of the Agency's Consultations with Affected Taxing Entities and a Response to Said Entities' Concerns Regarding the Plan O RSG Vi SECTION A Reasons for the Amendment REASONS FOR AMENDING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Since its 1987 adoption, progress has been made in revitalizing the Project Area pursuant to Redevelopment Plan. The Agency has made progress in eliminating blight throughout the Project Area by actively pursuing revitalization opportunities and assisting in redevelopment activities as allowed by the CRL. Unfortunately, blighting conditions still remain within the Project Area and the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment is necessary to continue the Agency's efforts in eliminating physical and economic blight and attracting private investment to the Project Area. Section B of this Report presents the remaining blighting conditions prevalent within the Project Area. The proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment will enable the Agency to more effectively implement programs, capital improvements, planning activities, commercial and residential rehabilitation, and to increase the overall commercial viability of the properties within the Project Area. The purposes of the 2008 Bay Point Amendment are to: 1. Increase the total dollar limit on the amount of tax increment revenues the Project Area may receive; and 2. Increase the limit on bonded indebtedness that can be outstanding at any one time. Adoption of the 2008 Bay Point Amendment will enable the Agency to more comprehensively fulfill the goals and objectives of the existing Redevelopment Plan. More specifically, with additional financial capacity, through increasing the Agency's amount of total bonded indebtedness that can be outstanding at any one time, and the amount of tax increment revenues that the Agency can collect, the Agency will be better equipped to implement projects necessary to eradicate the remaining blight in the interest of the general welfare of the community. It is also anticipated that redevelopment activities coordinated by the Agency will provide additional employment opportunities and enhance the quality of life within the Project Area and surrounding community. The benefits of the 2008 Bay Point Amendment would affect the immediate and long-range economic viability of the entire Bay Point community. If implemented, the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment would provide the needed resources to the Agency to ensure that blight removal activities are fully realized within the Project Area. Redevelopment activities will be subject to future review and approval by the Board, and/or other appropriate agencies, committees, and/or other interested parties as appropriate or required by CRL. Since its inception, the Redevelopment Program has included plans to pay for needed improvements within the entire Project Area. The critical element revolves around the amount of dollars needed to fund the projects that will eliminate blighting conditions currently existing in the Project Area. The Agency has predicted a revenue shortfall of approximately $201.8 million to complete the needed projects to eliminate blight in the Project Area. Of this $201.8 million, $136.5 million would be funded by capital backed by tax increment revenue, O RSG A / 1 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area primarily through the issuance of tax allocation bonds. In general, arriving at a limitation figure requires taking the $136.5 million in capital costs needed for projects and recognizing that this principal amount needs to be increased at least three fold to account for principal and interest payments overtime. To this amount, additional revenue must be added to cover the following: housing set aside requirements (20% of the total gross increment received by the Project Area), existing bonded debt service, County Auditor-Controller administrative charges and tax sharing payments to the Project Area's taxing entities. By amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the Bond Debt Limit and Tax Increment Revenue Limit, the Agency hopes to continue redevelopment efforts in the Project Area. This newly available revenue and capital will fund programs and projects that will enhance the value of the area, bring much needed private investment into the community, and eliminate blighting conditions. Through public and private investment, the Agency plans to address physical and economic blight in the Project Area, which in turn brings investment, development, affordable housing and jobs into the area. PROJECT AREA LOCATION The Project Area consists of unincorporated territory located in eastern Contra Costa County, California, just 40 miles northeast of San Francisco and 62 miles southwest of Sacramento. Access to the Project Area is limited to the Highway 4 transportation corridor. The freeway separates the Project Area from the City of Pittsburg to the south and the Naval Weapons Station separates Bay Point from the City of Concord. The Project Area is a mix of approximately 80.7% residential, 4.7% commercial, and 10.9% industrial land uses and includes an underutilized waterfront totaling approximately 1,550 acres of land, containing 2,914 contiguous parcels. Exhibit A-1 illustrates the Project Area boundaries and Exhibit A- 2 illustrates the geographical location of the Project Area. Project Area demographics illustrate characteristics of the Project Area that reflect the Area's ongoing cycle of blight and poverty. The need for increasing the tax increment and bonded indebtedness limitations of the Redevelopment Plan are a direct result of the continued impairment of the Project Area. Demographics derived from ESRI Business Analyst indicate that the 2007 median household income within the Project Area is $46,797. The Project Area's median household income is 57% of the County's 2007 median household income of $81,812. Furthermore, only 57% of the residents in the Project Area are homeowners. This significantly lower household income indicates that the financial capacity of Project Area residents and property owners to maintain their properties is impacted. This claim is supported by the fact that 858 parcels, or 29%, suffer from deterioration and dilapidation caused by long-term neglect which reflects the lack of reinvestment by property owners. According to the Wall Street Journal - Real Estate Journal', home repair costs can easily exceed a home's purchase price, reporting that the cost of keeping a typical house up to current standards for a 30 year period is almost four times the purchase price. Nearly 19% of the Project Area households fall below the poverty line. As a comparison, only 7% the households countywide fall below the poverty level. Therefore, the Project Area has a significantly higher poverty rate than the county overall. With respect to CRL June Fletcher. Repair Costs Exceed a Home's Purchase Price.Wall Street Journal—Real Estate Journal. O RSG A / 2 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area affordability provisions, the Project Area consists of 86% low and moderate income families. Of the 86% low and moderate income families, 37%, 25%, and 24% are very low, low, and moderate income households, respective ly2. Furthermore, 34.9% of Project Area residents over the age of 24 have not attained a high school diploma. Of the 34.9%, 15.8% have less than a 9th grade education. The countywide percentage of residents without a high school diploma is only13%. The Agency's redevelopment efforts in the Project Area are not only constrained by the socio-economic conditions of its residents but it is significantly impacted by its high crime rate as well. In each of the preceding four years, spanning from 2003 to 2006, crime rates in Bay Point are among the highest of all unincorporated territories serviced by the Contra Costa County Sheriff. The reality of a high crime neighborhood is that businesses and other investors are often unwilling to locate their businesses or invest private dollars into high risk neighborhoods, which further exacerbate other blighting conditions. In a July 2007 presentation, management representatives of an apartment complex located along Willow Pass Road in the Project Area told the Bay Point Municipal Advisory Council that almost half of the tenants in the complex had moved out in the past year and that tenants primarily noted the surrounding area conditions and crimes occurring nearby as motives. The low level of educational attainment and limited financial resources of Project Area residents and property owners as well as high crime rates are all problems that reflect the need for continued financial assistance from additional tax increment dollars to successfully redevelop the Project Area. Very low-, low-, and moderate- income categories for 2007 are based on $37,700, $59,600, and $90,500, respectively, which is consistent with the Project Area's average household size of 3 persons. Very low-, low-, and moderate-income limits are defined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development as up to 50%, 80%and 120%of the area median income, respectively. O RSG A / 3 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Exhibit A- 1 z < a s 0 a a a F ti �a,�ee Q O z O m Q a w o Q 3 U /QMH oftoiy0 la U w F- pA g oU"eVW UeS z LU O J w U O m w m a 0 m M LU T 2 a ,I{] �OOMI�IIQ d < < tp z O a 6ti o- a Z p� a m J z O PSG A / 4 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Exhibit A-2 Ile e I . v _ an m ` i Z� a m a s ° 10 U y Z k Z O a � A V 2° c = G !Qa d C G U+ R C W° LL U° _fv�n w m EOX t, �•`` � 7C .S y E C � Y _ O Qc FwY � - W 'Z c Z2 -•m a m''•• rn h V Lw yy 46 0 29) j II y O RSG A / 5 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area PROPOSED PROJECTS AND HOW BIGHT WILL BE ADDRESSED As required by CRL Section 33352, the Report must include this list of projects that are being proposed by the Agency and how they will alleviate blighting conditions. Section 33354.6 also states that when an Agency proposes to increase the limitation on the number of dollars to be allocated to the redevelopment agency, it shall describe and identify the remaining blight within the project area, identify the portion, if any, that is no longer blighted, the projects that are required to be completed to eradicate the remaining blight and the relationship between the costs of those projects and the amount of increase in the limitation on the number of dollars to be allocated to the Agency. The Agency has identified a number of projects which would aid current revitalization efforts, and in particular, eliminate deficiencies in the existing infrastructure systems. The following exhibits identify projects necessary for redevelopment. The projects include a range of redevelopment activities, from infrastructure improvements to general economic development programs that will serve to improve he Project Area's ability to compete with other areas. The following narrative identifies and discusses potential public improvement and economic development projects the Agency may consider over time in its efforts to address blight and complete revitalization of the Project Area. Public Improvement Programs The Agency has identified a number of public improvement projects which would aid current revitalization efforts and eliminate deficiencies in the existing infrastructure systems in the Project Area. Paving, reconstruction, rehabilitation and widening of streets, widening of intersections, grade separations, and utility realignment are needed in the Project Area to improve traffic flow, provide better access for emergency vehicles, enhance accessibility, increase safety for pedestrians and motorists, and bring overall aesthetic improvements to the Bay Point community which may help improve surrounding property values and attract further investment from the private sector. Additionally, utilities such as phone lines, sewer lines, and storm drains that run along streets and required utility and street improvements are all necessary components of successful redevelopment. Furthermore, these infrastructure and utility improvements will encourage infill development of vacant lots and the redevelopment of blighted properties by property owners. Such activity is expected to reduce blighting conditions in the Project Area by removing conditions that otherwise hinder the viable use of buildings or lots and improving property values. In some cases, infrastructure and utility improvements are expected to stimulate private sector investment, lower vacancy rates, increase lease rates, cause an increase in the availability of necessary commercial facilities, and reduce conditions of dilapidation and deterioration. The Agency intends to maximize its investment by improving streets and utilities simultaneously wherever feasible. The Agency has identified street segments for these improvements. Public improvement projects that the Agency may implement are listed both below and in Table A-1. Through public investment in infrastructure system improvements and public capital projects, the Agency hopes to further stimulate private sector investment in the Project Area. The Agency has identified the following projects as Public Improvement Programs that will address the remaining blight in the Project Area: O RSG A / 6 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Neighborhood Infrastructure Upgrades Funding is needed to include construction of curb, gutter and sidewalks, drainage improvements, and improved lighting in the older neighborhoods in Bay Point. These improvements will address infrastructure deficiencies that hinder public safety, provide for adequate drainage and improve pedestrian safety ("walkability") in existing neighborhoods. Providing these improvements can stimulate property values in the community and will encourage private investment into the neighborhood through infill redevelopment of vacant lots and improvements to existing homes. Port Chicago Highway/Pacifica Intersection Improvements Projects would include upgrading an existing 3-way traffic signal to a 4-way signal and adding the proposed east extension of Pacifica Avenue. These improvements will provide safe and necessary access from the intersection at the entrance of the proposed Bay Harbor Commerce Center, a proposed business park in the community. Providing these improvements also adds value to Project Area properties and will encourage private investment in and around Port Chicago Highway and Pacifica Avenue intersection properties. East Willow Pass Road Improvements Funds are needed to widen Willow Pass Road, from the current 2-lane configuration to a 4- lane configuration, with landscaped median islands. Improvements along the corridor, where there are numerous vacant lots, vacant buildings, and substandard structures, will result in better vehicle and pedestrian circulation, increased property values, and overall aesthetics of this heavily traveled former highway. Providing these improvements adds value to the area and will encourage private redevelopment and economic development. Bart Specific Plan Implementation - Development Zone 2 This project includes the Orbisonia Heights Transit Oriented Development Project. Additional funding is needed in order to include the completion of land assemblage, completing upgrades to infrastructure, and to participate in a public/private partnership in order to develop the site. The project would eliminate blight by assembling properties, relocating residents, and redeveloping a neighborhood of existing single-family homes, several of which are uninhabitable, and numerous vacant lots into a higher density transit oriented development near the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station. Bart Specific Plan Implementation - Development Zone 3 Funding is needed to engage in land assemblage (if necessary), make upgrades to infrastructure in the area and participate in public/private partnership to develop several sites (Canal/Mims, Far Hills MHP, Clearland/Willow Pass Road) within Development Zone 3 of the Specific Plan. These projects would eliminate blight by redeveloping vacant and underutilized areas into higher density residential uses, mixed uses, or neighborhood retail (as identified in the Specific Plan) Pacifica Avenue Extension/Bay Harbor Industrial Area Infrastructure These projects would include needed funding to participate in construction of the Pacifica Avenue Extension eastward to the proposed intersection with the Alves Lane Northern Q RSG A / 7 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area extension road. These infrastructure improvements would enable the development of a large vacant property designated for industrial uses, which would result in improved property values and economic development opportunities, including increased employment opportunities to the area. Pacifica Avenue Area Drainage This project includes participation in the construction of a series of drainage improvements in the industrial area east of Port Chicago Highway and along the Pacifica Avenue Extension. These infrastructure improvements would enable the development of a large vacant property designated for industrial uses, as well as remove drainage deficiencies adjacent to an existing, dilapidated shopping center, resulting in improved property values and economic development opportunities to the area. Railroad Overcrossing To Waterfront Funding is needed in order to complete a grade-separated crossing from the Pacifica Avenue Extension and Alves Lane Extension to the waterfront area, north of the rail road. A secondary crossing to the waterfront area is necessary to eliminate blighting conditions of the vacant/ closed marina, by providing access and new development and redevelopment opportunities including those described in the Waterfront Specific Plan. Waterfront Infrastructure These improvements would require additional funding in order to complete drainage, transportation, and water and sewer service necessary for redevelopment of the waterfront area. Infrastructure improvements in the waterfront area are necessary to eliminate the blighted conditions of the area which include a closed marina and an active marina in need of upgrades. Infrastructure improvements would assist in new development and redevelopment opportunities at the waterfront. Alves Lane Extension/Criterion Industrial Area Infrastructure These improvements, based upon additional funding becoming available, includes participation in the construction of the northern extension of Alves Lane, from Willow Pass Road to the Pacifica Avenue Extension and north to the railroad crossing over to the waterfront area. These infrastructure improvements would enable the development of a large vacant property designated for industrial uses as well as provide better circulation within the industrial zoned area and to the waterfront, resulting in improved property values and public safety, and economic development opportunities to the area. Alves Lane Drainage Funding is needed to include the participation of the Agency in the construction of a series of drainage improvements in the Criterion Industrial Area north of Willow Pass Road, along the Alves Lane extension. These infrastructure improvements would enable the development of a large vacant property designated for industrial uses resulting in improved property values and economic development opportunities to the area. O RSG A / 8 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Bailey Road/Orbisonia Heights This improvement is based upon additional funding becoming available and includes upgrades to the existing infrastructure system necessary for the future development of the Orbisonia Heights area. Improvements along the corridor, where there are numerous vacant lots, vacant buildings, and substandard structures, will result in better vehicle and pedestrian circulation, increased property values, and overall better aesthetics of this heavily traveled former highway. These improvements will positively affect surrounding property values and will encourage private redevelopment of blighted properties and other economic development activities. Bailey Road (North Of SR 4) These projects are related to the implementation of the Specific Plan and include upgrades to Bailey Road, north of State Route 4 to include wider sidewalks, mid-block crossings, bike lanes, landscaped medians, and street trees. Improvements along the corridor, where there are numerous vacant lots, vacant buildings, and substandard structures, will result in better vehicle and pedestrian access to the BART Station, increased property values, and overall better aesthetics of this heavily traveled road. These improvements will positively affect surrounding property values and will encourage private partnerships to assist in implementation of the Specific Plan. Willow Pass Road (Bailey - Clearland) Funding is need to implement portions of the Specific Plan and includes several upgrades to Willow Pass Road within the Neighborhood Commercial Mixed-Use Area, including wider sidewalks, mid-block crossings, bike lanes, landscaped medians, and street trees. Improvements along the corridor, where there are numerous vacant lots, vacant buildings, and substandard structures, will improve motorist and pedestrian safety, increase surrounding property values, and result in better vehicle and pedestrian circulation and improve aesthetics of this heavily traveled former highway. Providing these improvements may stimulate private redevelopment of blighted properties and other economic development activities. South Willow Pass Road Neighborhood Infrastructure This project includes making upgrades and constructing curb, gutter and sidewalks, drainage improvements, and improved lighting in the older neighborhood south of Willow Pass Road, between Loftus and Madison. These improvements will address the lack of adequate drainage and infrastructure deficiencies that hinder pedestrian safety ("walkability") in existing neighborhoods. Providing these improvements will improve nearby property values and provide stimulus for private investment and redevelopment of the neighborhood's blighted properties through infill development of vacant lots and improvements to existing homes. Pacifica Avenue Frontage Improvements These frontage improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalks) along Pacifica Avenue, between Port Chicago Avenue and Driftwood Drive, are dependent on additional funds becoming available. These improvements will address the need for adequate drainage and infrastructure deficiencies that create highly unsafe conditions for pedestrians in and around o RSG A / 9 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area an elementary school, middle school, the Shore Acres neighborhood, and the nearby shopping center. Additionally, these improvements may stimulate property values and private redevelopment of blighted properties. Clearland Avenue Assemblage/Infrastructure Funding is needed in order to include the Agency's participation in the development of three vacant parcels on the south side of Willow Pass Road, east of Clearland Avenue. Assemblage of the vacant and blighted properties would enable the community to fulfill a desired neighborhood retail development on the site, and would address the lack of commercial facilities in the project area. Hertz Property Infrastructure This project would include participation in the development of three vacant parcels on the south west corner of Willow Pass Road and Alberts Avenue. These improvements will address infrastructure deficiencies that hinder development of this prominent, vacant site. Bike Lanes This project includes the design and construction of bike lanes along Port of Chicago Highway between Pacifica Avenue and McAvoy Road/Harris Yacht Harbor area. These enhancements along Port of Chicago Highway will improve pedestrian safety, access to the McAvoy Harbor Road/Harris Yacht Harbor area and commercial center located at the north west corner of Port of Chicago Highway and Pacifica Avenue, and help relieve stagnant property values. Contra Costa Fire District Station 86 The Agency recently sponsored a General Plan amendment that will allow for the relocation of the fire station from its current location on Willow Pass Road to a location west of the existing site. Furthermore, funding is needed in order to assist with the relocation of the fire station. This project will improve public safety and reduce unsafe buildings conditions due to fire damage within the Project Area. Delta De Anza Trail This project includes the design of the trail gap closures and identification of potential funding sources. These improvements will help address stagnant property values and reduce crime in the community. The tables on the following pages, summarizes these projects and indicates the type of blight that each project will address. O RSG A / 10 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Table A-1 Public Improvement Programs How Pro'ect Will Address Blight Physical Blight Economic Blight Project Name Funding N o i Needed o 0 o a ZN N � mo N m� No E O '2a u @ O N U N U N -0 O -O m Q N N L U Y N O L N c N o c m o m m m 3 m o x � rn a Z) w w 2 m (n a 2 2 0 w _ 2@ Neighborhood Infrastruture Upgrades $6.750.000 Neighborhood infrastructure upgrades include construction of curb,gutter and X X sidewalks,drainage improvements,and improved li htin . Port Chicago Highway/Pacifica Ave Intersection Improvements $175.000 Port Chicago Highway(PCH)/Pacifica Intersection Improvements includes upgrade X X to an existing 3-way traffic signal to a 4-way signal. East Willow Pass Road Improvements $3,400,000 Includes widening of Willow Pass Road,from X X the current 2-lane configuration to a 4-lane configuration.with median islands. BART Specific Plan Implementation- $2.417,000 Development Zone 2 BART Specific Plan Implementation- X X X X Development Zone 2:includes completion of land assemblage,upgrades to infrastructure and participation in public/private partnership to develop the site. BART Specific Plan Implementation- $2,500,000 Development Zone 3 BART Specific Plan Implementation-Dev Zone 3:includes land assemblage(if X X X X necessary) and upgrades to infrastructure and participation in public/private partnership to develop several sites. Pacifica Avenue Extension/Bay Harbor Industrial Area Infrastructure $6,000,000 Infrastructure includes participation in construction of the Pacifica Avenue X X Extension eastward to the proposed intersection with the Alves Lane Northern extension road. Pacifica Avenue Drainage $3,750,000 Pacifica Avenue Area Drainage includes X X participation in construction of drainage improvements in the industrial area. Subtotal $24,992,000 o RSG A / 11 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Table A-1 Continued Public Improvement Programs How Pro'ect Will Address Blight Physical Blight Economic Blight Funding o° u Project Namem o IDM N c6 Needed o @ w 'n .N N 7 O y U > @ Nom- a 0 m 2 (0 '�" L Y N O L N c m c ID ° -° - 3: Ez rna� D 0 0 = c m co a 2 = 2 c W 2 m Rail Road Overcrossing to Waterfront $12,000,000 RR Overcrossing to Waterfront north of the X X rail road Waterfront Infrastructure $3,000.000 Waterfront Infrastructure includes improvements to drainage,transportation. X X water and sewer service necessary for redevelopment. Alves Lane Extension/Criterion Industrial $4.500.000 Area Infrastructure Alves Lane Extension/Criterion Industrial X X Area Infrastructure includes participation in construction of the northern extension of Alves Lane Alves Lane Drainage $600.000 Alves Lane Drainage includes participation in X X construction of drainage improvements. Bailey Road/Orbisonia Heights $2,000,000 Includes upgrades to infrastructure X X necessary for future development of Orbisonia Heights. Bailey Road(north of SR 4) $2,500,000 Implementation of the Specific Plan includes upgrades to Bailey Road,north of State X X Route 4 to include wider sidewalks,mid- block crossings,bike lanes,landscaped medians,and street trees. Willow Pass Road $4,000,000 Implementation of the Specific Plan includes upgrades to Willow Pass Road within the neighborhood Commercial mixed use area, X X including wider sidewalks,mid-block crossings,bike lanes, landscaped medians, and street trees. Subtotal $28,600,000 O PSG A / 12 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Table A-1 Continued Public Improvement Programs How Pro ect Will Address Blight Physical Blight Economic Blight Funding o6 Project Nameo o N 6 a Needed m . � N > N N s C m r tf O l6 N L) N ° o a a 7 > O �U N U o ° OD_ m m M. v E c°i ° U C _ _ 3 = 2 0 J ° W South Willow Pass Road Neighborhood $6,000,000 Infrastructure South Willow Pass Road Neighborhood Infrastructure upgrades include construction X X of curb,gutter and sidewalks,drainage improvements,and improved lighting in older nei hborhoods. Pacifica Avenue Frontage Improvements $1,250,000 X X Frontage improvements including improvements to curb,gutter and sidewalks. Clearland Avenue $2.500,000 Assemblage/Infrastructure Clearland Avenue Assemblage/Infrastructure X X X includes participation in the development of three vacant parcels. Hertz Property Infrastructure $2.000,000 Hertz Property Infrastructure includes X X participation in the development of three vacant parcels. Bike Lanes Undetermined Includes the design and construction of bike lanes along Port of Chicago Highway X between Pacifica Avenue and McAvoy Road/Harris Yacht Harbor area. Contra Costa Fire District Station 86 Undetermined Relocate the fire station from its current X X location on Willow Pass Road to a location west of the existing site. Delta De Anza Trail Undetermined Includes the design of the trail gap closures X X and identifying potential funding sources. Subtotal $11,750,000 Total $65,342,000 Community Improvement Programs Projects in the Community Improvement Program, as shown in Table A-2 on the following page, all directly address the appearance of the neighborhood, and indirectly the overall value of the properties located in the Project Area. This increased property value impacts not only the specific property, but has significant impact on surrounding properties as well. The Agency has established beautification programs to assist residents and businesses upgrade and maintain the appearance of buildings and property, a garbage remediation O RSG A / 13 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area program that helps address illegal dumping, code enforcement support that adds valuable human power to the strenuous task of daily code review in the Project Area, marketing pieces to assist with business attraction thus lowering vacancy rates and increasing lease rates, and other invaluable programs that address the improved appearance of the entire community. Furthermore, several of the projects in the Community Improvement Program are expected to have secondary reduction effects on the Bay Point community's high crime rates. For example, additional code enforcement support, a garbage remediation program, a community group funding program for projects such as graffiti removal and vacant lot/yard cleanup, and the closure of trail gaps are all anticipated to indirectly reduce crime. O RSG A / 14 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Table A-2 Community Improvement Programs How Project Will Address Blight Physical Blight Economic Blight A O N N N Project Name Funding o c o N 2 Needed 9dm d oo mOo (p N N E c 'O UO U@ 6 E m a ° c ° o C @ O m '30: EO x 36 0/ N 2 7 @ (n O. S 2 _2 J Abatement Attorney-County Counsel $300,000 A pro-rata share of County Counsel X X X X expenses for an attorney devoted solely to code enforcement activities. Dumpster Grants $100,000 Agency works with Building Inspection Department to identify properties which may benefit from the use of a dumpster. The X X X program is desinged as a revolving loan but may be a grant for those meeting income requirements. Community Group Funding Program $250,000 Funds to support neighborhood "beautification"projects,such as graffitti X X X removal and vacant lot/yard cleanup,initiated bv volunteer qroups in Bay Point. Property Holding Costs $500,000 Property maintenance costs incuding weed X X abatement.clean up,taxes,etc. Willow Pass Road Urban Design Improvement Banners $500,000 Funds for the installation and rotation of X X banners and other enhancements Marketing $500,000 Involves update and reproduction of marketing material for Bay Point and Agency X X participation in Economic Development forums Newsletter $100,000 Shared cost for the publication and mail-out X of a quarterly newsletter Enterprise Zone Administration $2,500,000 Funds to cover the costs associated with the application to California Department of Housing and Community Development for X X the Pittsburg/Bay Point Enterprise Zone Designation,in partnership with the City of Pittsbur . Pittsburg Pre-School Coordinating Council's Family Preservation and Undetermined Support Program X Involves the provision of necessary office space in the North Broadway area for operations of this program. Total $4,750,000 O RSG A / 15 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Low- / Moderate- Affordable Housing Programs The Agency is required to set aside no less than twenty (20) percent of gross tax increment revenue generated by the Project Area for the creation of affordable housing. These funds are to be used to increase, improve and preserve the supply of affordable housing in the community. Table A-3 summarizes the Agency's ongoing efforts to provide affordable housing in the Project Area. Table A-3 Low-Mod Housing Programs How Pro'ect Will Address Blight Physical Blight Economic Blight U W N N Project Name Funding o c m N Needed a o m > fO N C T O N :U > «O CL-C N E C N N > N O w N U O N 'O 01 Q M t Y O O L N N m c o 0 m m m 2 J Low-Mod Housing Program S50.130.000 Funds will be used for preserving and increasing the Project Area's supply of affordable units. Activities may include,but X X X X are not limited to,site acquisition,developer subsidies for constructing affordable units,in- fill housing,rehabilitation of existing housing for moderate income households,and 1purchasing of affordability covenants. Total $50,130,000 Administration and Operations In addition to the programs and projects listed, the Agency must make allocations in yearly budgets for administrative costs, equipment and related expenses. These costs are outlined in Table A-4 below and are essential to ensure that a sufficient level of staff support and equipment is available to operate and maintain the Project Area at an efficient level. Table A-4 Administrative and Operational Costs How Pro'ect Will Address Blight Physical Blight Economic Blight FundingCZ o° Project Name Needed a ° co U t 2] V N C y Co l0 N > ] N O N N > O E (>6 N O w N N O N `m �o E rn a L c m c U C m o m m m 3 co E X L5 2 3 C W N a 2 2 0 � Administration $16,305,000 A full complement of staff and equipment is required to Funding covers salaries,services,supplies, manage Project Area redevelopment programs and and equipment costs to implement programs projects designed to eliminate and/or eleviate blighting and projects in the Project Area conditions. Total $16,305,000 O RSG A / 16 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area SUMMARY Approval of the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment increasing the limit on bonded indebtedness and the tax increment collection would provide the Agency with the necessary funds to implement the aforementioned programs and projects designed to address the remaining physical and economic blighting conditions in the Project Area. Without this additional revenue, the Agency's ability to work towards the removal of remaining blight would be seriously hindered. The Project Area continues to suffer from significant blight, and exhibits numerous signs of infrastructure deficiencies. The lack of infrastructure causes a reduction in utilization of the Project Area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden to the community. The projects enumerated previously in this section would significantly improve conditions within the Project Area by addressing physical and economic blight. These projects address blight by providing adequate infrastructure such as streets and public facilities, as well as fund other critical economic development initiatives and affordable housing. Landscape and median improvements, as well as the redevelopment of the Waterfront Specific Plan Area in conjunction with future redevelopment efforts will improve the visual environment and the economic viability of the entire community. The blighting conditions indentified in Section B cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise, governmental action, or both, without redevelopment action and proper funding. Implementing the identified projects will allow the Agency to abate the blighting conditions affecting the Project Area. This investment by the Agency will signal to the private development community and the public at large the Agency's confidence in the area and provide a catalyst for private investment and reinvestment. O RSG A / 17 SECTION 8 Description of the Physical & Economic Conditions Existing in the Project Area STUDY APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY Field investigations as well as several other data sources were utilized to quantify the physical and economic blighting conditions in the Project Area. An important evidentiary source for evaluating the existence and prevalence of blighting conditions in the Project Area was the field survey conducted by Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. ("RSG")'. RSG's approach to the field survey involved an initial site visit to the Project Area from August 6-8, 2007. At that time, the RSG survey team identified locations within the Project Area where blighting conditions appeared to remain substantial and prevalent and then on September 18-20, 2007, RSG conducted a parcel-by-parcel survey from the public right-of-way ("2007 Field Survey"). Based upon initial reconnaissance, RSG prepared and refined the survey instrument so that each parcel within the Project Area had its own survey sheet and was identified by county assessor's parcel numbers using county parcel maps. The survey sheets include physical and economic blighting conditions as prescribed by CRL Section 33031(a), and economic blighting conditions listed in CRL Section 33031(b), which are amenable to a visual survey. The survey forms contain consistent, educated assessments regarding the condition of parcels in the Project Area and the results represent a nominal assessment of whether a condition is "present" or "not present". RSG acknowledges that different degrees of deterioration or deficiencies are present in each parcel and the RSG survey team, at a minimum, cites a condition as "present" when any reasonable person, if shown the condition, could see the damage. During the 2007 Field Survey both physical and economic indicators of blight were observed in the Project Area including, deterioration and dilapidation, structural obsolescence, buildings of substandard and defective design, incompatible adjacent land uses, lack of parking, inadequate lot sizes, possibly abandoned buildings, and a lack of necessary commercial facilities. Representative photographs were taken throughout the Project Area to depict the conditions identified during the survey. 3 The 2007 Field Survey was completed by Matt McCleary, Brian Moncrief, Zachary Mikelson, Tara Howard, and Felise Acosta. Felise Acosta, Principal at RSG, and Tara Howard, Associate, were the lead surveyor's and supervised Mr. McCleary, Mr. Moncrief, and Mr. Mikelson. Ms.Acosta is a principal in the firm and has served as the Project Manager for clients, throughout the State, requiring services in redevelopment, housing, economic development, finance activities and developer/public sector coordination. Ms. Acosta specializes in redevelopment project area formation and implementation and has over 30 years of experience in this field. She has directed the creation or amendment of over 30 project areas including the cities of Buena Park, Burbank, Carson, Firebaugh, Fontana, Palm Desert, Port Hueneme, San Bernardino, and the unincorporated Montalvin Manor neighborhood in Contra Costa County. Ms. Howard has worked on project area adoption or amendment projects as well as feasibility studies in communities such as Camarillo, Fallbrook, Laguna Niguel, National City, and the Victor Valley. O RSG B / 18 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area BLIGHTING CONDITIONS Sections 33030 through 33039 of CRL describe the conditions that constitute blight in a redevelopment project area. A blighted area is one that necessitates the creation of a redevelopment project area, because the combination of conditions in an area constitute a burden on the community, and cannot be alleviated by private enterprise, governmental action, or both. Section 33030 of CRL defines a blighted area as one that contains the following: An area that is predominantly urbanized and is an area in which the combination of physical and economic blighting conditions is so prevalent and so substantial that it causes a reduction of, or lack of, proper utilization of the area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment. Urbanization To qualify for inclusion in a project area, the land must be "predominantly urbanized" as defined by CRL Section 33320.1(b). Pursuant to said section, an area is "predominantly urbanized" if no less than 80 percent of the land within the project area: ■ Has been or is developed for urban uses; or ■ Is an integral part of one or more areas developed for urban uses, which are surrounded or substantially surrounded by parcels, which have been or are developed for urban uses. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment does not propose to add new territory to the Project Area and the Project Area was found to be predominantly urbanized at the time of its adoption in 1987. The 1987 definition of a predominantly urbanized area required that no less than 80 percent of the privately owned property in the project area had been or was developed for urban uses, was characterized by the subdividing and sale of lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size for proper development or the laying out of lots in disregard of the contours and other topography or physical characteristics of the ground and surrounding conditions, or was an integral part of an area developed for urban uses. Current CRL requires that 80 percent or more of the land in a project area be either developed or previously developed for an urban use, or an integral part of one or more areas developed for urban uses that are surrounded or substantially surrounded by parcels that have been or are developed for urban uses. Current analysis indicates that 1,355 acres, or 84%, of the total 1,550 Project Area acres have been or are developed for urban uses. The Project Area met the "predominantly urbanized" requirement when the Project Area was adopted and continues to meet it under the current definition. Physical Blight Section 33031(a) of the CRL currently describes physical conditions that cause blight as follows: O RSG B / 19 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area 1. Buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work; examples of such conditions include: a. Serious Building Code violations b. Dilapidated and deteriorated buildings c. Buildings suffering from construction vulnerable to serious damage from seismic or geologic hazards d. Buildings suffering from faulty or inadequate water or sewer utilities 2. Conditions that prevent or substantially hinder the viable use or capacity of buildings or lots; examples of these conditions include: a. Lots/buildings suffering from substandard design b. Lots/buildings of inadequate size given present standards and market conditions 3. Adjacent or nearby uses that are incompatible with each other and which prevent the development of those parcels or other portions of redevelopment project areas. 4. The existence of subdivided lots that are in multiple ownership and whose physical development has been impaired by their irregular shapes and inadequate sizes, given present standards and market conditions. Economic Blight Section 33031(b) of the CRL describes the following economic conditions that cause blight: 1. Depreciated or stagnant property values or impaired investments. 2. Impaired property values due to hazardous wastes on property where the agency may be eligible to use its authority as specified in Section 33459. 3. Stagnant or declining market conditions; examples of this include: a. An abnormally high number of business vacancies, b. Abnormally low lease rates, c. Abnormally high number of abandoned buildings, and 4. A lack of necessary commercial facilities such as those normally found in neighborhoods including grocery stores, drug stores, and banks and other lending institutions. 5. Serious residential overcrowding that has resulted in significant public health or safety problems. As used here, overcrowding means exceeding the standard referenced in Article 5 (commencing with Section 32) of Chapter 1 of Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations. O RSG Bi2o REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area 6. An excess of bars, liquor stores, or adult-oriented businesses that has resulted in significant public health, safety, or welfare problems. 7. A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. Physical Blighting Conditions in the Project Area CRL Section 33031(a) describes the physical conditions that cause blight. These physical conditions are assessed in terms of the health and safety of persons and the economic viability of development in an area. In order to assess physical blight in the Project Area data from the 2007 Field Survey, MetroScan parcel data, building code enforcement, and other resources were collected and analyzed to determine what conditions may be adversely affecting the health and safety of persons in the Project Area, as well as the adverse economic conditions that result from physically deteriorating conditions. Generally, as economic returns from an area decline there is a corresponding lack of investment in physical upkeep of properties, further perpetuating physical blight. The Project Area is comprised of 2,914 parcels of which 1,112, or 38%, exhibit signs of one or more physically blighting characteristic such as incompatible adjacent land uses, structural obsolescence, defective design, and/or dilapidation and deterioration. Table B-1 summarizes the number of parcels exhibiting physical blighting conditions. BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Table B-1 BLIGHTED PARCEL SUMMARY Blighting Condition Total#of Parcels %of Total Deterioration & Dilapidation 858 29% Defective Design 518 18% Structural Obsolescence 2 Less than 1% Incompatible Adjacent Uses 6 Less than 1% Total Blighted Parcels/1 1,112 38% /1 Parcels may exhibit more than one blighting condition and as a result, Total Blighted Parcels will not equal the sum of all conditions or percent of tota 1. Source.Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. field survey of September 18-20, 2007, and County data The presence of these conditions reflect a lack of investment by property owners in maintaining their properties in good condition to assure the safety of persons who live and work in the Project Area. Physical blighting conditions propagate further decline of an area and deter economic development activities by private investors. The poor physical conditions of the Project Area place a burden on the community by reducing its ability to meet its goal of fostering vibrant neighborhoods. Exhibit B-1 illustrates the portions of Project Area where physically blighting conditions remain. Q RSG B / 21 N N O _ H` m c /N ° ISL W N W = �_ X (A w o o o0 c , O 1 LEI o a u Q) � In 1 ■1 � c mmN JJ C v) u o c Q > � DOIn u Q a9 �p o m0 ■' ' m 3 0 ° y i',1_q'�rr,� 3 W uy -w,6 v 11 �. '#IY './b _ u C)C)�in = am ar� . W W pm. J� U aILI o -j - C� -j J m'�Q �Y U ♦�"•i" N �' ♦! w A_. m >, I— 1, o 0 a fs W - � ' Q) O ami v a m Q Q a Cl H a4 poon���iaa ami a0 +' c ° Z L o o 0 U > a N a a` a` a � U c m M 0 v c CIO o m U c O REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Unsafe and Unhealthy Buildings for Persons to Live or Work Pursuant to CRL, buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work are represented by structures that exhibit serious dilapidation and deterioration by neglect, serious building code violations, construction that may be vulnerable to damage from seismic or geologic hazards, and faulty and/or inadequate water and sewer utilities. The following discussion substantiates the presence of these serious conditions which cause 29% of the structures within the Project Area to be unsafe and unhealthy for persons to live or work. Dilapidation and Deterioration Dilapidation and deterioration is a phenomenon that occurs when aging structures do not recur routine maintenance and repairs, and upkeep deferred for extended periods of time. By nature, older structures are more difficult to rehabilitate and as structures age rehabilitation becomes more expensive due to the need to bring buildings up to current building code. As stated in Stewart Brand's book, How Buildings Learn, What Happens After They're Built, a lack of maintenance results in buildings becoming unusable, with the threat of structural failure. Brand states that, "...due to deterioration and obsolescence, a building's capital value (and the rent it can charge) about halves by twenty years after construction. Most buildings you can expect to completely refurbish from eleven to twenty-five years after construction. The rule of thumb about abandonment is simple...if repairs will cost half of the value of the building, don't bother." It is no surprise, therefore, that a structure's condition is often directly correlated with its age. According to county assessor's data obtained through the Metroscan database, there are 3,063 structures located within the Project Area that reported the year built, and 60% of those permitted structures were built prior to 1960 and 79% were built before 1980, or more than 25 years ago. Table B-2 presents a summary of the structures within the Project Area by decade built. It should be noted that unpermitted structures and illegal additions are not accounted for by the county assessor's office and therefore, are not included among the table results. O RSG B / 23 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Table B-2 STRUCTURES BY AGE Decade No. of Structures % of Total Structures <1899 1 0.03% 1900 7 0.23% 1910 11 0.36% 1920 79 2.58% 1930 227 7.41% 1940 562 18.35% 1950 945 30.85% 1960 503 16.42% 1970 100 3.26% 1980 395 12.90% 1990 87 2.84% 2000 146 4.77% Total 3,063 100% Source.Metroscan,a product of First American Real Estate Solutions, L.P. In addition to nearly 80% of the structures located within the Project Area having been built prior to 1980, a prevalence of seriously dilapidated and deteriorated buildings exists. Despite Agency efforts to curtail blight in the Project Area, 29% of the Project Area parcels show signs of serious dilapidation and deterioration resulting from long-term neglect. Among some of the more prevalent building conditions noted during the field survey which characterize a parcel as dilapidated and deteriorated include: deteriorated or damaged external building materials such as roofing, siding, rafters/framing, doors, windows, window frames, and overhangs; exposed wiring; and faulty weather protection. The following sample of photographs depicts typical conditions noted during the 2007 Field Survey. O RSG B / 24 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Photo 1 Photo 2 The property located along Hill Street, as shown by photo 1 and photo 2, displays a lack of investment by its owner which has resulted in serious dilapidation and deterioration of the structures on site. The conditions include damaged exterior building materials, broken doors and windows, faulty weather proofing, and exposed wiring. Visible trash and debris also make this structure a potential fire hazard and eyesore, potentially devaluing surrounding properties. In addition, the unsecured doors and broken windows of the apartment complex may indicate forced entry and possibly signal residential squatting. O RSG B / 25 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area County staff has indicated that unoccupied structures within the Project Area such as these are often used for illegal activities. r .s Photo 3 The external building materials of this Solano Ave property are so severely damaged that it presents serious health risks to inhabitants and negatively impacts the economic progress of surrounding properties. Roofing and overhang materials are buckling and in complete disrepair and the structures eaves are damaged and/or missing. A stucco column to support the roof and overhang is missing and has been replaced by a poorly constructed substitute made of substandard building materials which renders the structure unsound. Given the conditions visible from the public right-of-way it is conceivable that this structure also suffers from internal structural damage. O RSG B / 26 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area e Photo 4 This property located within the Project Area along Mountain View Avenue shows signs of impaired investment as evidenced by the dilapidation and deterioration of the single family residential unit. The structure's leaning column and damaged foundation make this dwelling unit unfit for human habitat. Faulty weather proofing materials and damaged/missing eaves are visible signs of an aging structure left exposed and vulnerable to external forces such as wind and rain and exposed wiring drooping down from the roof present a potential fire hazard. O RSG B / 27 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area NP � - hK rM"low PM Rd. Photo 5 The damaged eaves and lack of weather proofing materials of this commercial structure located along Willow Pass Road are a sign of this building's deteriorating external building materials. The lack of paint, which serves to protect structures from the elements, leaves this building exposed and vulnerable to rain and wind which can cause further deterioration and wood rot. The poor condition of this structure and lack of reinvestment by its owner may reflect marginal economic gains due to relatively low lease rates that the property owner can charge. O RSG Bila REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area 7 Lill:e Photo 6 This commercial property located along Willow Pass Road exemplifies the serious risks attributable to exposed utilities/wiring that are often observed within the Project Area. When electrical wiring is exposed and left unmethodically it presents potential health hazards due to direct contact and fire. The combination of exposed wiring and trash viewed in this photo further perpetuate fire risk and unsafe conditions. The damaged siding and stucco indicate a lack of reinvestment. O RSG B / 29 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Fes. l 1 ,. Photo 7 This Bayview Ave. property is in very poor condition and displays a complete lack of reinvestment by its owner which has resulted in serious dilapidation and deterioration. The residential unit suffers from exposed wiring, lack of paint, and damaged exterior building materials. Furthermore, the busted windows and unsecured front door indicate forced entry and possibly signal residential squatting which County staff indicates is a serious problem in the Project Area. According to County staff, unoccupied structures, such as this one, are oftentimes used for illegal activities such as drug use and prostitution.. O RSG B / 30 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area 44 1 y Photo 8 This boarded up, seemingly abandoned house, along Bailey Road suffers from damaged exterior building materials and foundation, deteriorated roofing materials, leaning roof supports, and missing eaves. Building elements show signs of sagging and disrepair and the property also lacks exterior improvements such as an adequate driveway and walkway to the front door. Not only does this structure pose healthy and safety concerns but it also detracts from the community's aesthetics which may impair surrounding property values. O RSG B / 31 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area � c r c =,s`, s r S Photo 9 This 256 acre waterfront property located easterly and adjacent to McAvoy Harbor is underutilized and generally in poor condition. Broken windows and the lack of manicured landscaping indicate a lack of reinvestment by property owners. Furthermore, building elements such as roofing materials, siding, and doorways are damaged or deteriorated and heavily oxidized. The condition of this property poses a physical threat to inhabitants and may also negatively impact the economic progress of surrounding properties. O RSG B / 32 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Y r � � r I wE W� # C AU1-A ; A 11 y1v i at I it- Photo t Photo 10 This structure located on South Broadway Avenue is seriously dilapidated as a result of long-term neglect. Roofing materials are deteriorated, doors are broken and windows boarded which are all signs of impaired investment and possible abandonment, and the property is in need of external improvements such as a driveway. Outdoor storage, high weeds and foliage that back up to the structure create a fire inducing environment. The messages left by the tenants of the property indicate that there may a problem with squatters inhabiting the unit. O RSG B / 33 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area 1 ' Photo 11 This structure located along Alves Lane suffers from dilapidation and deterioration as evidenced by the damaged exterior building materials, broken door, and heavy oxidation of the roofing and siding materials. Also, it appears that this property is being used to store a prefabricated home that sits on top of a large commercial trailer and may be an illegal structure. Either building is unsuitable and unsafe for inhabitants. This presents an unstable condition that could pose serious health and safety risks to persons of the Project Area and may potentially devalue surrounding property values. O RSG B / 34 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area •J Photo 12 This single family residence is located on Hill Street shows clear signs of impaired investment by the property owner such as peeling paint, and deteriorating exterior building and roofing materials. This structure is an eyesore in the community and may work to lower property values of the surrounding properties. O RSG B / 35 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area s „AR- Photo 13 This Bella Vista Ave. property is home to multiple homicides in recent years. Vacant properties, such as this residential unit, serve as a safe haven for illegal activities which creates excessive burden on the Project Area and surrounding community. The lack of reinvestment by property owners is apparent by the unkempt foliage, broken doors and windows, and damaged exterior building materials. This property poses a serious threat to the health and safety of Project Area residents and may impede the economic progress of the Project Area. 0 PSG B / 36 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Building Code Violations Pursuant to CRL Section 33031(a), buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work are conditions that may be caused by serious building code violations. Buildings and structures that do not meet basic uniform building requirements, or does not meet other local codes mandated to ensure human health and safety, pose a threat to the workers, patrons, and residents of an area. The following list exemplifies some of the types of serious code violations observed by County staff in the Project Area during the early months of 2007. It is important to note that building code violations are occurring throughout the Project Area and are not isolated to any particular part of the Project Area: ■ Buildings containing structural damage due to fire. Fire damaged structures may be cited if the property is not properly secured within 30 days or if the structure is not properly rehabilitated or demolished after a reasonable period of time. Structures left unrepaired after fire damage present serious health and safety risks. (Project Area examples include 1945 Willow Pass Road, 29 Bella Vista, 172 Ambrose Avenue) ■ Unpermitted industrial business operating from an unpermitted building. Unpermitted buildings that are not properly inspected for safety could cause personal injury to occupants and unapproved commercial/industrial operations may not be compatible with surrounding uses. (Project Area examples include 94 Bella Vista, 21 Loftus Road) ■ Illegal dumping in the Project Area, particularly on vacant properties and along the sides of roads, such as Port of Chicago Highway, creates unsanitary conditions and can be a potential fire hazard. (Project Area examples include 3333 Willow Pass Road, 183 Bella Vista) ■ Unscreened junkyard conditions located on residential and commercial properties. This is a violation of Section D of the Bay Point Planned-Unit Zoning District Program which states that any outdoor storage and maintenance area shall be screened from view from public streets. Such properties are an eyesore to the community and can have significant impacts on surrounding real estate values as well as present serious health risks due to potential fire hazards and unsanitary/toxic conditions. Further hazardous conditions or materials located in a residential setting is dangerous to neighborhood residents and poses an attractive nuisance to young persons. (Project Area examples include 196 North Bella Monte, 293 Driftwood Drive, 232 Madison Avenue) ■ Illegal residential garage and carport conversions used as additional living space. Garages and carports are not suitable living spaces and when converted without permit or proper inspection it is not possible to determine if structural integrity has been jeopardized by the nature or quality of work. A December 2007 fire that took the lives of three young girls who were occupying a converted garage for living space in Long Beach, California underscores the serious health and safety concerns associated with illegal garage conversions. The Chief of Long Beach Fire Department called the living conditions of the converted garage (there was no smoke detector) a recipe for tragedy. (Project Area examples include 33 Breaken Drive, 15 Intel, 110 Jefferson) O RSG B / 37 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area ■ Unpermitted building additions and improvements. Unpermitted improvements may potentially affect the structural integrity of the building, creating a dangerous environment in which to live or work. Without examining the actual improvement, it is not possible to determine the true effects of the improvement on the structure. (Project Area examples include 46 Bayview, 1 Whang Drive, 263 Enes Avenue) ■ Car repair and other types of businesses being run out of residential properties. Without proper permitting/inspections residential structures cannot be properly evaluated for suitability for industrial/commercial conversion nor for the business's compatibility with adjacent uses. In the example of a car repair business being operated from home, there are serious risks due to waste disposal and chemical runoff. (Project Area example includes 98 Mountain View Avenue) ■ Residential lots with raw sewage in the rear yards. This is an unsanitary condition that is a threat to human health and safety. (Project Area example includes 23 Fairview Avenue) These conditions not only create an unsafe and unhealthy environment for persons to live and work but they also cause a drain on County resources as most code enforcement cases require at least one, if not more, additional follow up visits to make sure the violation is not reoccurring. Table B-3 presents a summary of code violation data for the Project Area from January 2007 to August 2007. During that same time period the Building Inspection Department issued over 414 building and zoning code violations of which 278 or 70% are considered to be serious in nature. The following types of violations were considered to be serious: structural damage due to fire, properties exhibiting junkyard conditions, unsecured vacant structures, illegally occupied structures, hazardous electrical wiring, faulty weather proofing, unpermitted building improvements, illegal garage and carport conversions, unpermitted business operations (primarily occurred when industrial/commercial businesses are run out of residential properties), properties containing raw sewage, and illegal dumping. The Building Inspection Department is not only citing a significant number of properties for code violations every month within the Project Area, but a high percentage of those code violations are for serious conditions that pose a threat to the health and safety of workers, patrons, and residents of the Project Area. o RSG B / 38 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Table B-3 2007 BUILDING CODE VIOLATIONS/1 Code Violation Jan Feb March Aril May June JU/y August Total Building 15 17 17 17 15 25 27 29 162 Zoning 11 13 17 14 9 11 15 17 107 Other Departments/2 14 16 17 14 16 16 15 14 122 Posted/3 2 2 2 2 3 4 3 5 23 TOTAL 42 48 53 47 43 56 60 65 414 Serious Violations/4 35 38 36 32 27 34 36 40 278 /1 Due to a lack of action by property owners to bring their property into code compliance or because of reoccuring violations,a property may be recorded for the same violation in multiple months. Only data through August 2007 was available at the time of this report. /2 Cases that require other departments to review and approve(i.e.Public Works,Environmental Health,Community Development)or in probate. /3 Comprised of building,zoning,and other department violations that have received final notice to comply. /4 Reflects the number of building,zonning,and other department code violations considered to be serious in nature. Source:Contra Costa County Building Inspection Department According to the Chief of Property Conservation Division of the Building Inspection Department, who is responsible for overseeing code enforcement services, the types and quantity of building code violations cited in the Project Area during 2007 are consistent with previous years and should not be viewed as abnormally high. This fact alone documents that ongoing blight is present within the Project Area and additional financial resources are needed to address these conditions. The following photographs represent an example of suspected illegal residential garage conversions and junkyard conditions observed during the 2007 Field Survey: O RSG B / 39 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area .tom Photo 14 This home located along Anchor Drive illustrates a suspected illegal garage conversion as observed during the 2007 Field Survey. According to county assessor's parcel data the structure contains 255 sq ft of garage space. It appears, however, that the portion of the house at the end of the driveway is not being used for its intended purpose, a car garage, as evidenced by the replacement of a garage door with a closed wall made of fixed building materials. Since the field survey was conducted from the public right-of-way it is impossible to verify that this garage conversion is being used as additional living space. However, illegal garage conversions may potentially affect the structural integrity of the building, creating a dangerous living environment. Without examining the actual improvement, it is not possible to determine the true effects of the improvement on the structure. O RSG B / 40 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area a R Photo 15 According to County staff, illegal residential garage conversions are a widespread phenomenon throughout the Project Area. During an initial visit to the Project Area, County staff identified this property along Crivelo as a garage conversion that likely did not have proper permits. Illegal garage conversions may potentially affect the structural integrity of the building, creating a dangerous living environment. Furthermore, a large quantity of articles from the home that appeared to just be "thrown" out onto the front yard was a sign that the property had been illegally occupied by squatters. This photo was taken during the 2007 Field Survey after County resources had been used to clear the articles and debris. O RSG B / 41 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Photo 16 This residential property on Shore Road appears to have a converted carport for additional living space. Since the field survey was conducted from the public right-of-way it is impossible to verify that this garage conversion is being used as additional living space. However, illegal garage and carport conversions are not suitable living spaces and when converted without proper permits or inspection it is not possible to determine if structural integrity has been jeopardized by the nature or quality of work. Without examining the actual improvement, it is not possible to determine the true effects of the improvement on the structure. Illegal garage and carport conversions are prevalent throughout the Project Area and present considerable risk to inhabitants. O RSG B / 42 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Photo 17 This residential parcel along Hill Street has an excess of outdoor storage and debris simulating junkyard and disposal site conditions. These conditions can become a nuisance for neighboring property owners. Stored refuse may be a fire hazard from spontaneous or accidental combustion and may become habitats for rodents, mosquitoes, and pests. Junkyard-like conditions are unsightly and may interfere with public interests, the protection of the public health, safety and welfare, and the conservation of property values- hurting the economic viability of the community. no RSG B / 43 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area 1> t"r Photo 18 This property along Alves Lane contains outdoor storage and vehicles parked on the lawn simulating junkyard conditions. One car is without rear tires and supported by a jack which signals that car repairs and/or vehicle storage is taking place at this location. When cars are repaired and/or stored on permeable surfaces such as grass and dirt, concerns arise regarding potential soil and groundwater contamination from leaking automobile fluids and other chemicals. These conditions detract from the community's aesthetics and may impede real estate values of the surrounding properties. RSG B / 44 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Photo 19 This industrial property located along Port Chicago Highway shows signs of excess outdoor storage, trash, and possible production. This is a violation of Section D of the Bay Point Planned-Unit Zoning District Program which states that any outdoor storage and maintenance area shall be screened from view from public streets. This property is an eyesore to the community and can have significant impacts on surrounding real estate values as well as present serious health risks due to potential fire hazards and unsanitary/toxic conditions. Furthermore, sites exhibiting these types of conditions are oftentimes the result of substandard or defective design which causes business owners to move storage and production outdoors due to insufficient structural improvements for their operations. O RSG B / 45 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Photo 20 According to County staff, this old restaurant building was relocated to this property on McAvoy Road many years ago and has remained vacant and in complete disrepair. The property displays substandard design as evidenced by the explicitly dilapidated building which lacks a foundation. The building rests on blocks several feet above the ground and is dilapidated throughout with deteriorated siding, roofing, doors, windows, and a buckled roof. The building is unsuitable and unsafe for human use and presents a serious safety hazard to users of McAvoy Harbor. Q RSG B / 46 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area r J k f e + f Photo 21 This residential unit on Solano Avenue exhibits a poorly constructed building addition using exposed plywood as a permanent building material. Roofing materials appear to be of substandard materials and either damaged or unfinished which may provide inadequate protection from the elements. The building improvement appears to have low structural integrity and would appear to be an illegal building addition. Illegal additions, which do not receive proper inspection, are not suitable for cohabitation and present considerable health and safety risks to persons occupying the space. Furthermore, the unsightly addition and outdoor storage present a visual blemish that may negatively affect neighboring property values. O RSG B / 47 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Construction Vulnerable to Damage from Seismic or Geologic Hazards According to CRL Section 33031(a)(1), construction that is vulnerable to serious damage from seismic or geologic hazards is a physical condition causing buildings to be unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. In 1986, California adopted Senate Bill 547 requiring every jurisdiction in Seismic Zone 4 (includes all of Contra Costa County) to inventory its buildings constructed of unreinforced masonry by 1990, to adopt a loss reduction program, and to report progress to the Seismic Safety Commission. Among the County Building Inspection Department's inventory of unreinforced masonry buildings are a church and a commercial property located along Willow Pass Road in the Project Area. Structures lacking modern earthquake-resistant design, such as those mentioned along Willow Pass Road, present health and safety risks in the event of seismic activity. According to the Northern California Chapter of the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute ("EERI"), with unreinforced masonry, walls tend to disconnect from buildings and fall outward, sometimes causing the building to collapse during earthquakes. EERI further stated in their document, Unreinforced Masonry Building Fact Sheet, that, "URM [unreinforced masonry] failures have been responsible for deaths in California Earthquakes since at least 1868, and as recently as Loma Prieta in 1989 and San Simeon in 2003." Conditions Hindering the Viable Use of Buildings or Lots Pursuant to CRL Section 33031(a)(2), a building or lot's viable use may be hindered by buildings of substandard, defective, or obsolete design or construction given the present general plan, zoning, or other development standards. Typical characteristics of parcels and/or buildings suffering from substandard or defective design include: 1. excessive lot coverage/inadequate setbacks 2. a lack of parking 3. inadequate vehicular access 4. inadequate loading areas 5. buildings being used for purposes for which they were not originally constructed or intended 6. poor building or site layout 7. poorly constructed additions 8. substandard exterior building materials 9. outdoor storage or production 10.when substantial garbage/debris/stagnant water exist Many of these characteristics of substandard or defective design exist throughout the Project Area. Of the 2,914 parcels in the Project Area, 520 parcels, or 18%, exhibit one or more characteristic of parcels or buildings suffering from substandard, defective, or obsolete design as determined by the 2007 Field Survey. The most prevalent conditions preventing 0 RSG B / 48 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area or hindering the viable use or capacity of buildings or lots in the Project Area include; poorly constructed additions, substandard exterior building materials, outdoor storage or production, and parcels containing significant garbage and debris. The following photographs depict a sample of Project Area properties whose viable use is hindered based upon the aforementioned conditions. O RSG B / 49 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area E Y Ar - — x 111111111k. 2. a. 4* I Microsoft Virtual Earth Image 1 The retail center located at the northwest corner of Port Chicago Highway and Pacifica Avenue suffers from poor building layout and obsolete design. As evidenced by Microsoft Virtual Earth Image 1, ingress and egress to the commercial center's loading facilities are limited to a driveway along Port Chicago Highway and a driveway on Pacifica Avenue that leads to an adjacent private property. Based on evidence from the aerial image and Photograph 22 on the following page, it would appear that in order for commercial vehicles to access loading facilities they must either enter or exit the loading area by the adjacent multifamily residential property, creating unsafe conditions for residents and children. Microsoft Virtual Earth Image 1 shows a large commercial truck pulling a trailer stationed at the south end of the retail center's loading facilities during daylight hours. Given the size of the commercial vehicle and turning angles, it is unlikely that the driver would be able to maneuver the vehicle in a way that it could back into its current position without breaching the adjacent property line. Furthermore, Photograph 22, taken from the adjacent multifamily residential property during the 2007 Field Survey, shows that vehicular access is available through a large, opened gate further indicating that commercial vehicles are entering or exiting through the residential property. O RSG B / 50 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area t A& i M p Photo 22 The retail center's obsolete and defective design is further evidenced by the poorly constructed addition (Photograph 23) that appears to be used for loading purposes. Poorly constructed additions characterize outdated buildings that do not properly meet tenant needs. It is also noteworthy to point out that should the commercial center's improvements be recycled, the center would not be rebuilt to the same specifications for its current uses given today's development standards. According to the 2004 publication of Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers by the Urban Land Institute, the median gross leasable area for a market located in a neighborhood shopping center is 34,187 square feet. The Port of Chicago Highway and Pacifica Avenue market that currently operates in this neighborhood retail center occupies a building less than 15,000 square feet or less than '/2 the median size for this type of retail center- a clear indication of obsolete design. In addition to its poor layout and obsolete design, this retail center exhibits signs of deterioration and dilapidation resulting from long-term neglect including, faulty weather proofing, and damaged/deteriorated exterior building materials. o RSG B / 51 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area i i Photo 23 (Please see the preceding two pages for a description of this property) O RSG B / 52 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area I r , r 1 a Photo 24 This property along Ambrose Avenue contains multiple detached residential units without adequate on site parking facilities. The placement of vehicles inhibits ingress/egress to posterior units of the property which may present a safety hazard in the event of an emergency. This is an obsolete design that has affected the viable use of the structures and lot. According to development and use standards provided by the Bay Point Planned-Unit District Zoning Program, single-family residences with three bedrooms or less are required to include a minimum of a one-car garage and one driveway parking space per unit. These units do not conform to these current parking requirements, which is a clear indication of their outdated design. These units also display early signs of deterioration and dilapidation including exposed wiring and lightly damaged eaves/exterior building materials. O PSG B / 53 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Incompatible Adjacent or Nearby Land Uses Land uses are found to be incompatible when certain properties are not congruent with adjacent or nearby uses which prevent the economic development of those parcels or other portions of the project area and/or present potential health and safety hazards to neighboring parcels. The results of incompatible uses can include noise pollution, unsafe/ unhealthy conditions for neighboring residents, commercial/ industrial traffic through residential neighborhoods, and hindrance of the economically viable use of buildings and lots. Such properties may also exhibit signs of economic blight as various incompatible uses can also result in stagnant property values or impaired investment for adjacent properties. The Project Area contains 6 incidents where land uses are incompatible with nearby or adjacent uses. These results are derived from the 2007 Field Survey. The following discussion details a sample of the incompatible adjacent or nearby land uses in the Project Area. The bar previously shown in Photo 6 is incompatible with adjacent and nearby uses. Located along Willow Pass Road, the bar is easterly adjacent to a park and residential uses are nearby to the south. Multifamily residential units, a childcare center, and a church are also located in the vicinity on Willow Pass Road. According to information gathered from County staff and the community, the bar is a nuisance and continual burden on the community, due to high noise levels coming from the bar and outdoor patio, and excessive loitering that occurs outside the bar. This site has also been identified by the Contra Costa Sheriff's Office ("Sheriff") as having substantial law enforcement problems such as public intoxication, fights, weapons possessions, sales to minors, and knowingly allowing drug sales on the property. Such activity presents a serious threat to the health and safety of persons within the Project Area and is incompatible with the nearby park, childcare center, church, and residential uses. The following photograph displays a vacant residential property with operations that are incompatible for a residential zone and the subsequent image highlights incompatible residential and industrial uses in the Project Area. O RSG B / 54 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area i Photo 25 According to the Bay Point General Plan/Specific Plan Land Use Map contained within the Bay Point Planned-Unit District Zoning Program and county assessor's parcel data, this parcel located along Ambrose Ave is designated for single family residential use. During the 2007 Field Survey the parcel was observed being used for storage of this commercial vehicle. Storage of this commercial vehicle is not the proper use of this residentially zoned property. The parking of commercial vehicles in this residential zone is an incompatible use that poses traffic and safety hazards for the residents of the adjacent multifamily units and neighboring homes. O RSG B / 55 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area 40-1 Microsoft Virtual Earth Image 2 This aerial image of properties located along Port Chicago Highway near the McAvoy Harbor entrance shows two single family homes that have been built on a single parcel zoned for heavy/light industrial use, and surrounding light and heavy industrial uses. These properties are an instance of incompatible use observed in the Project Area during the 2007 Field Survey. Such properties may also exhibit signs of economic blight as various incompatible uses can also result in stagnant property values or impaired investments for adjacent properties. Q RSG B / 56 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Economic Blighting Conditions in the Project Area The previous discussion outlined the physical conditions of blight remaining within the Project Area. CRL Section 33031(b) describes the economic conditions that cause blight. In order to show that the Project Area remains blighted, it must also contain one or more of the economic conditions described in CRL Section 33031(b). These economic conditions are generally assessed in terms of depreciated property values, low lease rates, a lack of commercial facilities, residential overcrowding, an excess of bars and other adult-oriented businesses, and high crime rates. In order to assess economic blight in the Project Area, data from brokers, market studies, DataQuick, Metroscan parcel data, EnviroStar, the Sheriff, and other resources were collected and analyzed. The purpose of the analysis was to determine what conditions may be adversely affecting the health and safety of persons in the Project Area, as well as the economic viability of the Bay Point community. The following discussion substantiates the seriousness of several indicators of economic blight within the Project Area. Exhibit B-2 illustrates the portions of Project Area affected by economically blighting conditions. O RSG B / 57 IOC) LO O ~ N � 7 > m U C LU m (A W y.� IL o m = O ° a L U N 20 O n @ u C 2 C f0 Q O a Y � a 0� f0 f0C.- m O CLL Qv fo- U0 a w 1L � v � �� o = o a° E Df c f' 0 00. N N 0 uQ �w Ln 1.E 0 ° Q 0u-o a .O U ,C J L N T Z C N U U 3 N C u2 C) 0 ptf Calieg LLJ 0- a u W � Q CL 0 w _ LX J a m 3 � o J 3 J Q U_ f O � z w v f � Q a � Q) Q nai H -°- @a U c: °' > a W m o 0 0) = E m n v v m � T 2 � a E 30 < a a O 1Q poomipic] O� � N O a' N z -� O u � 'p 'p O a N w a� Z u 'A � } No z u � U c m co �o La >. v O m U cc O REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Depreciated or Stagnant Property Values According to CRL, depreciated or stagnant property values are conditions that cause economic blight. Property values depreciate or stagnate when blighting factors exist and impede economic progress. In general, residential property values are significantly lower in the Project Area when compared to surrounding communities and the county. As evidenced by Table B-4, home sales in 2006 averaged $303 per square foot for the Project Area which is 2% higher than Antioch, 10% lower than Pittsburg, 28% lower than Martinez, 33% lower than Concord, and 38% lower than the county as a whole. Given that the home price per square foot for neighboring Pittsburg includes Project Area figures, it should be noted that Pittsburg's 2006 home price per square foot would be higher if the Project Area were excluded. BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Table B-4 HOME PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT COMPARISON 2006 Location Price/Sq. Ft. Antioch $297 Bay Point Project Area $303 Pittsburg/1 $333 Martinez $389 Concord $404 Contra Costa Count $419 /1 Includes the Bay Point Project Area Source.DataQuick Information Systems, MetroScan-a product of First American Real Estate Solutions, L.P. Further evidence of the Project Area's depreciating property values comes from property sales data obtained from Metroscan. It is important to first highlight that traditionally, a property sale will cause that property's assessed value to be reset to the new sales price. According to property sales data obtained for the time period between January 2002 and December 2006 there were 753 property sales transactions that occurred within the Project Area of which 211 properties sold at a price per square foot higher than their current 2007- 08 per square foot assessed value. In other words, over the last five years, 28% of the 753 properties sold within the Project Area have a lower assessed value today than what their market value was at the time of last sale. This fact indicates that nearly 1 of every 3 properties sold within the last five years in the Project Area has had a reduction in assessed value due to the Project Area's declining real estate market. Impaired Property Values Due to Hazardous Wastes Pursuant to CRL Section 33031(b)(2), impaired property values, due in significant part, to hazardous wastes is an economic blighting condition. According to J.C. Norby & Associates, a professional real estate appraisal company, case histories document devastating consequences for many who have purchased, invested in, or loaned real estate impaired by chemicals and toxic compounds, and that in many cases, the cost of remediation has exceeded the property's market value. O RSG B / 59 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area In order to assess ongoing environmental contamination within the Project Area, research was conducted using the Department of Toxic Substances Control ("DTSC") EnviroStor database. EnviroStor is an online search and Geographic Information System tool that allows you to search for information on investigation, cleanup, permitting, and/or corrective actions that are planned, being conducted or have been completed under DTSC's oversight. Two Project Area properties are listed in the EnviroStor database for lead contaminated soil and potential organic liquids with metals contamination. The EnviroStor database confirmed that a 1.5 acre property located along Port Chicago Highway suffers from lead contaminated soil and that further evaluation is needed in order to understand the true extent of contamination and the level of clean up necessary. From 1966 to 1979 Western Lead Burning Company operated and produced at this site liner for the inside of tanks, made with lead and plastic. Since the lead smelting operation a variety of other hazardous materials producing businesses have occupied the site including repair shops servicing automobiles, boats, recreational vehicles, and swimming pools. At the time of DTSC's report, an irrigation equipment supplier occupied the property. According to a DTSC report, a 29 acre site originally owned by the Shell Chemical Company who operated an ammonia plant from 1930 to 1967 potentially contains hazardous substance contaminants consisting of organic liquids with metals. Shell Chemical Company operations included production of hydrogen, carbon, hydrocarbons, nitrogen, ammonia, phosphates, and iron oxide catalysts involving compounds containing iron, nickel, chromium, copper, potassium, cobalt, molybdenum, and vanadium. An onsite lab also produced wastes containing styrene, ethyl benzene, benzene, and toluene. In 1980 the property was sold to PG&E and subsequently purchased by Criterion Catalyst Company, in 1988. The current owner and operator at this site has manufactured hydro-treating and dehydration catalysts for various oil refining, petrochemical, and plastic manufacturing industries. It is generally accepted that hazardous waste contamination and even the perception of contamination, whether real or not, can have drastic affects on property values, however, measuring hazardous waste's impairment on property values requires specialized methodology. According to William Kinnard, author of, "Measuring the Effects of Contamination and Pollution on Property Values: The Focus of the 1991 Symposium in the Context of the Current State of Knowledge" the following criteria are used for measuring the decreased market value of contaminated properties: 1. Cost to Correct 2. Reduced Marketability 3. Inability to Obtain Mortgage Financing 4. Reduced Net Operating Income 5. Higher Capitalization Rate Transfers of ownership for both of the previously discussed properties last occurred in 1988, and therefore, information regarding the aforementioned criteria is not readily available. Short of a full appraisal, it is difficult to fully asses how hazardous wastes may impair these sites' property values or the property values of nearby properties. However, it is conceivable 0 RSG B / 60 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area that should these properties be placed on the market, they can expect reduced marketability as well as high remediation costs consequently impairing their value. It is generally accepted that environmental contamination, or even the perception of contamination, diminishes a property's market value. High Business Vacancies & Low Lease Rates Pursuant to CRL Section 33031(b)(3), abnormally high business vacancies or abnormally low lease rates are an economic condition causing blight. Although published market data detailing business vacancy and lease rates are not available for the Bay Point community, real estate professionals familiar with the Bay Point real estate market confirm that Bay Point exhibits higher business vacancy rates and lower lease rates than other parts of the County. Real estate professionals interviewed at Cushman & Wakefield, Security Pacific Real Estate, Settlemier Properties, and the Community Housing Development Corporation all confirm that the Bay Point suffers from high business vacancy rates and low lease rates. High vacancy and low lease rates are often the consequence of other blighting conditions, such as dilapidated and deteriorated buildings, buildings of substandard and obsolete design, incompatible land uses, and high crime rates. The following photograph was taken of a vacant commercial building in the Project Area during the 2007 Field Survey. o RSG B ! 61 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area r Photo 26 This vacant commercial building on Port Chicago Highway is an example of a Project Area business vacancy. This property displays signs of lack of reinvestment and economic maladjustment including an unfinished facade, boarded up windows, a lack of weather proofing materials, and damaged signage. Economic maladjustments occur when blighting factors that exist within an area impede economic progress. Economic maladjustments manifest themselves throughout the Project Area in a multitude of ways including low lease rates and high business vacancies. O RSG B / 62 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Lack of Necessary Commercial Facilities Pursuant to the CRL, a serious lack of necessary commercial facilities that are normally found in neighborhoods constitutes economic blight. CRL Section 33031(b)(4) lists grocery stores, drug stores, banks, and other lending institutions as necessary commercial facilities. Within the Project Area a limited number of grocery stores exist along Port Chicago Highway and Willow Pass Road. Banks, lending institutions, and drug stores are absent from the Project Area. The closest drug store and bank are located just outside the Project Area boundaries in a retail shopping center located along Bailey Road immediately south of Highway 4. Excess of Bars, Liquor Stores, or Adult-Oriented Businesses An excess of bars, liquor stores, or adult-oriented businesses that has resulted in a significant public health, safety, or welfare problems is a condition of economic blight pursuant to CRL Section 33031(b)(6). Located within the Project Area are two bars and two liquor stores. According to County staff, the two bars located along Willow Pass Road are hubs for criminal activity and present significant public safety and welfare problems to the residents and workers of the Bay Point community. County staff's claims are supported by the significant concerns expressed by the Bay Point Project Area Committee ("Project Area Committee"), the Bay Point Municipal Advisory Council, and the general public regarding the bar located on the southwest corner of Willow Pass Road and Madison Avenue, and data supplied by the Sheriff. On November 9, 2005, the Project Area Committee held a meeting to consider an application requesting approval to expand the aforementioned bar. The following is an excerpt from the meeting minutes, "Many concerns about the current use were expressed, including [alleged]patrons loitering, drug use, public intoxication, noise levels from the bar, speeding up and down the street, and prostitution...there were other concerns expressed about the proximity of the business to Anuta Park." Furthermore, an incident log provided by the Sheriff exposes the large number of and types of calls-for-service to the bar. Between March 2004 and March 2007 over 230 calls were made to this location for incidents such as; drunk in public, auto burglary, disturbance of peace, armed robbery, vandalism, assault and battery, warrant arrest, suspicious persons, and 911 hang ups. Hang-up calls are a major concern and burden for the Sheriff because they are required to send a Deputy to the site to investigate any potential problems at the location. Many times there is no problem or emergency which has resulted in a drain on limited law enforcement resources. In addition, correspondence from the California Department of Alcohol and Beverage Control indicate disciplinary history for the bar located at Willow Pass Road and Madison Avenue, including the following grounds from actions: sales to minors, permitting obviously intoxicated individuals to remain on-site; failure to post "no person under 21 allowed"; several accounts of knowingly allowing drug sales on the property; and purchasing alcohol from unlicensed vendor. All of these incidents are a serious threat to public safety and contribute to a lower quality of life for all persons within the Project Area. O RSG B / 63 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area According to the Contra Costa Times article on August 18, 2007, Residents Say they're Fed Up with Crime- Bay Point: Meeting outlines concerns along Willow Pass Road, the second bar along Willow Pass Road is also a center for criminal activity. The article notes that the owner of the bar's brother was shot there in July of 2007 by men trying to rob the business and was subsequently shot at in August of 2007. The bar's owner was quoted as having said, "`I've got three or four bullet holes in my building, and there's going to be more" unless something is done'. Bars located within the Project Area present serious risks to the health and safety of residents, workers, and patrons of the Project Area. Generally, they contribute to a lower quality of life and degrade the economic viability of surrounding properties and businesses which further perpetuate blighting conditions within the Project Area. Crime Rates A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to public safety and welfare is an economic condition that causes blight. When an area suffers from high levels of crime, businesses and other investors are often unwilling to locate their businesses and/or invest their private dollars into these neighborhoods because of the increased level of risk. This can further perpetuate other blighting conditions, such as dilapidation and deterioration resulting from long-term neglect. In order to document the crime and its impact on the Bay Point community, information regarding the incidence of violent and other serious property crimes was collected from the Sheriff and the Office of the Attorney General of the State of California. The California Attomey General has the duty to collect, analyze, and report statistical data, which provide valid measures of crime and the criminal justice process to government and the citizens of California. The Sheriff's Patrol Division provides uniformed law enforcement services to the unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County and the contract cities of Danville, Lafayette, Orinda, Oakley, and San Ramon. Due to the large geographic area, as well as the very diverse social, cultural and economic climates found within the County, the Sheriff has broken the county in to four major service areas, each with its own Station House. Crime data was collected from the Sheriff for each of the Muir Station House and Bay Station House jurisdictions. The Muir Station House, whose jurisdiction spans from the Benicia Bridge south along the 1- 680 corridor to Walnut Creek, and east of Highway 4 to Bay Point, provides law enforcement services in the Project Area. In addition to Bay Point, Muir Station also services the following central county unincorporated communities: Pacheco, Clyde, Unincorporated Concord, Unincorporated Lafayette, and Unincorporated Martinez. The Bay Station House provides uniformed law enforcement services to a variety of unincorporated jurisdictions spanning from Port Costa west on Highway 4 to Crockett on 1-80 and west to Richmond. Crime rates depicted in Table B-5 represent the number of calls-for-service on a per capita basis that result in the generation of a Sheriff's incident report for the following four violent offenses; homicide, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, and for the following three types of property crimes; burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. Also included in the data are incidents of arson. The abovementioned crime categories are the same O RSG B / 64 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area categories included among the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") Crime Index. The offenses included in the FBI Crime Index were selected due to their serious nature and potential drain on law enforcement resources. In order to assess the severity of criminal activity in the Project Area, Table B-5 includes the following jurisdictions for comparison: Muir Station House jurisdictions (excluding unincorporated Concord, unincorporated Lafayette, and unincorporated Martinez due to unavailable U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census data), Bay Station House jurisdictions, all Sheriff territories, and countywide Contra Costa. Since each of the Sheriff's service areas has its own special needs, concerns and quality of life issues, comparing Bay Point's crime rates to other Muir Station jurisdictions is considered a very suitable gauge for comparing crime conditions. In order to maximize validity, crime rates were uniformly calculated based upon calls-for- service data provided by the Sheriff and U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census data (an annual growth adjustment equal to that used on a countywide basis by the Demographic Research Unit of the California Department of Finance was applied to 2000 Census data to account for population growth across all jurisdictions). It should be noted that countywide crime rate data is based upon information made available by the Office of the Attorney General of the State of California. Due to a difference in reporting sources countywide Contra Costa data may not be consistent with other crime rates represented in Table B-5. O RSG B / 65 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Table B-5 CALLS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES PER 1,000 POPULATION Jurisdiction 2003 2004 2005 2006 Bay Point 35.2 33.8 29.5 39.6 Pacheco 26.3 32.1 26.5 23.8 Clyde 4.1 12.2 5.4 14.6 North Richmond 92.7 70.4 96.2 91.4 Tara Hills 19.9 23.5 21.9 16.8 Bayview 8.9 13.2 6.7 13.7 Crockett 22.1 22.7 20.8 24.5 East Richmond Heights 19.1 26.4 21.4 28.3 Rollingwood 7.6 7.5 9.3 20.0 Port Costa 4.1 28.5 24.2 8.0 EI Sobrante 26.7 27.6 25.3 25.7 Montalvin Manor 7.8 5.7 5.0 5.5 Rodeo 19.8 20.9 40.5 23.4 Sheriff's Department/1 28.0 27.7 27.0 27.7 Contra Costa Count /2 45.0 45.0 42.8 - Avera e/3 15.14 20.03 18.84 18.58 /1 Includes all Contra Costa County unincorporated territories plus the following contract cities:Danville. Lafayette,Orinda,Oakley,and San Ramon. /2 Crime rates for Contra Costa County are based on countywide crime data provided by the Office of the Attorney General of the State of California and population estimates provided by the Demographic Research Unit,California Department of Finance. 2006 crime data was not available at the time of this report. /3 Excludes Bay Point, North Richmond,Sheriffs Department,and Contra Costa County crime rates. Source:Office of the Sheriff Contra Costa County As evidenced by Table B-5, Bay Point consistently has among the highest crime rates in each of the preceding four years for the jurisdictions presented, trailing only North Richmond and countywide Contra Costa. It is important to note, however, that countywide Contra Costa figures include Bay Point, North Richmond, Richmond (ranked the g,h most dangerous city in the United States by CO Press' City Crime Ranking, 14`x' edition), and other jurisdictions with abnormally high crime rates which impact the countywide crime rate. Bay Point's crime rates are 35.2, 33.8, 29.5, and 39.6 per 1,000 total population for the years 2003 through 2006, respectively. When compared to the average crime rate of Muir Station House and Bay Station House jurisdictions, excluding Bay Point and North Richmond, Bay Point's crime rates are 132%, 69%, 57%, and 113% higher for the same preceding years. Criminal activity in Bay Point poses a serious threat to the health and safety of residents, workers, and patrons of the Project Area. During the first three quarters of 2007 alone, Bay Point was home to two homicides, forty-four assaults with a deadly weapon, nine incidents of rape, forty-four cases of armed or strong-arm robbery, and over three hundred and sixty incidents of other reported crimes including burglary, arson, and grand theft. Furthermore, as indicated by the August 18, 2007, Contra Costa Times article, Residents Say they're Fed Up with Crime- Bay Point: Meeting outlines concerns along Willow Pass Road, criminal Q RSG B / 66 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area activity appears to be affecting the economic viability of the Project Area too. In a July 2007 presentation, management representatives of an apartment complex located along Willow Pass Road in the Project Area told the Bay Pont Municipal Advisory Council that almost half of the tenants in the complex had moved out in the past year and that tenants primarily noted the surrounding area conditions and crimes occurring nearby as motives. It is evident that the Project Area suffers from a high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to public safety and welfare. Summary of Physical and Economic Blighting Conditions The Agency continues to work toward the physical and economic rehabilitation of the Project Area. However, 38% of the Project Area parcels continue to exhibit signs of physical blight, such as deterioration and dilapidation caused by long-term neglect, defective and obsolete design, and incompatible adjacent land uses. Furthermore, between January 2007 and August 2007 there were over 414 building and zoning code violations of which 70% of those are serious violations, creating unsafe and unhealthy conditions for persons to live or work. Additionally, economic blighting conditions are both substantial and prevalent throughout the Project Area. Residential property values are 38% lower in the Project Area than countywide and 28% of the properties sold within the Project Area in the last five years have a lower assessed value today than they did at the time of their last sale- a strong indication of depreciating/stagnant property values. When combined with the Project Area's high business vacancies and low lease rates, lack of necessary commercial facilities, and very high crime rates, it is apparent that the physical and economic conditions present in the Project Area are causing a reduction in, or lack of, optimal utilization of the Project Area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious burden on the community. Although the Project Area contains individual parcels that show no evidence of physical blight, they are frequently in close proximity to other parcels that are in disrepair. This checkerboard pattern of blighted and non-blighted parcels, as shown in exhibit B-3, points to the fact that blighted parcels are not concentrated in any particular neighborhood which indicates that the Project Area as a whole is negatively impacted by the scattered pattern of blighted properties. Based on the observations and research in this section, it is evident that the Project Area continues to suffer from various physical and economic blighting conditions. Although progress has been made by the Agency and there has been limited private investment in the Project Area, further improvements are needed to alleviate current conditions. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment proposes to increase current financial limitations, effectively increasing the Agency's ability to continue to eliminate blight from the Project Area. Receipt of additional tax increment revenue and increased bonding capacity provides the Agency with additional capital to implement blight eliminating projects, thus alleviating current conditions that are threatening the health and safety of persons who live and work in the Project Area. These projects include upgrading and improving public infrastructure, working toward the continued enhancement of property values, enabling economic revitalization of commercial and industrial enterprises, and increasing, improving, and preserving the Project Area's supply of affordable housing. Section E provides additional detail of the proposed public projects that may be undertaken by the Agency in the Project Area and identifies the blighting conditions addressed by those public projects. O RSG B / 67 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area In accordance with CRL Section 33451.5(c)(1), Exhibit B-3 illustrates the portion of the project area that is no longer blighted, the portion of the project area that is blighted, and the portion of the project area that contains necessary and essential parcels for the elimination of the remaining blight. Parcels necessary and essential for the elimination of the remaining blight include parcels already owned by the Agency that are slated for redevelopment and vacant parcels within the Project Area. Inclusion of these vacant parcels is necessary and appropriate because they are negatively impacted by the economic blighting conditions previously described in this section and are located adjacent to or in the vicinity of other blighted parcels. These vacant parcels are underutilized and, because of their proximity to other blighted parcels, are unlikely to be developed to their highest and best-use without redevelopment assistance. Furthermore, the elimination of blight on adjacent parcels may require the development or use of these vacant lots making them both necessary and essential for the elimination of remaining blight. O RSG B / 68 OAC m ' O ol m mr m H 2 c.� > X c OC LLI D v W m E 7 d o0 > r °u y >Q oo QU7 � u L LL �w c V) i O '6 m O yo v9 oa c a'= - Q o O)o c N a o O C m @ O o.u aci d c u' 5 OU ... o Q u o _O c am, N m U u V) 1�\� �u > Oz ) Uf �yyn0 1 ' m g m0 a , Ezm� m — ro (D u W o v >cQr � i ;ou0E � a 3 0 'n:u O Y Qu N -i Q Q � 7u'; E E- a. oJv Z F.. @-C i OU i c0 u �- U3 c O a o tnG� E� iu GJJ==0 PNAalea H H O CL W N J m w C- u U 3 o Q a D w J v Q C w a) � Q ,� Q _ ` _ Z- <v V ° u ' �� s o E t w r`o CL a) —a°) 0 0 E m _� (D fo v a a Z o u m Q Q d C aj E rj Q) v H a� �oonn�aia� a)> o .0 u u +, CE Z > °' ° O a r Z c o 0 c a ly w Q a` Q` U aJ � � m O U c ° a° U' c >. Cn o ro U m O SECTION C Five-Year Implementation Plan CRL Section 33352(c) requires that the Agency prepare an Implementation Plan for the Bay Point Project Area pursuant to Section 33490. The Agency is not required to hold a separate public hearing on the amendment to the Implementation Plan and the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. The Agency has elected to hold the public hearings separately. The public hearing for the amendment to the Implementation Plan is scheduled for May 13, 2008. The Agency will ensure that a public hearing on the amendment to the Implementation Plan will be completed at or prior to the public hearing for the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. The 2004/05 to 2008/09 Implementation Plan adopted on January 17, 2006 ("Existing Implementation Plan") identified the Agency's goals and objectives during the 2004/05 to 2008/09 planning period, and documented the accomplishments for Bay Point. The Existing Implementation Plan also identified available resources and anticipated expenditures on identified proposed projects during the planning period. The Existing Implementation Plan also described how the Agency would expand the supply of housing, spend its low and moderate income housing set-aside funds ("Housing Funds") and meet its affordable housing obligations. Section 33490 (c) of the CRL requires that at least once within the five-year term of an implementation plan, a redevelopment agency shall conduct a public hearing and hear testimony of all interested parties for the purpose of reviewing the redevelopment plan and the corresponding implementation plan for each redevelopment project in the jurisdiction and evaluating the progress of the redevelopment project. The mid-term review must occur no earlier than two years and no later than three years following the adoption of the implementation plan. The Agency's Implementation Plan for Bay Point has been modified to satisfy both the requirements of CRL Section 33451.5 (c)(7) and 33490 (c). The Agency's Draft Amendment and Mid-term Review of the Implementation Plan for Bay Point have been included in Attachment 1 at the end of the Report. O RSG ciao SECTION D Explanation of Why the Elimination of Blight In the Project Area Cannot be Accomplished by Private Enterprise Acting Alone or Through Other Financing Alternatives Other Than Tax Increment Financing Section 33352(d) of the CRL requires an explanation of why the elimination of blight in the Bay Point Project Area cannot be accomplished by private enterprise alone, or by the use of governmental financing alternatives other than tax increment financing (with particular reference to the increase in the amount of tax increment revenue that would become available to the Agency as a result of the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment). This section was prepared in part by the Agency's fiscal consultant Fraser& Associates. REASONS FOR CONTINUING TO INCLUDE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING The Agency intends to complete its program of redevelopment in order to alleviate blight and create and improve affordable housing in the Project Area. The cost of that program, as described in this part of the Report, will total over $217 million in 2007 dollars, of which $136.5 million will be funded through tax increment revenues. When all costs are included and the impact of inflation has been added in, as shown on Table D-1 the costs for redevelopment will reach over $692 million. Given the remaining needs of the Project Area, and the lack of other ongoing funding sources, the Agency will need to look to tax increment financing as a major source of funding. Neither the County nor the private sector has historically been able to finance a redevelopment effort of this type. As required by the CRL, the Agency will continue to look to other funding sources to assist in the redevelopment effort. However, tax increment is needed to fill funding gaps between the costs identified and these other funding sources. In addition, most of the elements of the program of redevelopment have little or no alternative funding sources. Other funding sources also have serious limitations. Grants from other levels of government are sporadic and difficult to obtain. Assessment districts have been used to fund certain activities, but they can only be set at a level where private development can economically absorb them. Development impact fees are also being used by the Agency. Even with each of these other sources of revenue, the funding gaps still remain. Tax increment revenues will also be generated by the activities proposed by the Agency. Tax increment provides a stable source of revenue that will continue to grow as the Agency's redevelopment efforts spur private investment. In addition, such revenues can be leveraged in the form of tax allocation bonds and provide a large source of capital financing. For each of these reasons, tax increment financing continues to be included in the Amended Redevelopment Plan. O RSG D / 71 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Table D-1 Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Project Area FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS (000's Omitted) Resources Beginning Balance $12,919 Total Tax Increment Revenues 664,294 TA Bond Proceeds 63,031 Investment Earnings 6,187 Other Revenue Sources 5,507 Total Resources $751,937 Expenditures Section 33676 Allocations 39,150 Property Tax Admin Fees 5,572 AB 1290 Tax Sharing 122,694 Debt Service- 1999 Bonds 4,825 Debt Service-2007 Bonds 50,937 Debt Service- New Bonds 115,143 Negotiated Taxing Entity Share 99,581 Development Assistance Program 10,922 Public Improvements 85,969 Community Improvement Programs 6,550 Housing Progams 125,029 Administrative Expenses 26,236 Total Expenditures $692,608 Ending Discretionary Balance $59,328 Source:Fraser&Associates RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE NEED TO AMEND THE FINANCIAL LIMITS AND THE COST OF THE CONTINUING PROGRAM OF REDEVELOPMENT The provisions of the CRL require that when an agency proposes to increase the financial limitations of an existing redevelopment plan, it must identify the remaining blight within the project area, identify the portion, if any, that is no longer blighted, and identify the projects that are needed to eradicate the remaining blight. In addition, the relationship between the costs of those projects, the amount of increase in the limitation on the number of dollars proposed to be allocated to the agency and the agency's ability to eliminate remaining blight O RSG D / 72 C FFZ4SER&ASSOCIATES REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area must be identified. Both the Agency and the Board must also make a finding that (1) significant blight remains within the project area and (2) the blight cannot be eliminated without the establishment of additional debt and the increase in the limitations on the number of dollars to be allocated to the agency. The Agency's proposed amendment includes an increase in the number of dollars to be allocated to the Agency (tax increment limit). This amendment is needed in order to complete redevelopment program activities and eliminate remaining blight. Without the amendment, the Agency will have insufficient financial capacity to fund additional redevelopment activities. As provided for in the existing Redevelopment Plan, the total amount of tax increment the Agency is eligible to receive is $116 million. The Agency has received cumulative tax increment of approximately $26.3 million through fiscal year 2006- 07, leaving $89.7 million in funds that can be received under the current tax increment limit. Approximately $56 million of this is committed to existing obligations, leaving only $33 million for new project costs. The Agency also has $36.2 million in principal outstanding on bonds. Thus, the Agency is approaching the $60 million total bond limit. Given the current tax increment limit, the Agency will need to repay the outstanding bonds before they fully mature in 2036-37, since the current tax increment limit is projected to be reached in 2017-18. As part of the bonds that were issued in 2007, the Agency also placed $7.2 million into a bond escrow account in order to avoid exceeding its tax increment limit. Those funds can only be released if the Redevelopment Plan is amended to increase the tax increment and bond limit. The escrow funds are needed, along with the future growth in tax increment, to complete Project Area activities. The total estimated cost of the Agency's program of redevelopment, including all obligations and interest costs, is $692.6 million, as shown on Table D-1 A portion of these costs are projected to be funded with sources other than tax increment (interest earnings and other revenues). A portion of the expenditures (the Section 33676 Allocations) are also not subject to the tax increment limit. Overall, the Agency is projected to need approximately $688 million in tax increment. Without an amendment to the financial limits, the Agency will be unable to complete its program of redevelopment and alleviate blight. In summary, the current financial limits restrict the Agency's ability to issue new debt to finance remaining redevelopment activities. By increasing the tax increment and bond debt limits, the Agency will have the financial resources to complete an effective redevelopment program aimed at eliminating remaining blight and constraints to development in the Project Area. The Agency will not have the ability to assist in the elimination of remaining blight unless the existing financial limits are increased by adoption of the proposed amendments. WHY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL FUNDING SOURCES ARE INADEQUATE TO ELIMINATE BLIGHT The County of Contra Costa receives Community Development Block Grant funds. The purpose of these funds is to develop viable communities and expand economic opportunities primarily to low and moderate income people. These Federal funds are very limited and there are many competing communities, programs, and projects seeking funding. Other Federal Grant programs are very limited in scope and frequently require matching funds O RSG D / 73 FR4SER&ASSOCIATES REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area from the local jurisdiction. Given the restrictions placed on these funding sources, redevelopment of the Project Area would not be feasible if the Board relied to any significant extent on such funding. Although the Board will apply for such funding if it should become available, this funding source cannot be counted on to achieve the Agency's funding needs to address blighting conditions. Funds from the State of California are also very limited. The State is currently experiencing an estimated $8 billion to $16 billion deficit for 2008-09 and the governor is currently seeking a 10 percent across-the-board cut to help close the budget shortfall. In addition, the State has a structural deficit so future budgetary issues will continue for a period of time. In 2006 voters in California passed Proposition 1C, 1E and 84 to help fund capital infrastructure improvements throughout the State, but these funds are largely earmarked for certain State programs and are focused on disaster preparedness, stormwater, water and park improvements. State Housing and Community Development bond and grant programs are largely focused on affordable housing needs and communities throughout the State must compete for a limited pool of funds. In the past, the County has sought State funding, however the State has indicated that there are no funds available to fund the level of the improvements needed. The County and Agency will continue to seek and apply for any funding that becomes available; however, these sources cannot be relied upon to complete the projects needed to address blighting conditions in the Project Area. WHY PRIVATE ENTERPRISE ALONE CANNOT ELIMINATE BLIGHT The Agency has historically encouraged property owners to invest in improving their property. In fact, the Agency has provided matching funds to help leverage private investment in rehabilitation and new development. Although the County and the Board will continue to leverage private financing sources to fund projects, these have not and likely never will be sufficient for the type and amount of improvements required. Financial assistance from the County, state and federal government may be used by the Agency to fund redevelopment program expenses. The County general fund is currently constrained and is not a source for the potential funding of redevelopment. During the period from 2002-03 through 2004-05, the County's expenditures grew faster than its revenues, resulting in deficit spending. In 2006-07, the County was able to balance its budget through the cutting of services and by supplementing revenues. For 2007-08, proposed expenditures exceeded revenues, and so departmental budget requests were once again paired down. Assessment districts and Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts are examples of public/private partnership financing mechanisms where the actual cost of financing is borne by private interests, however, the mechanism must be facilitated by a governmental entity. Assessment districts are becoming more widespread in the State as a means to pay for improvements. Assessments are levied upon properties within a designated area to fund improvements directly benefitting that area, and are paid in association with property tax. The use of assessment districts is limited and regulated by state law, and are most commonly related to street improvements, landscape and lighting, and parks. However, in an area such as Bay Point that already faces challenges in attracting private investment, imposing additional taxes through assessments on property may in fact deter private investment by increasing costs paid annually by property owners. Additionally, the County 0 RSG D / 74 ERASER$ASSOCIATES REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Board of Supervisors cannot form a district over a property if the owner disapproves, making creation of new districts very challenging. Assessment districts impose a financial burden that area businesses and potential developers may be unable to bear. As indicated by the continued presence of blighting conditions, which can be found throughout the Project Area, some property owners do not have the resources to maintain their properties, much less rehabilitate them or pay for area-wide improvements such as those that may be funded through assessment districts. Similar to Assessment Districts, the 1982 Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act authorized the formation of a Community Facilities District (CFD) to finance capital improvement projects and to pay for ongoing operations and maintenance of certain facilities. Formation of a CFD requires extensive front-end investment and the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the affected property owners where the vote is weighted based on the quantity of acres owned. For this reason CFDs are typically most successful where only one or a very limited number of property owners are involved — usually in vast undeveloped areas under a single ownership. These features make successful CFDs very difficult to accomplish with the inclusion of existing occupied properties within redevelopment project areas, and proposed within the Project Area. The County has already established a CFD for stormwater management services that will only apply to new development. Similarly Public Utility Districts provide a mechanism for issuing bonds secured by the revenues of a utility district to pay for capital improvements, but these too require approval by a majority vote of residents of the district. This constraint makes their use in redevelopment project areas rather uncommon. Business Improvement Districts (BID) and Property and Business Improvement Districts (PBID) allow business districts to establish an assessment that generates revenue to support enhanced services to a designated area. BIDs are financed through an additional fee paid by businesses within the designated area, and the fee is typically added to the annual business licensing charges. PBIDs provide for an assessment on commercial property and typically result in substantially more revenue generation. PBIDs are therefore more apt to have a greater positive impact on the local commercial district, however, their creation requires petition support from businesses that would pay more than 50 percent of the annual fee to be collected from the proposed area. They also have a cap on assessments and a five-year maximum life requiring a new petition process to renew the fee. Some community stakeholders in Bay Point have indicated their interest in pursuing a BID or PBID. The Commission could provide an important source of seed capital to help bring such a funding source to fruition. However, the amount of capital that could be raised from the limited number of commercial enterprises in Bay Point area would be very limited. The revenue may helpful in funding promotion and management activities, but would not be adequate to fund the level of infrastructure and capital investment needed to address blighting conditions throughout the area as identified elsewhere in this Report. Finally, the prevalence of dilapidated and deteriorated buildings, depreciated or stagnant property values, and other adverse physical and economic conditions affecting individual private properties, as detailed in Section B above, is itself a direct indicator that the private sector alone has been unable to marshal the private debt and equity resources to overcome such problems, and needs a catalyst, in the form of strategic redevelopment investment by the Agency, to overcome these adverse private property conditions. O RSG C D / 75 FR4SER&ASSOCIATES REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area For these reasons, it cannot be reasonably expected that private enterprise acting alone would have the means to accomplish redevelopment of the Project Area. Without the provision of tax increment revenue financing, sufficient revenue would not be available to fund the needed programs and improvements. REASONS FOR CONTINUED USE OF TAX INCREMENT The provision of continuing tax increment revenue, through the proposed increases in the caps on receipt of tax increment and bonded indebtedness, must be included in the Amended Plan because other sources are not available or are insufficient to finance the remaining costs of redeveloping the Project Area. Continued utilization of tax increment financing, as made possible through the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment, will provide the resources to develop a consistent and direct approach to activities and programs needed to eliminate blight, provide for the improvement of infrastructure, and aid in the expansion of the Project Area's economic base. When adverse conditions are not addressed, the resulting physical and financial impacts imposed by these conditions will exacerbate existing blighting conditions. It will cause serious economic hardships and undue disruption of the lives and activities of people working in the Project Area and its surrounds. Please refer to Section E, for a further discussion of the reasons for the proposed dollar amount of increase in the caps for receipt of tax increment revenue and the issuance of bonded indebtedness. O RSG FA D / 76 FR4SER&ASSOCIATES SECTION E Proposed Method of Financing, Including the Economic Feasibility of the Amendment CRL Section 33352 requires that this Report include information on the proposed method of financing, including information on the economic feasibility of the Redevelopment Program under the proposed Amended Plan, and the reasons why the Redevelopment Program cannot be completed without the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment (including the proposed increase in the caps on the receipt of tax increment revenue and issuance of bonded indebtedness). This Section was completed by the Agency's fiscal consultant Fraser& Associates. The Agency has previously used tax increment funds to pursue redevelopment opportunities in the Project Area, and intends to continue improvements to ameliorate blighting conditions. To the extent possible, the Agency will use State and Federal funds to implement improvements and programs, but these funds are not adequate to address the level of infrastructure improvements, economic development and public facility construction and improvements that are needed in the Project Area. The following narrative elaborates on the proposed method of financing, and the economic feasibility of the amendment. All tables referred to in this Section can be found at the end of the Section. PROGRAM COSTS The costs to implement the redevelopment program are summarized on Table E-11 in current (2007) dollars. The programs include the Development Assistance Program, the Public Improvement Program, the Community Improvement Program, and the Low and Moderate Income Housing Program. In addition to the program costs shown on Table E-1, the Agency will need to incur expenses for administration of the Project Area. Such costs will include staff time, legal and technical assistance, and the preparation of planning studies and reports. The total cost for the program of redevelopment is estimated at $216.6 million. Table E-1 also shows the amount of funds that the Agency has on hand. This amount is estimated at $14.8 million. The additional costs for the Agency's program are estimated at $201.8 million, of which $136.5 million is estimated to be funded through tax increment financing. The costs shown on Table E-1 do not include the impacts of inflation or the interest costs associated with the borrowing of funds to continue to implement the redevelopment program. They also do not include negotiated or mandatory payments to the taxing entities. The mandatory payments will be required by the CRL due to the removal of the debt limit and the increase in the tax increment limit that will occur due to amendments to the Redevelopment Plan. Finally, Table E-1 does not include costs related to outstanding obligations, including repayment of bonds. Each of these items has been included on Table E-5, which reflects the overall analysis of the Project Area's economic feasibility. O RSG E / 77 C RR4SER&ASSOUA TES REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Tax Increment Revenues Table E-2 provides an estimate of the tax increment revenues that could be generated over the remaining period to receive tax increment through 2037-38. The tax increment revenue projection is based on the following assumptions: ■ The Proposition 13 allowable inflationary adjustment of up to 2 percent annually. ■ A 3 percent increase to reflect changes of ownership. ■ New development activity shown on Table E-3. Total gross tax increment shown on Table E-2 is estimated at $664.3 million. Total tax increment has been reduced by the following liens and adjustments discussed below. Section 33676 Adjustment For project areas adopted prior to January 1994, taxing entities could elect to receive additional property taxes above the base year revenue amount. Such amounts are calculated by increasing the real property portion of base year values by an inflation factor of up to 2 percent annually. Taxing entities can receive a proportionate share of such revenues if they elected to do so prior to adoption of the redevelopment plan. Those taxing entities that are eligible to receive such payments have been included on Table E-2. It should be noted that payments pursuant to Section 33676 are not a part of the allocated tax increment of the Project Area and are not counted towards the tax increment limit. Property Tax Administrative Fees State law allows counties to charge taxing entities, including redevelopment agencies, for the cost of administering the property tax collection system. The fees have been estimated and shown on Table E-2. Housing Set-Aside Reflect 20 percent of total tax increment (less the Section 33676 Adjustment) that must be used for affordable housing. AB 1290 Tax Sharing Pursuant to 1994 legislation (AB 1290), the Agency is required to make payments to the affected taxing entities from the Project Area since the last date to incur debt was deleted from the Redevelopment Plan. All payments are based on a three tier formula that is shown below. TIER PAYMENT REQUIRED 20% of the gross tax increment attributable to increases above the 2007- Tier 1 08 assessed values during the remaining term the Agency receives tax increment. Tier 2 Beginning in 2018-19, an additional payment equal to 16.8% of the gross tax increment attributable to growth above value in 2017-18. Tier 3 No Tier 3 payments are due since the Project Areas will no longer be receiving tax increment in the year in which this tier is triggered. O RSG E / 78 C FRASER$ASSOCIATES REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Negotiated Taxing Entity Share The Agency has entered into a tax sharing agreement with the Contra Costa Fire District. New Bond and New Tax Increment Limits The new limit on the principal amount of bonds that can be outstanding at one time has been calculated on Table E-4. The limitation is based on the program costs shown on Table E-1 of $136.5 million. To this amount, we have added a 20 percent factor for contingencies. The Agency will also incur various costs when issuing bonds. Therefore, a 15 percent factor has been applied for finance costs. The Agency also has approximately $36.2 million in principal outstanding on tax allocation bonds previously issued. Based on these factors, the new bonded indebtedness limit for the Project Area has been established at $220 million. The additional program costs, inclusive of contingencies and finance costs, have been assumed to be financed as a single borrowing (a total of $188.4 million of the $220 million bond limit). For purposes of estimating interest costs, we have used an interest rate of 6 percent and a term of 25 years, which results in total interest of $186.9 million for the new bonds. We have also included interest on outstanding bonds, which totals $28.3 million. The Agency has also received approximately $26.3 million in tax increment through 2006- 07. Approximately $222.3 million in tax increment revenues is estimated to be used for pass through payments to the taxing entities, and property tax administrative costs are estimated to add $5.6 million. The total of these items, when rounded, equals $689 million, which is the new tax increment limitation included in the Amended Redevelopment Plan. Proposed Financing Method and Economic Feasibility The proposed method of financing redevelopment and the economic feasibility of the Project Area have been demonstrated on Table E-5. The table compares the future projected tax increment revenues of the Project Area, plus other resources, to the existing obligations and program expenditures on a future dollar basis. It should be noted that the analysis shown on Table E-5 is based on one set of assumptions for continued implementation of redevelopment. It should not be considered the only means to continue to finance redevelopment of the Project Area. The analysis does indicate that the Project Area will continue to be financially feasible given the set of assumptions that underlie the projections. The primary assumptions in this regard are that the costs for redevelopment activities are as projected; that growth will occur in the Project Area as the Agency continues to remove impediments to development; and that the tax increment and bond limits will be increased. The financial analysis on Table E-5 begins with Agency resources on hand of approximately $12.9 million, as provided by Agency staff. Most of this balance reflects unspent bond proceeds from the Agency's prior bond issues. The total tax increment shown on Table E-5 has been derived from the amounts shown on Table E-2. The tax allocation bond proceeds amount shown on Table E-5 include both the release of certain monies held in an escrow account from the 2007 bond issue and the sale of new bonds. The financial analysis on Table E-5 includes the following expenditures: ■ Section 33676 Allocations- These are pass through payments to the taxing entities based on the allowable inflation increase of 2 percent per year. O RSG E / 79 C FR4SER&ASSOCIATES REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area ■ Property Tax Administrative Fees- These fees are paid to the County for the collection of tax increment. • AB 1290 Pass Through Payments- These payments will be owed to those taxing entities that have not entered into negotiated pass through arrangements. ■ Negotiated Tax Sharing Payments- The Agency has entered into a pass through agreement with the Contra Costa County Fire Department. ■ Debt Service- Includes debt service on currently outstanding bonds and the new bonds. ■ Program Costs- The program costs (Development Assistance; Public Improvements; Community Improvement Program; and Housing) have been included on Table E-5 and have been increased by a 3 percent inflation factor. ■ Administrative Costs- The costs for administration of the Project Area are based on the current Agency budget increased at 3 percent per year. The financial analysis shows that the Project Area may generate a surplus of $59.3 million by the end of the term when tax increment can be received. The surplus arises in large part because the Project Area will only be able to repay debt in the final 10 years of tax increment collection. This balance is the Project Area's hedge against higher than expected costs or revenues that fall short of projections. If these funds are not needed, they will flow back to the taxing entities. Given this, the Project Area will continue to be economically feasible after the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. PSG EiBo FRASER&ASSOCIATES U ce O w H LU oao <000a0000000eoo 0 0 0 0 (n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ao dc Z J LL a (L O N .N. r o O O (n 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 (0 0 t M O In O r0 O In V) O � O O 04 LO m O M fl- N Q C U .O (O M N N (O M N M V N N V (O N N C) R O (O M Od O E O m S M Q p LL W O W v O O (n O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O au o n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 rn v> M o r oaovoo (n000N0000lnoo (n r� M n Nr- V W M - V (n W( N DN O C O (O C pN r M (O O U w a E o A CL O _ O ((1 O M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l 0 O N O r O i (D N O c0 O (O (O 00 w h M NIC) ap � IL c 9 c J O d LL 'IU ¢ d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O N a0 a5 N tD C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O (!J 0) (f1 N d O I- O O_ O O O In O O O N O O O O (O O O r n al M 1A U O V (O (3) V In M (O N l0 N N aJ (O W � -O N _ a7 � F N m N V C C O N = N � � r Y N d U= O w O C U a d N N 7 d C > U O N J F O N M d d o.:. U O 0 0 @ m aci N N a ¢ c Q > N.E c o> > > E ¢ d d -O N 2 f7 a Y m � c aui 0� g w o w O m� Q@ d 'o N c c J t (a u, Q' N m o a1 E (n E a c o o m o o > c a d d d L O_ H t6 0/ d R N 2 0 _ m J U Y J O Q rn a a) c c m o 12 m n m o Q m L > O o Ed E >o EEm 'C m m a E Ad d E o 0O V d U d c V' Z - - 16 O Q U a d c S d d o o ? d a d E u c m 6 F o 3 u w O d Q c o o E E E aa � c d J U as o m ni ` d o a 0 o v d c c N E d D Q v a ¢ p N o m m w p - a m L m (i a¢ o a Q o o E c o w K (� E`c d a d d C d-� a o U O d J C a �' ¢ J d u w d N W U p d ¢ >a N w c c .N w x f0 p a C co 2,' E o c F Q d d wa W ac Eo° tea uu > > o- Lu d� OONO > ¢ d O > Q. ) F E E L u a a Q Q ` c c o o m-¢ v o .c o z ~ (D a ° aa) ? _a0i W � 0 Q- E aoi (-'ra � HH ---. O> dJu,� d' � (n� and o E c z �HH � d a d O > m o m N o a>i .� U 3 ¢ ¢ m m m > > .� as IL o m °' d o o aOf V H U m W 0 a Z a W m m M M G' > ¢ ¢ m m 0 a U m (n U J ¢ m d L O 4, U c 0 o ro U CD O U N 00 0 w H ' rMroMrnQrnQOQo�n W WNmmr WmmNOQinM mop W � vm w ao N a Z=� O Mm n W LL m N 0 �X O Z N N C W QO M m N Q N W Q O M M 0 co Q F O O M n O m n W M m n m Q r Q N 0 Q 0 O N N{{pp N n Q A m r N rn r r �O W W Q O n`3 Q M W Q m m M M m W Q N N M N O>0 M O m N Q N O N m W O�M N r �M m �Q r o m O Q N W 0 Q m j Q � ���� In N r N C0 Q O N lQ0 a�D W O N N M Q N W W Of O N Q�tQi m m pmi�N Q W n r E n N� b L pn Q N LrL d N ll r m QQ O b Q M Q m O>M W Q N O O O N W O W O a m N�p W M n mO Q.W M W Nr i0 m W mr r mm O>O�O�-- QQ--W rr..Moo 0 m E N N N r v. M M J M Q W N Q NIU!�Ol O N M i(J m W r m W O N M Q b n m O M b n M Q O F N U r C � C N N m m m m m m m m m W m m m m m m m m m m........... � O C C N C U ❑� N d v > Q CJ O>Q Q m 0 N A N O Of W mN N M X N O m W O W�-r O O n Q W W W W O m M M m M n W N W N N M N m W m W r�p O o Q W N Q m m M W ffpp O m Q N M N M r > C T -NO O>m O n O M n b O b M W O��O m m Q m�p m b > O� N m m Q M tQ0 O O M N V N O ro m OOi NMN aW0 N r N iOm N M b O N N d U d Q�mm�rno�cvMQ�n W W rm W oc�MQ�nn mo�M�nnrn�M a o >M fA ----------- NNN N N N N ri M ci t+i Ci Ci Q Q a K N a > C N O N Q W N W M E N U p O N r Q m m m N pi m m m m n W O M W b O W O W U l0 r W W O ' (O W O N M b m n Of O N M M r m O N T E C O C f9 - N N N N N N N N�`"�M M M M Q Q Q = ., -p .U 2 d m m 0 W W m b b O m O)r OI N O�O m M n W n Q O>M r O>N m r - C C)d C1 C U Q (h u- 1J W -M L OM-N W m r m W N N N N N N N N fOh M M M M M Q Q O V Q�O N y p U L Q Q UQ Q N E O M N O N M n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9mm j Q U j N H Q W m i0 O m m O Ji.- C d« O.y M E 'p^ 0 � 3 o Z in mrnmMMQQ mi> m o � > E a Z ' d m a a.v,9 o CL rn O 2 ❑ C C`p Q C d t0 U W ry V C j ry N m G W N m N m M Q m m N Q O r r M T N 0 tQ0M M N N W N lN7 Q N W O N O p m N N N Q. r W m Q N O m O r m�O N N Q 01 N M Of O M r LO m o m W M Q m N> d ULL y d mNQmQ rOWo nM rm NM WM QMQwt+l m WmQM O N Q CNEQ O N XN N U O B m W O N M Q�O m r m Q7 O N M Q�p m r m W O N M Q m m N U > O 2 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O NO 0 0 0 0 d ry 0~ O p �N N-O - �"'� N U-ifa V E N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N }O d J N W U m N J E (0 W W O -6 p v m +-' v 10a m r W W o�NMQ�nmrmrno NMQinmrmmo�NMQmmr am.ago.2 �a (n 0. N O 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M E O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O '~ F U m a 0 jy Y N N N N N N NNN N N NNN N N N N N NNN N N N N N N N N N V �-N v Q v tD VCO O>� ° a° U m O (n Cl) 00 O w W H W a D V) LL O - 00 000000000 m Q N 0 0 LO O O O O O (O O M M 7 a (0 O — O N N O tf) 00 O w N m N O 00 (fl Cfl 06 M 00 (D M M M (D ^> It N Cn r r Q "o E O ZM0 0 (n m Eo W in p = W H O O O O In CO CO O O N M (O a) (n O Na) M 0� W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o CDo } m It U ~ 0- 0 C (n LL. a) Q Q Q t Z O Z E W O N a) d mE > J Q � c � > � o ami 3 _ > a) o .� o � (n �° Q N E (n t cn m 0 0 w E ° - o E Q Cl) U .a� U �, - o aci E C m J c N Q) Q m H a) Q N m o Et', Mia a E �' E - moa� mm L) -0 n U c H D m c E o 0 o a -a -2 o .o w m .o Z o m c c m .o E o (o m m > d a) o_ N c co 30 x rn O o Q m a m O aa) CU � co a O UU � UUm CU (V 1 o o v o > U a) � � a) V) o U c m a C Cn o ra U co O v GL 00 O w 1.4 W a W LL O Q r- Lr) N Lf) O O (n 0 (D (n N O O N O Cl) r- O O 6) (D (D h r O O O U7 M 00 (A N O 00 N N N (!D N O (D r- Cl) V (D O (D OO CD (14 (D 6) O) m N (D N M N O N N N (D lO cn W 69 `� U a _ E c 0 H rno _ rn � O w _ c Y d OC C N ° m a) (n c in E 1_ o iv u c N g cmi ami ° cn p Q O w Q E F d z o C � m W 2 w c c ro m c (n > V M m OU U ) z M r a (n @ 7 N J. v O a) a w U m Q C >. 9 ` - O` N co NO N CN Nm C Z Oz a) w am (a U Q C C m a) O> U -Cc: O ° yf6 p LOoQ N N (n C 7 (D Q m j a U (D C O C C a) C C (� — c a) E w m 3 CL ° w �° m � N y o o E . o m Y Q .. o m c n Q Y a o N o ro m j c •� CO c N rn m y = U (On N O v rn (D o p _ .N E C p 7 w N C N O a1 a ? U J m x °) m U O Q E Oo (n Z w U L m m L o c rn m o N m rn cm c c cE UE oE aw ao o O y o (D c O ° a EQ m N c4) UU wNo O - w o H O a N Ccc CD -Np Em o o mn (n oo m ( ) ) dS p -0N E pQ O c E 6 11 ++ a) UC Q O C p <n lV 'O a) a) in vl m a) U O a N C C i w m O 2 (n O U w LL O_ a) Q Q w w w a C m = N N U a) m c c Y `o N Q Q C a _f. O a (n m N C U) a) x LL m OU m LL a) H U Co w Q d H d d m a. Q F N o � O > a` v Y -a c v v E 4-1a o O > U v a Ln O U a o ro um O LO 00 O w V) OC W a LL O 0 a O m WO V r r O N V to 1- M N O O m (O w w �- O M 00 O Cl) (n f- O (V CO V ao N (0 (n N Cl) O N O (V O — (n 6) Lf� (D 00 O to O O u7 O N O M N I M (O Lr) O (n N V 0 (n 0 0 (n O LO (O N 0) ( O r- M 1') O 1CO 64 N (O IA O �NN O IL W Q U C N Q1 a N W E E Cl- a d > Q U 7 m O O C c U w m 0 } O a� c N d a) F- EA > y a) C � O Y N C N m O U (no o O O C - U N a) m N W m rn m m Co y6 c C O) U C _C 0) I-- W (/7 C O O C oQ Q U °' � .S (n E mrno m mm o (n ° W o a� w c E a� L (n Q -ar — NZ N E QEw y :� U .o W a m a� m (0QU mQ > E m m m 0 co cO w c � r- x x a> a> m H c o o .> � � o Q E X L c > 0 M > w m o Z o f 0 cu � o cn cn (n �_ E .E w c a) _0 ca Zo 0)— co a) m o� � n � rn > � E E m v Q m FmUm � � m � � SO <na < mz0a- U = Q w a� � L Ca) Q L d CL O � O > a v -0 c v � cl� E � a O O > U v m � Ln CZ O U c 0 n c > cn U m O SECTION F Method of Relocation Section 33352(f) of the CRL requires that this Report include a plan and method of relocation for the Project Area. Additionally, Section 33411 of the CRL requires that the Agency prepare a feasible plan for the relocation of families or persons to be temporarily or permanently displaced from housing facilities in its Project Area, and for nonprofit local community institutions to be temporarily or permanently displaced from facilities actually used for institutional purposes in the Project Area. Pursuant to the CRL, the Agency previously prepared Methods of Relocation for the Bay Point Project Area (Relocation Methods) and incorporated the Relocation Methods in the Original Report to the Board of Supervisors ("Original Report") at the time of initial Redevelopment Plan adoption in 1987. The Relocation Methods document, provided as Appendix B, remains applicable to any required relocation activity under the Redevelopment Plan, as proposed to be amended by the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. However, if the Amended Plan is adopted and implemented, should any actions be undertaken which include the relocation of residents or businesses, such actions will adhere to the State Relocation Law (Government Code 7260 et seq.), the State Relocation Guidelines, as those regulations may be amended by the State from time to time, and the Relocation Methods, as previously prepared and in effect and as set forth below. Any amendments to the State Guidelines of State Relocation Law shall automatically be incorporated without the need for further action by the Agency. As provided in Section 33411.1 of the CRL, the Agency shall not displace from housing units, persons or families of low- and moderate-income unless and until there is a suitable housing unit available and ready for occupancy by such displaced person or family at rents comparable to those at the time of their displacement. Further, such relocation housing shall be decent, safe, sanitary and suitable to their individual needs; located in areas not less desirable than the Project Area; with comparable access to public utilities and commercial facilities. The relocation area must also be reasonably accessible to their places of employment and priced within their financial means (all of the foregoing as defined in State laws and regulations). O RSG F / 86 SECTION G Analysis of the Preliminary Plan Section 33352(g) of the CRL requires the inclusion of an analysis of the Preliminary Plan for the Project Area. An analysis of the Preliminary Plan was provided in the supporting documentation prepared at the time the Project Area was adopted. Pursuant to Section 33457.1 of the CRL, an analysis of the Preliminary Plan is not required for the 2008 Bay Point Amendment because it does not propose to add new territory nor amend Project Area boundaries that necessitate the need for a preliminary plan. The Original Preliminary Plan sets forth the boundaries of the Project Area and certain land use criteria. The Analysis of Preliminary Plan from the Original Report and the Original Preliminary Plan are included as Appendix C. O RSG G / 87 SECTION H Report of the Planning Commission Section 33352(h) of the CRL requires inclusion of a report of the Planning Commission of the County of Contra Costa ("Planning Commission"). The Planning Commission is required to review the proposed Amended Plan and determine conformance with the County's General Plan. On Aprill 22, 2008, the Planning Commission took such action pursuant to Section 33346 of the CRL. Planning Commission Resolution No. 13-2008 addressing the conformance of the Amended Plan with the County's General Plan is provided on the following pages. O RSG H / 88 RESOLUTION NO. 13-2008 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the County of Contra Costa, State of California, recommending to the Board of Supervisors and the Redevelopment Agency of the County of Contra Costa adoption of California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Findings and adoption of the Sixth Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project (formerly known as the "West Pittsburg" Redevelopment Project), and making various findings in connection with such recommendations. The Contra Costa County Planning Commission RESOLVES THAT: The Redevelopment Agency of the County of Contra Costa(the "Agency")has submitted to the Contra Costa County Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission") the proposed Sixth Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project (formerly known as the "West Pittsburg" Redevelopment Project) (the "Plan Amendment"); and Part V of the Redevelopment Plan incorporates the General Plan land uses, land use standards, development criteria, goals and objectives into the Redevelopment Plan; and The effects on the environment caused by implementation of the Plan Amendment are covered by the Negative Declaration; and Sections 33346, 33354.6(a), and 33453 of the Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code, Section 33000 et seq.) provides that the Planning Commission is to review the proposed Plan Amendment and make its report and recommendation thereon to the Agency and the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (the 'Board"), including a determination whether the Plan Amendment conforms to the General Plan of the Contra Costa County (the "General Plan"); and Section 65402 of the Government Code provides in part: "(a) If a general plan or part thereof has been adopted, no real property shall be acquired by dedication or otherwise for street, square, park or other public purposes, and no real property shall be disposed of, no street shall be vacated or abandoned, and no public building or structure shall be constructed or authorized, if the adopted general plan or part thereof applies thereto, until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition or disposition, such street vacation or abandonment, or such public building or structure have been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof...." "(c) A local agency shall not acquire real property for any of the purposes specified in paragraph (a) nor dispose of any real property, nor construct or authorize a public building or structure, in any county or city, if such county or city has adopted a general plan or part thereof and such general 320\24�546614.1 1 plan or part thereof is applicable thereto, until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition, disposition, or such public building or structure have been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency having jurisdiction, as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof...."; and The above required Planning Commission report and recommendation, including matters referred to in Health and Safety Code Sections 33346, 33354.6(a) and 33453 and Government Code Section 65402, are to be made to the Agency and the Board within thirty days of the Planning Commission's receipt of the Plan Amendment, for their consideration in acting on the adoption of the Plan Amendment; and The Planning Commission has reviewed the Contra Costa County General Plan, the proposed Plan Amendment, the Negative Declaration, and the staff report accompanying this Resolution pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, and the Report to the Board on the proposed Plan Amendment; and Part V. of the Redevelopment Plan incorporates the County's General Plan land uses and land use standards into the Redevelopment Plan, and the Plan Amendment would facilitate redevelopment of the Bay Point Redevelopment Project in a manner consistent with the General Plan. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that: (a) All required public notices have been given in connection with the actions set forth in this Resolution. (b) The proposed Negative Declaration is adequate for the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt same. (c) Pursuant to Sections 33346, 33354.6(a), and 33453 of the Community Redevelopment Law, the proposed Plan Amendment conforms to the General Plan. (d) Pursuant to Section 65402 of the Government Code, with respect to public activities which may be undertaken pursuant to the Plan Amendment, and that are referred to in Section 65402, such activities and undertakings conform to the General Plan. Section 2. Report and Recommendation. The Planning Commission recommends to the Board of Supervisors the approval and adoption of the Plan Amendment and in the event that prior to its adoption of the Plan Amendment, the Board desires to make any minor, technical, or clarifying changes to the Plan Amendment, the Planning Commission hereby finds and 320\241546614.1 2 determines that any such minor, technical, or clarifying changes need not be referred to it for further report and recommendation, and hereby waives its report and recommendation under Section 33455 of the Community Redevelopment Law concerning any such change; and Section 3. Transmittal. The Planning Commission's Secretary shall transmit a copy of this Resolution to the Agency and the Board for consideration as part of the Agency's Report to the Board pursuant to Section 33352 of the Community Redevelopment Law, and this Resolution shall be deemed the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission concerning the proposed Plan Amendment and contemplated public projects and activities thereunder, as required by applicable provisions of law. The instructions by the County Planning Commission to prepare this resolution were given by motion of the County Planning Commission on Tuesday, April 22, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Wong, Terrell, and Snyder NOES: Commissioner Murray ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioncrs Battaglia, Clark and Gaddis BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the County Planning Commission shall respectively sign and attest the certified copy of this resolution and deliver the same to the Board of Supervisors all in accordance with the Planning Laws of the State of California. Michael Murray, Chair County Planning Commission County of Contra Costa State of California ATTEST: Dennis M. Barry, Secretary County Planning Commission County of Contra Costa State of California 320'a4\546614.1 3 SECTION Report and Recommendation of the Redevelopment Advisory Committee Pursuant to Section 33385.3 of the CRL, a Project Area Committee ("PAC") is required if the Agency proposes to amend a redevelopment plan to: (1) grant the authority to the Agency to acquire by eminent domain property on which persons reside in a project area in which a substantial number of low- and moderate-income persons reside; or (2) add territory in which a substantial number of low-and moderate-income persons reside and grant the authority to the Agency to acquire, by eminent domain, property on which persons reside in the added territory. The proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment does not involve any of these activities. Therefore, there is no requirement to form a PAC. However, while there is no requirement for a PAC, as defined by the CRL, the Agency has taken steps to ensure that local residents, business owners and other interested parties are aware of, and involved in, the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment, and will take the Amended Plan to the PAC for its consideration and recommendation at a meeting scheduled for May 14, 2008. Any recommendations received from the PAC will be incorporated into a supplement to this Report prior to the joint public hearing on the Amended Plan. Notices of this joint public hearing were mailed to all Project Area property owners, residents, business owners, and affected taxing agencies. Additionally, notices are being duly published in the Contra Costa Times (a local newspaper of general circulation) in accordance with the CRL. Collectively, these measures ensure that the views of local residents and business owners as well as those of other interested parties can be made known. The following bullet points provide a summary of the requests, comments, and recommendations received by the Agency from interested property owners, residents and business owners regarding the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment. ■ On April 15, 2008, the Agency received an email from Steve Hoagland requesting a hard copy of the Redevelopment Plan. • On April 16, 2008, Connie Tolleson requested copies of all ordinances referenced in the joint public hearing notice. Agency staff subsequently sent copies of the ordinances to Ms. Tolleson. ■ On April 17, 2008, Paulina Zazueta requested additional information regarding the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. Subsequently Agency staff sent Ms. Zazueta information regarding the Agency's residential rehabilitation program. ■ On April 17, 2008, the Agency received an inquiry for basic information regarding the 2008 Bay Point Amendment from Linda Wheale. Ms. Wheale asked whether the Agency was going to "take our homes"? ■ On April 18, 2008, Kathryn Qualls inquired about the effects of the 2008 Bay Point Amendment on her property in the City of Pittsburg. It was determined that Ms. Qualls had received the joint public hearing notice because she also owned O RSG I / 89 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Community Development Commis _ property in the Project Area (Orbisonia Heights) which had recently been purchased by the Agency. ■ On April 21, 2008, Ken Bartlett requested information about infrastructure improvements for the South Willow Pass Road area neighborhood. O RSG I / 90 SECTION J Statement of Conformance with the General Plan Section 33352(j) of the CRL requires a report of General Plan conformance per Section 65402 of the Government Code. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment does not contain provisions which would alter land use designations, nor does the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment affect the land use provisions of the Redevelopment Plan. A report of the Planning Commission determined that the Redevelopment Plan was in conformance with the General Plan and was provided in the Original Report prepared at the time the Project Area was adopted. Pursuant to Section 33346 of the CRL, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 13-2008 (provided under Section H of this Report) on April 22, 2008, finding that the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. O RSG J / 91 SECTION K Environmental Documentation Section 33352(k) of the CRL requires environmental documentation to be prepared pursuant to Section 21151 of the Public Resources Code. Concurrent with the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency undertook appropriate environmental documentation as necessary. For the 2008 Bay Point Amendment, a Negative Declaration (Initial Study) was prepared pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act guidelines, which found that the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment would not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. A copy of the Negative Declaration follows as Appendix D. O RSG K / 92 SECTION L Report of the County Fiscal Officer The proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment does not add territory to the Project Area. Therefore, preparation of a base year report, as described in CRL Section 33328, is not required for the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. O RSG L / 93 SECTION M Neighborhood Impact Report Section 33352(m) of the CRL requires that a Neighborhood Impact Report be included in this Report. The Original Report contained all of the required information provided for in Section 33352(m) of the CRL. As stated in the Original Report, the overall purpose and impact of the redevelopment activities within the Project Area was to stimulate construction of new affordable housing, upgrade existing residential neighborhoods through rehabilitation of housing units as well as facilitation on infill housing construction. Another aspect of the Redevelopment Plan discussed in the Original Report was the intent to provide major infrastructure improvements in order to better serve the existing residents and businesses of the Project Area as well as provide for new development. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment, as authorized by the CRL, would increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency from $116 million to approximately $689 million and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness from $60 million to approximately $220 million, to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. Pursuant to CRL Section 33352(m), the following discussion presents an overview of redevelopment impacts on Project Area neighborhoods and then discusses in greater detail the impacts of redevelopment on the following: relocation; traffic circulation; environmental quality; availability of community facilities and services; school population and the quality of education; property assessments and taxes; and housing (with emphasis on housing production for low-and moderate-income households). More specifically, this discussion summarizes the Neighborhood Impact Report contained in the Original Report ("Original Neighborhood Impact Report") (shown in italicized lettering) followed by updated information and analysis that describes in detail the impact that the 2008 Bay Point Amendment would have upon Project Area residents. In addition to the italicized excerpts, the Original Neighborhood Impact Report is attached in its entirety as Appendix E of this Report. Overview of Redevelopment Impacts Redevelopment activities will have a direct impact on the Project Area through the alleviation of blighting conditions and such activities will reduce impediments to private investment and development. Indirect impacts on the Project Area as a result of redevelopment activities include (1) stabilizing and improving the quality of the existing residential neighborhoods; (2) expanding the supply of affordable housing; and (3) creating a more attractive and efficient environment for persons living and working in the Project Area. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment will not change the boundaries of the Project Area. Redevelopment activities and programs are expected to continue to impact the Project Area positively through the alleviation of blighting conditions and the reduction of impediments to private investment and development. Redevelopment activities and programs are also expected to stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods, expand the Project Area's O RSG M / 94 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area supply of affordable housing, and create a more attractive and efficient environment for residents, workers, and patrons. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment proposes, however, to increase the tax increment limit from $116 million to $689 million and the bonded indebtedness limit from $60 million to $220 million. This increased financial capacity will enable the Agency to more comprehensively fulfill its goals under the Redevelopment Plan and to effectively implement blight reducing redevelopment projects and activities, leading to increased growth of the Project Area. The impact caused by construction as a result of redevelopment activity and program implementation on area residents, in general, will be minimal as redevelopment projects are intended to be phased with a limited scope of direct activity at any give time. Furthermore, redevelopment projects will be subject to future review and approval by the Board, Agency Board, Planning Commission, and other appropriate bodies after input has been solicited from affected taxing agencies, Project Area property owners, and/or interested parties as appropriate or required by law. Relocation It is not anticipated that any households would be displaced over the life of the Redevelopment Plan. The Agency will conduct its activities to minimize the relocation of households and businesses. The Redevelopment Plan and the relocation plan (which is set forth in Part IV of the Original Report) contain policies, procedures, and safeguards to minimize inconvenience and hardship and to ensure timely, satisfactory relocation of any household that must move as a result of redevelopment activities. It is expected that during fiscal year 07-08 10 very-low-, 6 low-, 4 moderate-, and 2 above- moderate- income households and two commercial operations (residential transitional facilities for special need populations) will be permanently displaced and require relocation assistance. At this time, the agency has no further plans to relocate Project Area residents and/or businesses. However, the implementation of certain redevelopment agency activities and programs identified in Section A may result in the future displacement of Project Area residents and/or businesses over the remaining life of the Redevelopment Plan. Specifically, the public improvement programs BART Specific Plan Implementation- Development Zone 2, BART Specific Plan Implementation- Development Zone 3, and Bailey Road/Orbisonia Heights, if realized, could result in parcel assemblage and the need to relocate Project Area residents and/or businesses. It is important to note that no persons or families of low- and moderate-income shall be displaced unless and until there is suitable housing available and ready for occupancy by such persons or families. The Agency will continue to conduct its activities in a fashion that minimizes the need to relocate households and businesses. If relocation activities are undertaken as a result of actions taken by the Agency, the Agency will handle those activities on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with its General Relocation Plan as set forth in Part IV of the Original Report. The General Relocation Plan adheres to the State Relocation Law, as it now exists or is further amended (Government Code Sections 7260 through 7277), and follows the California Relocation Assistance Act and Real Property Acquisition Guidelines issued by the State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development, pursuant to Government Code Section 7268 and Health and Safety Code Section 50460, as it now exists or is further amended. In accordance with the Agency's General Relocation Plan the O RSG M / 95 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Orbisonia Heights Relocation Plan was adopted on October 2, 2007 in order to insure the lawful relocation of those residents expected to be displaced during fiscal year 07-08. Traffic Circulation The redevelopment program is designated both to encourage new development by providing an adequate traffic circulation system and to mitigate the effects of increased traffic generated by such new development. Although road and intersection improvements are projected to improve access to the area and to reduce existing safety hazards for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles, projected new development in the Project Area, in combination with cumulative development in the West Pittsburg vicinity, will result in increases' in local traffic volumes that may exceed the capacity of most local arterials. Section W.C. of the Environmental Impact Report contains a detailed and comprehensive traffic and circulation analysis. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment will not alter the Project Area boundaries nor does the Redevelopment Plan provide for the direct development of any private or public development projects that would generate traffic and impact existing roadways. The implementation of redevelopment activities and programs will, however, stimulate growth in the Project Area and encourage new development and investment from the private sector which will result in increases in local traffic volumes. The Agency has identified a number of public improvement projects that would improve access to the Project Area and reduce existing safety hazards for motorists and pedestrians. Specifically, projects planned for the Project Area will include paving, reconstruction, rehabilitation and widening of streets, construction of curb, gutter and sidewalks, widening of intersections, and grade separations. Refer to Section E for a more comprehensive and detailed list of neighborhood infrastructure upgrades that will mitigate the effects of increased traffic generated by new development. It should be noted that all new development and redevelopment within the Project Area will be consistent with the Contra Costa County General Plan ("General Plan") which controls the land use designations and intensities within the Project Area. Furthermore, the 2008 Bay Point Amendment will not alter or intensify the General Plan's land uses, traffic generation, levels of service, or intersection capacities. As a result, no traffic or circulation impacts are anticipated that have not already been considered by the General Plan Environmental Impact Report. Environmental Quality The environmental quality of the Project Area will generally be enhanced by Redevelopment Plan activities aimed at eliminating blighting conditions which are generally perceived as negative environmental factors. These plan activities include: 1) rehabilitation of dilapidated homes; 2) provision of infill housing; 3) upgrading of residential neighborhoods through street and landscaping improvisions, construction of curbs, gutters and sidewalks, and provision of mini-parks and tot lots; 4) major road and infrastructure improvements, and 5) elimination of flooding conditions. The Redevelopment Plan will create two additional impacts which include: 1) new development, which tends to increase density and create a more concentrated urbanized environment; 2) increases in traffic resulting in greater noise and air emissions. However, redevelopment activities related to improvement of traffic circulation patterns in the Project O RSG M / 96 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Area are designed to help mitigate these adverse environmental effects of the Redevelopment Plan. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment will not alter the Project Area boundaries nor does the Redevelopment Plan provide for the direct development of any private or public development projects. During implementation of the Redevelopment Plan, specific redevelopment proposals may warrant specific environmental analysis as required by the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et. seq. Community Facilities and Services The Redevelopment Plan will improve the availability of public facilities in the Project Area and infrastructure improvements such as street widening and road repair, design and construction, and intersection upgrades will lead to improvements in the provision of various public services as a result of traffic circulation improvements. These improvements will enhance response times for fire, police, and other emergency services. On the other hand, development as a result of redevelopment activities will generate increased demands in the Project Area for police, fire, schools, and other public services. Service-providing agencies that rely on property tax revenue will continue to receive the same level of tax revenue from the Project Area as they obtained prior to Redevelopment Plan adoption (assuming no change in tax rate). The 2008 Bay Point Amendment will not alter the Project Area boundaries nor does the Redevelopment Plan provide for the direct development of any private or public development projects. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment will increase the Agency's financial capacity to more comprehensively fulfill its goals under the Redevelopment Plan and to effectively implement blight reducing redevelopment projects and activities, leading to increased growth of the Project Area. The analysis on redevelopment's impacts on community facilities and services as described in the Original Report remains applicable under the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. School Population and Quality of Education To assist in increasing the supply of affordable housing in the Project Area and the County, the Plan will encourage the construction of housing in the Project Area. It is estimated that over the life of the Plan 723 units of housing may be added to the Project Area housing stock. As described in the EIR, this may add as many as 506 school children to the pupil numbers in the Mt. Diablo and Pittsburg Unified School Districts. However, this increase is expected to be very gradual given the extended build-out period of twenty-five years or more. Because of this extended build-out period, it is difficult to predict the impact Project generated enrollment increases would have on area schools. Enrollment patterns could change significantly over this period, as could District facilities. The rate at which the residential expansion takes place will be a major factor in determining the impact on school enrollment (i.e., gradual development would have less significant effects than building new units all at once or in large segments). In any event, Project-related increases in the residential population would probably require some expansion of school district facilities over the long term. Assembly Bill 2926, which became law on January 2, 1987, provides for the imposition of school impact fees for new development prior to the issuance of building permits. It is O RSG M / 97 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area anticipated that Project-assisted housing construction will be subject to such impact fees, mitigating the impact of increased school enrollment due to redevelopment activities. The potential effects of the Redevelopment Plan on local schools were evaluated by the Environmental Impact Report certified at the time of the Project Area's adoption. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment will not alter the Project Area boundaries nor does the Redevelopment Plan provide for the direct development of any private or public development projects. Therefore, it is anticipated that the 2008 Bay Point Amendment would have no effect on school populations or the quality of education that have not already been evaluated by the aforementioned Environmental Impact Report. None the less, the 2008 Bay Point Amendment does propose increasing the tax increment cap and bonded indebtedness limit which will provide the Agency with additional capital to implement blight eliminating projects, including increasing the Project Area's supply of affordable housing. As a result of project implementation it is reasonable to expect gradual growth and an increase in the number of school age children within the Project Area. It should be noted however, that all new development and redevelopment projects within the Project Area, whether implemented by the Agency or the private sector, are required to be consistent with the General Plan which controls the land use designations and intensities within the Project Area. Accordingly, the General Plan contains relevant policies and implementation measures pertaining to schools in order to mitigate the effects of new development on schools and ensure the provision of adequate school facilities. Furthermore, during implementation of the Redevelopment Plan, specific redevelopment proposals may warrant project specific environmental analysis as required by the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et. seq. which requires an a analysis of the project's impact on schools. Property Assessments and Taxes The establishment of a redevelopment project and use of tax increment financing will have no effect on the ad valorem property tax rate or total ad valorem property tax bill levied against properties inside or outside the Project Area. Tax increment financing does not affect the tax rate, but instead alters the distribution of property tax revenue that would be collected in any event, so that a portion (the tax increments generated by increased assessed value of Project Area property over the frozen base) is allocated to the Agency to contribute to the elimination of blight in the Project Area. The establishment of a redevelopment project and the use of tax increment financing has been established as a last resort financing mechanism to provide blight-alleviating public improvements that cannot feasibly be financed by tax assessment districts alone. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment will not change the boundaries of the Project Area; however, it will increase the tax increment limit from $116 million to $689 million and the bonded indebtedness limit from $60 million to $220 million. The amendment of these financial limits does not affect the tax rate nor does it extend the time period that the Agency may collect tax increment, but instead allows the Agency to increase its financial capacity to issue bonded indebtedness and to receive tax increments generated by increased value of Project Area property over the frozen base to pay for blight eliminating projects and to repay Agency debts. O RSG M / 98 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area Housing No dwelling units are anticipated to be removed from the Project Area's housing stock as result of redevelopment activities. However, to the extent feasible, the Agency will require developers of projects that necessitate removal of units from the low- and moderate-income housing stock to contribute to the replacement of such units. Further, a portion of the tax increment monies allocated to the Agency's low and moderate income housing fund could be used to finance the costs of any replacement housing obligation, as necessary. It is projected that all of the Plan's relocation and replacement housing obligations, if any, will be accomplished within forty years. As required by state law, dwelling units housing low- and moderate-income persons and families which are removed from the housing market because of redevelopment will be replaced within four years of removal. No persons or families of low- and moderate-income shall be displaced unless and until there is suitable housing available and ready for occupancy by such persons or families. The total number of dwelling units, housing persons and families of low- or moderate- income that will be constructed or rehabilitated will primarily depend on the following: 1. Health and Safety Code Section 33413(b) requires that 30% of all units constructed or rehabilitated by the Agency be available at affordable housing costs to low- and moderate-income households, and that at least 15% of all units constructed or rehabilitated by private developers or other governmental entities be available at affordable housing cost to such households. Of all units that are constructed in the Project Area, at least the percentages described in aforementioned section shall be available at affordable cost to low- and moderate-income households. 2. Since the tax increment cap is set at $116 million, up to $23.2 million will be available for the purpose of rehabilitating and constructing low-and moderate- income housing within the Project Area. The number of housing units to be constructed and rehabilitated will depend on the mix of new construction and rehabilitation that is undertaken. However, project-assisted rehabilitation or existing deteriorated residential structures may result in direct improvements to as many as 500 structures and as many as 20 parcels are expected to be made available to private developers for new residential construction. Project-assisted new housing construction is expected to produce approximately 90 units of multifamily housing (of which one-half are planned to be affordable to very low income households) and 144 units of single family housing (34% of which are planned to be affordable to very low income households). Methods for financing construction of housing for low and moderate-income persons and families may include: 1. The housing fund comprising 20 percent of tax increment revenues and additional tax increment revenue available in the later years of the Plan term; 2. Mortgage revenue bonds; 3. Community Development Block Grant funds (if the program exists); 4. Other Federal and State housing assistance programs; and O RSG M / 99 REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area 5. Developer contributions. The precise method for financing any specific project that will include low- and moderate- income housing will depend on market conditions and financing availability at the time of development. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment will not alter the Project Area boundaries nor does the Redevelopment Plan provide for the direct development, rehabilitation, or demolition of any private or public housing projects. Information provided under the subsection Housing of the Neighborhood Impact Report and contained in the Original Report (summarized above) remains pertinent and applicable. Because it is important to update and identify any changes, and point out the effects of the 2008 Bay Point Amendment on the low- and moderate-income housing stock the following information updates are provided. Identified in Section F, the Agency does have plans to displace 10 very-low-, 6 low-, 4 moderate-, 2 above-moderate-income households, and two commercial operations (residential transition facilities for special need temporary tenants) over the 07-08 fiscal year. In anticipation of this activity, the Agency adopted the Obrisonia Heights Relocation Plan on October 2, 2007 in order to assure the lawful relocation of those residents. Furthermore, implementation of the Redevelopment Plan, specifically the BART Specific Plan Implementation- Development Zone 2, BART Specific Plan Implementation- Development Zone 3 and Bailey Road/Orbisonia Heights, may require lot assemblage resulting in further displacement of low- and moderate-income households. It is important to note that the Agency's ability to make more units available to households of very-low-, low-, and moderate-income will be enhanced by the 2008 Bay Point Amendment which proposes to increase the cumulative tax increment cap from $116 million to $689 million. The CRL requires that, at a minimum, 20% of the gross tax increment collected by the Agency be set-aside for the purpose of rehabilitating and constructing low-and moderate-income housing within the Project Area, which means that up to $137.8 million will be available for said purpose. The number of housing units to be constructed and rehabilitated, however, will depend on the mix of new construction and rehabilitation that is undertaken. Q RSG M / 100 SECTION N Summary of Agency's Consultations with Affected Taxing Entities and Response to Said Entities' Concerns Regarding the Plan On February 14, 2008 the Agency forwarded to all taxing entities the following: 1) Statement of Preparation of the 2008 Bay Point Amendment, 2) the 2008 Bay Point Plan Amendment, 3) the Preliminary Report (on CD), 4) the Notice of Public Review and Intent to adopt a proposed Negative Declaration, and 5) the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the 2008 Bay Point Amendment for review and consultation. As a part of each of these mailings, the Agency offered to consult with the affected taxing agencies pursuant to Section 33328 of the CRL. Notices of the joint public hearing on the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment were sent to each affected taxing entity in accordance with the requirements of the CRL. The Agency contacted all affected taxing entities on or around April 15, 2008 and proposed additional consultation on the 2008 Bay Point Amendment if desired by the taxing entities. At the request of the Pittsburg Unified School District ("PUSY), the Agency consulted with the PUSD on April 16, 2008. PUSD representatives described school funding in California and inquired about potential fiscal impacts on the PUSD as a result of the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment. The Agency resent to the PUSD the fiscal analysis originally included with the joint public hearing notice sent to affected taxing entities on February 14, 2008. It was determined that no additional action or follow up was required. O RSG N / 101 APPENDIX A AMENDED FIVE-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN O RSG APPENDIX A / 102 VI. 2004/05 to 2008/09 Implementation Plan Amendment and Mid-term Review Prepared to Support the 2008 Amendment to the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan The Bay Point Project Area ("Project Area") consists of approximately 1,550 acres of land in eastern Contra Costa County (see Figure VI-1). The Project Area is a mix of residential, commercial, and industrial land uses, which are located near the Pittsburg BART Station. Bay Point also has an underutilized waterfront. Access to the Project Area is limited to the Highway 4 transportation corridor. The Naval Weapons Station separates Bay Point from the City of Concord. The freeway separates the Project Area from the City of Pittsburg to the south. Redevelopment of the Project Area is intended to remove blight by revitalizing the existing commercial spaces, restoring the waterfront for public purposes, redeveloping properties for new business establishments that will create jobs for local residents, and revitalizing the residential neighborhoods. The 2004/05 to 2008/09 Implementation Plan adopted on January 17, 2006 ("Existing Implementation Plan") identified the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency's ("Agency") goals and objectives during the 2004/05 to 2008/09 planning period, and documented the accomplishments for Bay Point during the 1999/00 through 2006/07 planning period. The Existing Implementation Plan also identified available resources and anticipated expenditures on identified proposed projects during the planning period. The Existing Implementation Plan also described how the Agency would expand the supply of housing, spend its low and moderate income housing set-aside funds ("Housing Funds") and meet its affordable housing obligations. MIDTERM REVIEW REQUIREMENTS Section 33490 (c) of the Community Redevelopment Law ("CRL") requires that at least once within the five-year term of an implementation plan, a redevelopment agency shall conduct a public hearing and hear testimony of all interested parties for the purpose of reviewing the redevelopment plan and the corresponding implementation plan for each redevelopment project in the jurisdiction and evaluating the progress of the redevelopment project. The mid-term review must occur no earlier than two years and no later than three years following the adoption of the implementation plan. PURPOSE FOR AMENDING 2004/05-2008/09 BAY POINT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The Agency has initiated the redevelopment plan amendment process to amend the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan The proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan ("2008 Bay Point Amendment") will, if adopted, accomplish the following: 1. Increase the total dollar limit on the amount of tax increment revenues the Project Area may receive; and 2. Increase the limit on bonded indebtedness that can be outstanding at any one time. The proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment will enable the Agency to more effectively implement redevelopment projects and activities eliminating blighting conditions within the Project Area. The Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-1 Five Year Implementation Plan Mid-term Review Redevelopment Plan's current cumulative tax increment cap is $116 million and the bonded indebtedness limit is $60 million. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment proposes to increase these caps to $689 and $220 million,respectively. Section 33451.5 of the CRL sets forth the required elements of the report on blight that must be presented by the Agency at the public hearing to consider the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment increasing the tax increment and outstanding indebtedness limits. Under item (7) of this code section the Agency is required to amend the Existing Implementation Plan to address any changes the 2008 Bay Point Amendment may have on the Agency's implementation activities. Such amendment to an implementation plan must comply with the requirements of Section 33490 of the CRL. SUBJECT OF THIS DOCUMENT This document summarizes the actions and activities of the Agency in revitalizing Bay Point that have taken place since the Existing Implementation Plan was adopted in 2006 in compliance with the requirements to conduct a midterm review of the Existing Implementation Plan. Serving as the 2004/05- 2008/09 Amended Implementation Plan ("Amended Implementation Plan"), it identifies programs and projects listed in Existing Implementation Plan as well as presents new proposed programs and projects that Agency staff recommends be added as a result of the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment. Figure VI-I Bay Point Project Area Bay Point Redevelopment j Project Area {i1ghMlY 24 Pittsburg N h .A� Goncord Antioch N Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-2 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan A. Legislative Changes to Implementation Plans Among the changes to CRL to be addressed in this Mid-term Review is the requirement that implementation plans must include a detailed description of the Redevelopment Plan's regulatory limits, as well as changes to limitations on proportional expenditures (Section 33334.4(b). The Existing Implementation Plan currently reflects the detailed description of the Redevelopment Plan's regulatory limits in Table VI-1. Changes to Section 33334.4(b), serve to modify the previous limitation that each agency expend over the duration of each implementation plan, the monies in its Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund"in at least the same proportion as the low-income population under age 65 bears to the total low-income population of the community as reflected in the most recent census". The new language provides a higher level of specificity as follows: "in at least the same proportion as the number of low-income households with a member under age 65 years bears to the total number of low-income households of the community as reported in the most recent census". The potential impact of the change is difficult to assess in that the census bureau does not provide a data set that reflects the new requirement leaving the burden on local jurisdictions to determine. As a practical matter, the prior language may continue to be used since the available data set for seniors age 65 and over could arguably reflect only households comprised of such seniors. This legislative change does not apply to the Mid-term Review and will be addressed during the preparation of the FY2009/10 through FY2013/14 Implementation Plan. In addition, AB 987 expanded the monitoring and notification requirements in CRL Section 33418(c) to require that agencies compile and maintain annually a database of all existing new and substantially rehabilitated units assisted by the Agency or otherwise counted toward fulfilling the Agency's affordable housing production obligations. Accordingly, the Agency will ensure compliance with the provisions of AB 987 no later than December 31, 2008. B. Agency Accomplishments, FY 1999/00-FY 2006/07 The Agency has funded a number of housing, public safety, health, infrastructure, urban design, and economic and community development projects, which are a continuation of the efforts to attract jobs, remove blight, and improve access to affordable housing. The Agency's accomplishments since FY 1999/00 are listed below: Sponsored a Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Specific Plan and General Plan amendment in collaboration with the City of Pittsburg and the BART District.The Specific Plan was adopted by the County in 2002 and was part of a larger joint effort to plan the area around the BART Station for transit-oriented development. Acquired several parcels near the BART station, which will be used for commercial/mixed use development that is consistent with the Specific Plan. Funded the Waterfront Strategic Plan, which planned for the revitalization of the Marina and urban design improvements to better pedestrian and bicycle access to the waterfront. Funded a community planning process to create a conceptual plan for the development of an eight-acre site in the North Broadway Neighborhood. The plan followed new urbanist concepts, allowing for a mix of residential and commercial development along Willow Pass Road. Facilitated the development of 69 single family, and 49 multi family units, which were part of a residential and commercial mixed use project in the North Broadway Area.An additional 9-unit project is pending. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-3 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Completed the infrastructure and traffic circulation improvements for the North Broadway Neighborhood. The improvements were implemented for North Broadway, Solano, Pullman, Poinsettia, Bella Monte, Crivello and Siino Avenues and Highway 4. Secured approval from the County Board of Supervisors to adopt a Planned-Unit District Zoning (P-1) Program for the Project Area and adjacent waterfront property. Funded a retail capacity study to identify and prioritize areas in Bay Point best suited for retail development. Funded the creation of a website that identifies available sites within Bay Point that could accommodate new residential or commercial development. Funded economic development promotion in Bay Point by creating marketing materials for business attraction and retention. Secured approval from the County Board of Supervisors, on July 13, 2004, for the Bay Harbor Commerce Center Project, which allowed Bay Point Venture One to develop a light industrial/business park at the northeast intersection of Port Chicago Highways and Pacifica Avenue. Created the Community Group Funding Program to support neighborhood beautification projects that eliminate blight in the Bay Point Redevelopment Project area and foster a sense of community and pride among the local residents. Assisted the Mt. Diablo Unified School District to secure a portable building for after school programs at Riverview Middle School. Established the Community Preservation-Abatement and Revolving Loan Fund. Provided financial assistance to Habitat for Humanity in June 2005 to acquire real property to expand the supply of affordable housing in the Project Area. Created a Housing Development Fund to be used for site acquisition and/or predevelopment costs to expand the supply of affordable housing. Funded the construction of curb, gutter, and sidewalks on Willow Pass Road and Port Chicago Highway. Funded median and landscape installation at the intersection of Willow Pass Road and Port Chicago Highway. Funded flood control improvements along Bailey Road, north of State Route 4. Installed frontage improvements, including curbs,gutters,and sidewalks along Alves Lane. Partnered with a non-profit housing developer to construct the Elaine Null Apartment Complex, a 14-unit affordable housing complex. Provided loans to numerous first time homebuyers. Partnered with the Ambrose Recreation and Park District to fund numerous improvements to various park and community center improvements. Worked with the Code Enforcement Division of the Building Inspection Department to implement a dumpster program for low income property owners. Sponsored the Avenue Banner Program for Willow Pass Road and Bailey Road. C. Project Area Goals and Objectives The Project Area's goals and objectives are intended to guide Agency actions toward eliminating the Project Area's physical and economic blight. The community and Agency first established goals in the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-4 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Redevelopment Plan, and the General Plan, which will continue to direct future actions within the Project Area. Since the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, other long term goals have become important to the Agency. Those goals are synthesized below as Capital/Public Improvement and Economic Development/Community Improvement goals. In addition to these two sets of goals, the Agency has established particular goals and objectives for the Implementation Plan planning period, as required by the CRL. The Redevelopment Plan goals, Capital/Public Improvement and Economic Development/Community Improvement goals, and the Implementation Plan goals and objectives are listed below. The Existing Implementation Plan was adopted by the Agency in order to actively pursue the goals listed below. 1. Redevelopment Plan Goals In accordance with the CRL, the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan was designed to achieve five major goals: Stimulate new industrial development in the Project Area in order that it may become a productive and attractive economic center, providing jobs for community residents and enhancing the local tax base. Revitalize and expand commercial development in the area. Provide major infrastructure improvements in the Project Area in order to serve the existing area residents and businesses, as well as to accommodate new residential, commercial, and industrial development. Upgrade the existing residential neighborhoods through rehabilitation of a substantial number of existing housing units, the facilitation of infill housing construction, and development of neighborhood parks and infrastructure improvements. Stimulate the construction of new affordable housing in the Project Area. 2. Capital/Public Improvement and Economic Development/Community Improvement Goals Attract industrial and other job creating businesses to the Project Area, which may create jobs for community residents and enhance the local tax base. Implement road, drainage, water and sewer improvements in the Project Area. Encourage and support public-private partnerships that address community needs. Encourage and support community participation. Leverage the Agency's resources with grants, loans and other funding opportunities. Improve and expand the type and quality of community facilities available within the Project Area. Expand and improve the commercial/economic development opportunities in the Project Area and create focal points to the existing commercial strips. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-5 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan 3. Five Year Implementation Plan Goals and Objectives Implement the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Specific Plan. Implement marketing program to attract new businesses, improve jobs/housing balance and expand the tax base. Continue efforts to improve the attractiveness of Bay Point at the community entrances and at the waterfront. Continue efforts to improve the Willow Pass Road, Bailey Road, and Port Chicago Highway corridors. Continue to promote residential infill development. D. Projected Five Year Non-Housing Projects and Activities The Agency will undertake projects and activities in the Bay Point Project Area during the Implementation Plan planning period in order to reduce blight and achieve the Project Area's goals and objectives. The Agency will continue to encourage projects and activities that expand the job base and improve the quality of life for Project Area residents. The Agency will also partner with property owners and potential investors to implement land development projects that help achieve the Project Area's goals and objectives. Land development assistance will be provided through business incentives, loans, land write downs, and other tools that can reduce the cost of business operations. In addition, the Agency will apply for grants when doing so furthers the Redevelopment Plan. Projects and activities that the Agency may help fund during the Implementation Plan planning period are listed below. Project and activity implementation depend on available financial resources. The anticipated expenditures listed under each project reflect expenditures through FY 2008/09. Some projects listed may not incur expenditures until after the 2004/05-2008/09 planning period, however are included in this Amended Implementation Plan to account for administrative planning. Capital/Public Improvement Projects The Agency has identified a number of public improvement projects which would aid current revitalization efforts and eliminate deficiencies in existing infrastructure systems in the Project Area. Paving, reconstruction, rehabilitation and widening of streets, widening of intersections, grade separations, and utility realignment are needed in the Project Area to improve traffic flow, provide better access for emergency vehicles, enhance accessibility, increase safety for pedestrians and motorists, and bring overall aesthetic improvements to the Bay Point community which may help improve surrounding property values and attract further investment from the private sector. Additionally, utilities such as phone lines, sewer lines, and storm drains that run along streets and required utility and street improvements are all necessary components of successful redevelopment. Furthermore, these infrastructure and utility improvements will encourage infill development of vacant lots and the redevelopment of blighted properties by property owners. Such activity is expected to reduce blighting conditions in the Project Area by removing conditions that otherwise hinder the viable use of buildings or lots and improving property values. In some cases, infrastructure and utility improvements are expected to stimulate private sector investment, lower vacancy rates, increase lease rates, cause an increase in the availability of necessary commercial facilities, and reduce conditions of dilapidation and deterioration. The Agency intends to maximize its investment by improving streets and utilities simultaneously wherever feasible. The Agency has identified street segments for these improvements. Projects where funds have been expended since the Existing Implementation Plan was adopted have been identified. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-6 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Project/Program Description Expenditures Anticipated Through Completion FY 2008/09 Port Chicago Highway/Pacifica Ave Intersection Improvements The commercial and industrial zoned Expenditures to Date: 2008 properties surrounding this intersection have $0 the potential to attract private investment. Improvements to the Port Chicago Highway and Pacifica Highway intersection would Anticipated include upgrading the existing 3-way traffic Expenditures: signal into a 4-way signal. These $325,000 improvements will provide access to the entrance of the proposed Bay Harbor Commerce Center (business park). This project is slated to begin in 2009. This project will stimulate economic growth by providing circulation improvements necessary to accommodate commercial and industrial development. Pacifica Avenue Frontage Improvements Improvements are needed to drainage and Expenditures to Date: 2009 infrastructure deficiencies that create highly $0 unsafe conditions for pedestrians in and around an elementary school, middle school, the Shore Acres neighborhood, and the Anticipated nearby shopping center. The Agency would Expenditures: assist on frontage improvements (curb, gutter $2,500,000 and sidewalks) along Pacifica Avenue, between Port Chicago Avenue and Driftwood Drive. This project is slated to begin 2008. This project will stimulate economic growth by providing circulation and infrastructure improvements. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-7 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Pacifica Avenue Extension/Bay Harbor Industrial Area Infrastructure The Agency is facilitating the development Expenditures to Date: 2010 of the Bay Harbor Industrial Park. This area $0 is currently underutilized and has the potential to become a thriving industrial area within the community. Infrastructure Anticipated improvements would include participation in Expenditures: the construction of the Pacifica Avenue $3,000,000 extension eastward to the proposed intersection with the Alves Lane extension road. This project is slated to begin in 2008 This project would provide the necessary infrastructure to develop the proposed Bay Harbor Industrial Park. Currently, there is insufficient access and infrastructure to adequately utilize the properties. Pacifica Avenue Drainage Pacifica Avenue area drainage includes Expenditures to Date: 2010 Agency participation in construction of $0 drainage improvements in the industrial area east of Port Chicago Highway and along the Anticipated Pacifica Avenue extension. This project is Expenditures: anticipated to begin in 2008. $600,000 This project would provide the necessary infrastructure to develop the proposed Bay Harbor Industrial Park, stimulating economic growth. Clearland Avenue- Assemblage/Infrastructure The Agency will participate in the Expenditures to Date: 2010 development of three vacant parcels on the $0 south side of Willow Pass Road, east of Clearland Avenue. The Agency would facilitate the assemblage of vacant and Anticipated blighted properties enabling the community Expenditures: to fulfill the desired neighborhood retail $2,500,000 development. This project is anticipated to begin in 2009. This project would address the lack of commercial facilities in the Project Area and stimulate economic growth. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-8 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Contra Costa Fire District Station 86 The Agency identified this project when the Existing Implementation Plan was adopted. Expenditures to Date: 2010 The Agency sponsored a General Plan $0 amendment to relocate the fire station from its current location on Willow Pass Road to a location west of the existing site. Anticipated Expenditures: This project will improve public safety. $0 Bailey Road/Orbisonia Heights Upgrades to the existing infrastructure system are necessary for the future Expenditures to Date: 2010 development of the Orbisonia Heights area. $0 The Agency would assist with improvements along the corridor, where there are numerous vacant lots, vacant buildings, and Anticipated substandard structures. This project is Expenditures: anticipated to begin in 2008. $1,082,556 This project will improve vehicle and pedestrian circulation, encourage private investment, and stimulate economic growth. Bailey Road(north of SR 4) This project is related to the implementation Expenditures to Date: 2011 of the BART Specific Plan and includes $0 upgrades to Bailey Road, north of State Route 4. Improvements consist of widening sidewalks, constructing mid-block crossings, Anticipated creating bike lanes, landscaped medians, and Expenditures: street trees. These improvements will $1,666,667 provide better pedestrian and vehicular access to the BART station. This project is slated to begin in 2008. This project will improve vehicle and pedestrian circulation, encourage private investment, and stimulate economic growth. These improvements will positively affect surrounding property values and will encourage private partnerships to assist in implementation of the Specific Plan. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-9 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Willow Pass Road Expenditures to Date: 2011 Improvements to existing infrastructure are $0 necessary to implement portions of the Bayshore Specific Plan. The Agency would assist with several upgrades to Willow Pass Anticipated Road within the Neighborhood Commercial Expenditures: Mixed-Use Area, including widening $1,666,667 sidewalks, mid-block crossings, bike lanes, landscaped medians, and street trees. This project is anticipated to begin in 2008. This project will improve vehicle and pedestrian circulation, encourage private investment, and stimulate economic growth. Hertz Property Infrastructure The Agency would participate in the Expenditures to Date: 2011 development of three vacant parcels on the $0 southwest corner of Willow Pass Road and Alberts Avenue. The Agency would assist with infrastructure improvements hindering Anticipated development. This project is slated to begin Expenditures: in 2009. $666,667 This project will stimulate economic growth by providing infrastructure improvements necessary to accommodate commercial development. Delta De Anza Trail The Agency identified this project when the Existing Implementation Plan was adopted. Expenditures to Date: 2011 This project includes the design of the trail $0 gap closure and identifying potential funding sources. This project is slated to begin in 2009-10. Anticipated Expenditures: $0 Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-10 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan BART Specific Plan Implementation- Development Zone 2 (Orbisonia Heights Development) Expenditures to Date: 2012 The Agency has been actively implementing $6,152,351 the BART Specific Plan activities in Development Zone 2 since the Existing Implementation Plan was adopted in January Anticipated of 2006. Activities include completing land Expenditures: assemblage, upgrading infrastructure, $TBD streetscape improvements, and participating in public/private partnership to develop the site. The Agency wants to create initiatives to attract a land developer to plan and implement a residential mixed-use, transit oriented project at the Orbisonia Heights. The Agency is in the process of preparing a Request for Proposals to solicit a qualified developer. The final cost is to be determined. Site acquisition could cost up to $26.5 million, however the properties would be resold to replenish Agency revenues. This project began in 2005. This project would eliminate physical blighting conditions that currently exist in the area and stimulate economic growth by providing circulation and infrastructure improvements. BART Specific Plan Implementation- Development Zone 3 The Agency will further implement the Expenditures to Date: 2012 BART Specific Plan by will participating in $0 Development Zone 3. Activities will include land assemblage (if necessary), upgrades to infrastructure, and participation in Anticipated public/private partnerships to develop several Expenditures: sites. This project is slated to begin in 2008. $1,125,000 This project will stimulate economic growth by providing circulation deficiencies and infrastructure improvements. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-11 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan East Willow Pass Road Improvements This project includes widening of Willow Expenditures to Date: 2012 Pass Road, from the current 2-lane $0 configuration to a 4-lane configuration. Median islands would also be created to improve aesthetics and improve traffic Anticipated circulation. This project is slated to begin in Expenditures: 2008. $1,200,000 This project will stimulate economic growth by providing circulation improvements necessary to accommodate commercial and industrial development. Bike Lanes The Agency identified this project when the Existing Implementation Plan was adopted. Expenditures to Date: 2012 The Agency will implement the design and $0 construction of bike lanes along Port of Chicago Highway between Pacifica Avenue and Mc Avoy Road/Harris Yacht Harbor Anticipated area. This project is slated to begin in 2009- Expenditures: 10. $0 Alves Lane Extension/Criterion Industrial Area Infrastructure These improvements include the construction Expenditures to Date: 2013 of the northern extension of Alves Lane, $0 from Willow Pass Road to the Pacifica Avenue Extension and north to the railroad crossing over to the waterfront area. These Anticipated infrastructure improvements would enable Expenditures: the development of a large vacant property $1,200,000 designated for industrial uses as well as provide better circulation within the industrial zoned area and to the waterfront. This project is slated to begin in 2009. This project would provide the necessary infrastructure to develop the closed marina and the industrial park, encourage private investment, and stimulate economic growth. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-12 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Alves Lane Drainage The Agency will participate in the Expenditures to Date: 2013 construction of a series of drainage $0 improvements in the Criterian Industrial Area north of Willow Pass Road, along the Alves Anticipated Lane extension. These infrastructure improvements would enable the development Expenditures: of a large vacant property designated for $240,000 industrial uses. This project is slated to begin in 2009. This project would provide the necessary infrastructure to develop the proposed Bay Harbor Industrial Park, stimulating economic growth. Railroad Overcrossing to Waterfront This project addresses implementation of the Expenditures to Date: 2015$0 Waterfront Strategic Plan identified in the Implementation Plan. The Waterfront Specific Plan was adopted to address the Anticipated vacant/closed marina within the Project Area. Expenditures: The Agency will assist in completion of a $3,428,571 grade separation crossing from the Pacifica Avenue extension and Alves Lane extension to the waterfront. A secondary crossing to the waterfront will provide access to the closed marina area. The project is anticipated to begin in 2009. This project would provide the necessary infrastructure to develop the closed marina, encourage private investment, and stimulate economic growth. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-13 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Waterfront Infrastructure This project addresses implementation of the Expenditures to Date: 2015 Waterfront Strategic Plan identified in the $0 Implementation Plan. The closed marina is lacking sufficient infrastructure to accommodate development. The Agency Anticipated would assist in facilitating improvements Expenditures: such as drainage, circulation, and water and $857,143 sewer services. This project is slated to begin in 2009. This project would provide the necessary infrastructure to develop the closed marina, encourage private investment, and stimulate economic growth. South Willow Pass Road Neighborhood Infrastructure This project includes upgrades and Expenditures to Date: 2015 construction of curbs, gutters and sidewalks, $0 drainage improvements, and improved lighting in the older neighborhood south of Willow Pass Road, between Loftus and Anticipated Madison. These improvements will address Expenditures: infrastructure deficiencies that hinder $1,719,393 pedestrian safety in existing neighborhoods. This project is slated to begin in 2009. This project would provide the necessary infrastructure to increase the safety of residents and visitors in this neighborhood, encourage private investment, and stimulate economic growth. Expenditures to Date: $6,152,351 TOTAL Anticipated Expenditures: $23,777,664 Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-14 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Community Improvement Activities/Economic Development Promotion Projects in the Community Improvement Program directly address the appearance of the neighborhood, the health and safety aspects of community life and indirectly the overall value of the properties located in the Project Area. Increased property value impacts not only the specific improved property, but has significant impact on surrounding properties as well. The Agency has established beautification programs to assist residents and businesses upgrade and maintain the appearance of buildings and property, a garbage remediation program that helps address illegal dumping, code enforcement support that adds valuable human power to the strenuous task of daily code review in the Project Area, marketing pieces to assist with business attraction thus lowering vacancy rates and increasing lease rates, and other invaluable programs that address the improved appearance of the entire community.Neighborhood safety and crime prevention activities are directly tied to the collaborative effort of County officials to improve the health and welfare of Project Area residents and workers. The Agency also intends to implement neighborhood safety and crime prevention activities,which include targeted code enforcement, graffiti removal, Abatement Attorney, Resident Deputy, and equipment such as security cameras.Neighborhood safety and crime prevention activities are directly tied to the collaborative effort of County officials to improve the health, safety, and welfare of Project Area residents and workers. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-15 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Community Improvement Program Expenditures to Date: Ongoing The Agency provides financial assistance to $36,674 support neighborhood "beautification" ' projects, such as graffiti removal and vacant lot/yard cleanup. Many projects addressed Anticipated by this program are initiated by volunteer Expenditures: groups in Bay Point. The projects in the $36,000 Community Improvement Program directly address the appearance of the neighborhood, and indirectly the overall value of the properties located in the Project Area. Component Program: Neighborhood Safety Pro ram Amount currently unknown or included This program provides funding required for in Anticipated site-specific services, equipment and Expenditures above facilities aimed at addressing problems related to criminal activity affecting the health, welfare and safety of the Project Area. Such activities include targeted code enforcement, illegal dumping remediation programs, Abatement Attorney (see below), Resident Deputy, and equipment such as security cameras. The Community Improvement Program will eliminate existing blighting conditions by improving severely deteriorated and dilapidated buildings and stagnant property values, which can have an adverse affect on surrounding property values as well. The Program will increase the safety of the area and reduce crimes against property and persons. The elimination of these existing blighting conditions and safety issues will encourage private investment and economic development in the Project Area. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-16 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Abatement Attorney-County Counsel The Project Area is significantly affected by Expenditures to Date: Ongoing a lack of private investment resulting in the $30,688 deterioration and dilapidation of properties. A pro-rata share of County Counsel expenses Anticipated for an attorney is devoted solely to code Expenditures: enforcement activities. Included Under This project would address the lack of private Community investment and improve physically blighted Improvement properties in the Project Area. Program Community Group Funding Program This project was identified in the Existing Expenditures to Date: Ongoing Implementation Plan. The Agency provides $5,986 financial assistance to support neighborhood "beautification" projects, such as graffiti removal and vacant lot/yard cleanup. The Anticipated projects addressed by this program are Expenditures: initiated by volunteer groups in Bay Point. Included Under Community This project would address the lack of private Improvement investment and improve physically blighted Program properties in the Project Area. Property Holding Costs This fund is for property maintenance costs Expenditures to Date: Ongoing such as weed abatement, clean up, taxes, and $33,148 other expenses related to holding property for redevelopment projects. Anticipated This project will improve physically blighted Expenditures: properties. $10,694 Willow Pass Road Urban Design Improvement Banners The Agency will provide funds for the Expenditures to Date: Ongoing installation and rotation of banners and other $16,215 enhancements. This project will stimulate economic growth. Anticipated Expenditures: $3,233 Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-17 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Marketing This program was identified at the time of Expenditures to Date: Ongoing the Existing Implementation Plan adoption. $5,112 Involves updates and reproduction of marketing material for Bay Point and Agency Anticipated participation in Economic Development Expenditures: forums. $15,888 This project will stimulate economic growth. Newsletter The Agency shares the cost for the Expenditures to Date: Ongoing publication and mail-out of a quarterly $5,775 newsletter. This project will stimulate economic growth. Anticipated Expenditures: $4,000 Dumpster Grants This project was identified in the Existing Expenditures to Date: Ongoing Implementation Plan. The Agency works $0 with the Building Inspection Department to identify properties which may benefit from Anticipated the use of a dumpster. The program is Expenditures: designed as a revolving loan but may be a grant for those meeting income requirements. $1,200 This project would address the lack of private investment and improve physically blighted properties in the Project Area. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-18 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Business Assistance/Enterprise Zone Administration Expenditures to Date: 2016 This project was identified when the Existing $0 Implementation Plan was adopted. The Agency wishes to provide referrals to new and existing businesses on program Anticipated opportunities that would provide revenue to Expenditures: the businesses. Programs include the County $150,000 CBDG Small Business and Micro-Enterprise Loan and Grant, Small Business Administration, and the Recycling Market Development Revolving Program. Since the Existing Implementation Plan was adopted the Agency has effectively implemented this program. The Agency will provide funds to cover the costs associated with the application to California Department of Housing and Community Development for the Pittsburg/Bay Point Enterprise Zone Designation, in partnership with the City of Pittsburg. This project will stimulate economic growth. Pittsburg Pre-School Coordinating Council's Family Preservation and Expenditures to Date: 2009 Support Program $0 The Agency identified this project when the Existing Implementation Plan was adopted. Anticipated The Agency anticipated the provision of office space for this program in the North Expenditures: Broadway area. $0 This project will stimulate economic growth by encouraging new private investment. Expenditures to Date: $96,924 TOTAL Anticipated Expenditures: $221,015 Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-19 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan E. Revenues Available to Implement Non-Housing Improvements The primary source of revenue available to the Agency for improvement projects and programs has been and will continue to be property tax increment, as it is used both directly for projects and to secure bond revenues and pay debt service. Table VI-1 shows that the Agency will be able to undertake project activities through 2027. The Redevelopment Plan's current cumulative tax increment cap is $116 million and the bonded indebtedness limit is $60 million. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment proposes to increase these caps to$689 and$220 million,respectively. Table VI-1 Summary of Time and Fiscal Limits for the Bay Point Project Area Acres 1,550 Adopted December 29, 1987 Eminent Domain December 29,2011 Time Limit for Incurring Debt December 29,2026 Time Limit for Project Activities December 29,2027 Time Limit for Tax Increment Receipt December 29,2027 Fiscal Limit for Tax Increment Collection* $116,000,000 Outstanding Indebtedness* $60,000,000 *The Agency is undergoing an amendment to increase the tax increment collection limit to$689 million and the outstanding indebtedness limit to$220 million. Source: Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency. Since FY 2004/05 the Agency has expended $6.2 million on non housing redevelopment projects and programs eliminating blighting conditions within the Project Area. The Agency received more revenue than projected since the Existing Implementation Plan was adopted in January of 2006. The increased revenue is primarily due to assessed values in the Project Area increasing at a rate greater than projected. The Agency is projected to collect $12.9 million in revenue from FY 2007/08 through FY 2008/09. The four sources of revenues that the Agency can spend and reinvest in the Project Area are net tax increment, proceeds from the sale of bonds secured by tax increment, interest earned on non-housing funds, and other revenue sources, each of which is displayed in Table VI-2. Projections in Table VI-2 have been updated to reflect future fiscal years remaining in the Amended Implementation Plan planning period. More information about each source of revenue is provided below. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-20 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Table VI-2 Summary of Projected Non-Housing Revenues Bay Point Project Area FY 2004/05-FY 2008/09 V1 1 r C C> N M M O b V p 00 0 00 O� C C N = M 60% M M M n fV N P a C vi rC C n N 7 n 7 7 0 = G r r 00 10 O Vl 7 6A 69 65 V. d9 fR Vi `� 69 p 69 69 69 C h 0 h h x 00 O ;; O C O x M N ^ l- O 69 O O 65 69 0 pppm C O N V1 1� C M M C n OO R O N V1 V1 00 V) Vn O M M 00 r- V1 (� 00 00 C !} M N 1. 00 N C V1 6�9 00 609 00 00 69 P EA 6�9 69 M O 00 N 69 M N M N y b9 696q �p N ID M C N VM9 M69 N n 0 Vt M 00 V1 V1 1� 69 M V1 00 69 ` 69 ` 69 N VM9 v Ic y � `" 69 69 69 69 8 �C O 10 r •� � w W � '= a c m u €u E m W c m N N • O y V M G c a E c m y v c .r. m 6 N L q v e u v c L N O o 6 y � C � W 6 rNp C 25 v d ffi d � � `e ° .SS •a° o `� a°I•' u Li CS T o y O '� C E 9 S 9 S e •a m c u Q$.k Q o •o o 6 VCC�y C 'O E O z 0p ,z. A e •E u m y e g e V°i •� ,` Q r o o ? e e Q ° ° '9 v u 0 v0 E u y �« o Go F a ap o t Z § rm 7R�d 8i a v � v �c o E U a E v 7 L r V Z ° y b y ° m ,Z y ` Q " X c ti o ssy vi .g a w Z e. o 'W 05 v{ > `ti z —� m U P Yf x t w w C Yt s- c £ a W m C75a oad ¢`oQ ' L �° 4 .� .� a .� e s e, e _ O m � F a F v, a � Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-21 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan 1. Tax Increment Revenues The Agency is projected to have a balance of$6.1 million in capital funds in fiscal year 2007/08. The Agency is projected to earn $1.2 million of net tax increment revenues over the next two fiscal years (2007/08 and 2008/09) in the Bay Point Project Area. The projected tax increment revenues set a limit on the amount of expenditures that the Agency can reinvest in the Project Area through FY 2008/09. Property tax increment is that portion of the total amount of property tax revenues collected annually from all the properties in the Project Area above the amount collected at the time the Project Area was adopted. Per Proposition 13, increases in property taxes can result only from increases in assessed value, which in turn can only come from reassessment upon property sale or improvement or the maximum annual inflationary increase of 2 percent. Net tax increment revenue is the amount of tax increment remaining to the Agency for non-housing projects and activities after it has met its other financial obligations. These financial obligations typically include Housing Fund deposits, debt services payments, County property tax administration fees, Administration costs,and pass thorough payments to other taxing entities. The Agency must reinvest a portion of property tax increment revenues back into non-housing projects that will help reduce and eliminate blight. By encouraging and expanding local commercial, retail, industrial and residential opportunities, the Agency shall achieve the greatest return on its investment while creating local jobs, enhancing sales tax generation and increasing property values. Increased property values translate to increased tax increment revenues to the Agency, which can then be reinvested in the Project Area. 2. Proceeds from the Sales of Bonds The Agency can also generate revenue by issuing bonds and investing the proceeds of those bonds in Project Area improvements. The bond sale proceeds are forms of borrowing against projected tax increment revenues. The Agency meets annually to discuss and prioritize projects and activities to be funded from bond sales, as well as to coordinate expenditures of bond proceeds with the County's Capital Improvement Program. The Agency has a maximum bonded indebtedness of$60 million for the Project Area; this limit will be increased to $220 million if the 2008 Bay Point Amendment is adopted. Approximately$3.9 million of a bond sale was reserved as a capital fund for the Agency to reinvest in the Project Area through FY 2008/09. A portion of the 2007 Tax Allocation Revenue Bond proceeds was initially deposited into the Bay Point Escrow Fund; $12.1 million will become available for use in fiscal year 2007/08 after the 2008 Bay Point Amendment is adopted. $7.2 million is allocated to the capital projects fund. The Agency projects to expend $10.8 million of the total bond sale proceeds before the completion of the Implementation Plan planning period. 3. Other Agency and Non-Agency Financial Resources Wherever possible, the Agency will continue to leverage other sources of funding to achieve the Project Area's long term goals and objectives. The Agency has already demonstrated an ability to acquire additional funding in the form of grants and loans from Contra Costa County and the state and federal governments. The Agency also earns interest and revenue from the lease of Agency owned property, and it can also collect fees from developers. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-22 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Accordingly, the Agency also projects to collect approximately $767,000 of additional funding from grants, loans, impact fees, the sale or lease of Agency-owned property and other sources of revenues that can be invested in the Project Area through FY 2008/09. These revenue sources will be combined with approximately $78,000 of interest earned on the Non-Housing Fund and $10.8 million of bond proceed expenditures. F. Projected Five Year Non-Housing Expenditures The Agency will implement projects within its financial capabilities and will look for opportunities to create additional capital such as grants or bonds. As shown in Table VI-3, the Agency has projected to spend $24 million on improvement projects through FY 2008/09. The projects will focus on the following: Capital/Public Improvement Projects—Projects and activities within this category include utility, road and other infrastructure improvement projects, urban design and streetscape improvements, property acquisition and site improvements particularly related to public/private real estate development partnerships, transit and mixed-use facilities, and other physical development projects. Community Improvement Activities/Economic Development Promotion —Projects and activities within this category include beautification programs,hazardous waste and other garbage remediation programs, code enforcement support, and other initiatives that enhance the appearance of the Project Area as well as the quality of life for residents. Projects and activities within this category include job creation and retention initiatives,policies or programs that enhance the local economy, marketing programs, and other promotional projects, events, or activities. Projects and activities within this category include those that modify or enforce zoning and land use policies, design future capital improvement projects, strategize economic development and community improvement programs, and plan for urban design and streetscape improvements. Table VI-3 Projected Five Year Non-Housing Expenditures Bay Point Project Area FY 2004/05-FY 2008/09 Projects and Activities 2004/05 to Projected Current Expenditures Expenditures Capital/Public Improvement Projects $6,152,351 $23,777,664 Community Improvement Activities/ $96,924 $221,015 Economic Development Promotion Total Expenditures $6,249,275 $23,998,679 Source:Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency. The Agency will also continue to meet its Housing Fund obligations, make debt service payments, pay pass-through payments to other agencies,and cover administration and technical assistance costs. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-23 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan G. Linkage Between Project Area Improvements and Elimination of Remaining Blight The Agency's actions since the Bay Point Project Area was established have eliminated a significant amount of blight in the Project Area. However, blighting conditions continue to exist along Willow Pass Road, along Port Chicago Highway, within the unincorporated sites located near the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station, along Bailey Road, along the waterfront, and elsewhere in the Project Area. Those blighting conditions include incompatible adjacent land uses, buildings that are vacant, obsolete, and/or dilapidated beyond the point of rehabilitation, and inadequate public improvements and infrastructure. The Project Area is also significantly impacted by a high crime rate, which poses a serious threat to the health and safety of Project Area residents and workers. In addition, the Bay Point Project Area has underutilized and blighted sites that can be more intensively redeveloped for retail commercial and light industrial uses. The Agency's capital projects will facilitate the redevelopment of blighted, underutilized, and vacant properties by investing resources in property acquisition, demolition, and site preparation, as well as public infrastructure projects. Community improvement activities will improve the supply and quality of community services, beautify the neighborhoods, rehabilitate the housing stock, and remove hazardous materials and garbage. Neighborhood safety and crime prevention activities such as targeted code enforcement, illegal dumping remediation programs, Abatement Attorney, Resident Deputy, and equipment such as security cameras will help improve the health, safety, and general welfare of Project Area residents and workers.Economic development promotion activities will help attract more private investment to the Project Area, which will help create new jobs and increase the local tax base and economy, all of which will counteract blighting conditions remaining in the Bay Point Project Area. Accordingly, the projects and activities described in this Amended Implementation Plan will help reduce and eliminate Project Area blight,consistent with the Redevelopment Plan. H. Affordable Housing Obligations for the Project Area The Agency is required by the CRL to meet certain obligations with respect to the provision of affordable housing and the expenditure of tax increment funds on affordable housing. In summary, there are three basic legal requirements that the Agency must meet: Housing Production—For certain project areas, the Agency must make available specified minimum percentages of new or substantially rehabilitated housing units available to very low, low and moderate income households at a legally defined affordable housing cost.' Replacement Housing—The Agency must replace housing units removed from the housing stock in a project area as a result of redevelopment activities within four years at a legally defined affordable housing cost. Housing Fund Expenditures—The Agency must set-aside and spend at least 20 percent of tax increment revenue (Housing Fund) to improve, preserve, and/or produce affordable housing for targeted segments of the project area residents,with various conditions on their use. The following sections of this Amended Implementation Plan describe the Agency's Affordable Housing Program and specifically outline how the Agency will meet its legal obligations. The Agency's ' The housing production obligation applies to redevelopment plans adopted on or after January 1, 1976,and territory added to project areas by amendment adopted on or after January 1, 1976.The Agency must include a plan for how it intends to meet its housing production obligations in its implementation plan. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-24 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Affordable Housing Program is guided by the most recent adopted and certified Housing Element,as well as the County's regional fair share housing needs allocation and various County policies and programs to promote affordable housing. I. Overview of Agency's Affordable Housing Program During the five year implementation plan period, the Agency will concentrate on affordable housing activities that are most applicable to the Agency's goals and objectives. The Agency recognizes the important role of the Affordable Housing Program and its activities in its overall Redevelopment Program. Consequently, the proposed Affordable Housing Program should be viewed not simply as the means of implementing the Agency's stated goals and objectives related to affordable housing, but as a key element in its overall blight alleviation and revitalization efforts. The Agency's Affordable Housing Program is focused on working with appropriate organizations to facilitate development of a variety of affordable housing activities in the Bay Point Project Area. In developing its Affordable Housing Program, the Agency has been guided by the goals and objectives of the County's Housing Element of the General Plan, incorporated into this Amended Implementation Plan by this reference. Through its affordable housing activities, the Agency will support and advance the overall Housing Element programs as well as contribute to the implementation of the policies and strategies identified in the County's General Plan. The Agency is committed to assisting the County in achieving the goals presented in the Housing Element,including: Improve housing affordability for both renters and homeowners. Preserve the existing affordable housing stock in Contra Costa County. Increase the supply of housing with a priority on the development of affordable housing. Increase the supply of appropriate and supportive housing for special needs populations. Mitigate potential governmental constraints to housing development and affordability. Promote equal opportunity for all residents to reside in the housing of their choice. The Agency will make every effort to encourage the preservation, rehabilitation and development of housing affordable to a variety of income levels combining various funding sources. Leveraging other funding sources devoted to the provision of affordable housing will maximize the number of affordable units that can be developed or substantially rehabilitated. By partnering and collaborating with other entities dedicated to the preservation and development of affordable housing,the Agency is confident that it will be able to meet its affordable housing production obligations and Housing Fund expenditure requirements within the compliance period ending in 2014, as well as over the life of the Redevelopment Plan. The Affordable Housing Program promotes residential and mixed-use development on vacant and underutilized sites in the Bay Point Project Area. The Agency's Housing Fund revenues will be used in a flexible manner to respond to favorable development, substantial rehabilitation and grant opportunities. In carrying out its purpose to preserve,improve and increase the affordable housing supply,the Agency may use the following methods: Work with appropriate non-profit and for-profit organizations in developing affordable housing and actively participate in development activities where that is feasible. Facilitate the final stages of the North Broadway Area Revitalization Strategy. Agency funds may be required for predevelopment,construction,and/or land acquisition. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-25 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Provide funding or other assistance to Habitat for Humanity for the acquisition of property and entitlements for single-family residences on infill sites. Assist with additional site acquisition and/or predevelopment costs for previously funded projects or assist new scattered site property acquisition and/or housing rehabilitation. The Agency expects to take advantage of various opportunities as they are presented and to initiate actions as necessary, consistent with the CRL and the County's Housing Element, to preserve and facilitate the development of housing affordable to households whose basic needs are not met by the private housing market. The Agency expects to meet its legal housing production obligations under CRL.The Agency will use the Housing Fund in a strategic approach to assist residential developments to create and preserve affordable housing within the community, and meet the Agency's housing production requirement. It should be noted,however, that several factors may result in estimated expenditures and unit production being either less than or greater than what is projected for any given year. These factors include the timing of the development process, the levels of Housing Fund revenue and other public assistance, the need to amass sufficient funds for an efficiently sized development,and development opportunities. J. Housing Fund Revenues The primary funding source for the Agency's affordable housing activities is 20 percent of the annual tax increment revenue, which is set-aside into the Agency's Housing Fund. The Housing Fund resources are then used by the Agency to facilitate the expansion, improvement and preservation of the affordable housing supply within the Project Area. The Housing Fund balance for the Project Area was $373,039 at the beginning of the Implementation Plan period. The Housing Fund balance at the end of FY 2006/07 was$1,117,727. The Agency is projected to have accumulated$6.7 million of net tax increment revenues available to fund affordable housing through FY 2013/14. The tax increment revenues will be supplemented by approximately $744,000 of bond proceeds and $60,000 of interest earned on the Housing Fund. (See Table VI-4.) Thus, there will be approximately $7.6 million of revenue available to support affordable housing projects and programs. The Agency intends to use the Housing Fund revenue to leverage other federal and state funds to develop, rehabilitate or preserve more affordable housing. The available funding sources that can be leveraged include the Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnership funds, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development funds (HUD), California Housing Finance Agency (Ca1HFA), Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), and low income housing tax credit equity funds. K. Housing Production Plan The Project Area is subject to the CRL affordable housing production requirements since the Project Area was established after 1975. In simple terms,the CRL requires that 15 percent of all non-Agency developed housing units in the Project Area be affordable to moderate, low, and very low income households. The CRL also requires that 40 percent of the total supply of affordable housing be restricted to very low income households. The legislation requires the Agency to comply with the production requirements throughout a series of ten year periods, as well as through the life of the Plan. If the Agency has fallen behind in its legal requirements to produce affordable housing, then the Agency must assure that all new non-Agency housing developments built in the project area individually meet the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-26 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan production requirement until the Agency has fully met its production requirement. Conversely,if the Agency has produced more housing than is legally required,then the future number of affordable housing units that are required to be developed within the Project Area will be less. Accordingly,the information below describes the Agency's housing production requirements,and presents a plan for how the Agency will meet its affordable housing production obligations. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-27 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Table VI4 Projected Revenues Available for Affordable Housing in the Bay Point Project Area FY 2004/05 to FY 2013/14 1� O oo v co 00 0O 0\ 0, O O O t- O r 00 y 7 N N � � V�1 Off+ ��•' 7 M � 7 7 D 690 w 69 69 69 69 69 fA 69 Vf 61 fA 69 8 0 O M O o O V D` oc N N fA M �n fA 69 69 r x p N 69 O O` 69 69 0 69 0 r It 0 - N 0 7 r o0 00 j 1 M r 00 .O f, H N G� O\ N o0 00 69 69a, P O O v) 69 69 2 V1 N 69 N j 69 � � " 69 f1Y irA i x ao O M �n O 7 O O 7 c M O 0 M O O 'O O 10 O` 1 7 7 00 69 �O n 69 V1 69 10 — .- O N 69 10 r 69 69 0 69 00 Vn 10 p r O 7 7 69 v1 C C O 10 69 6n t- .- 00 N N ry Vf 6961 69 _ _ '04 } 64 79 69 69 4A 69 U O. oo �pp x O irH oro f0A 604 609 N O •n v N C O\ 7 O\ O\ M D O O 69 cA 69 ... 69 69 6�9 rOj O O h N 0 7 •J1 r 69t1- a, 69 69 10 69 10 10 r v e N 1r0^ O M U f0A 609 O VNi , O. _ L O K 69 C y N In {L - O N a, O D\ 00 'O t y c n O N K -It -e O c nCq O ° a9 fA - v � C O N n Y, v Y � r V O CO � ti u C p 4 V to O V V O > N = e S o E u Q u p d 7 7 :C 7 R o � s •o e v i i y fr. p G o G 9 = 00 9 7 Y O y 0. a > e 'E w e °' w� �tp G. Q •p r ffi W S o > d Y p G 4 y p y 9 y O y O 'o • u ° 'O 7 7 p O L W 9 9 m = O u O •� W 61 O R V ° ° LE .5 y o a E a p CO p > h 7 d 'C � x p w CO 'on CYO O > » a u •- � v o p ° p S ao F > c 9 0p p 7E c G E OC U •�° a [ L e � s o n o Gq 7Ed .E u u o E � p Y = Z 0 o o ZQ w u o� ° ep, y z a p z p a+ 9 m v z b e Ta <Y I=O Y a E' p C .y q i L w u R C Y Z F .�'] ffi e a Q 2 ¢ Q .E O o 0 � Fu Z Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-28 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan The Agency is projected to have a balance of $2.1 million in housing funds in fiscal year 2007/08. A portion of the 2007 Tax Allocation Revenue bond proceeds are initially deposited into the Bay Point Escrow Fund; $12.1 million will become available for use in fiscal year 2007/08 after the 2008 Bay Point Amendment is adopted. $4.4 million is allocated to the housing fund. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-29 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Historical Housing Production and Affordable Housing Obligations The Agency reported that 196 new units have been produced in the Project Area after the Redevelopment Plan was adopted in 1987, until the starting point for this Amended Implementation Plan. Since the adoption of the Existing Implementation Plan, an additional 272 units have been produced in the Project Area. The Agency has determined that 33 housing units were substantially rehabilitated in the Project Area from Plan Adoption to 1/1/02.2 Since 1/1/02,the Agency has assisted the substantial rehabilitation of four housing units and the Agency itself has substantially rehabilitated 160 units.3" No units have been substantially rehabilitated in the Project Area since the Existing Implementation Plan was adopted. The Agency also reported that 186 affordable units were produced since Project Area inception to FY 2003/04,of which 41 units were produced for very low income households (See Table VI-5).5 The Agency is currently exceeding its legal requirements to produce affordable housing in the Bay Point Project Area. Given housing production in the Project Area through FY 2003/04, the CRL obligated the Agency to produce only 83 affordable units, of which 38 units must be for very low income households.b Due to its excellent past performance, the Agency produced a surplus of 103 affordable housing units including a surplus of 3 units with occupancy restricted to very low-income households during this time. Since the Existing Implementation Plan was adopted the Agency has incurred an additional inclusionary obligation of 41 affordable housing units of which 17 units must be affordable to very low income households. Due to the Agency's surplus in units, the affordable unit requirement has been satisfied and 63 unit surplus remains. The Agency's 3 unit surplus in very low income restricted units was not enough to fully satisfy the 17 unit obligation. Thus, the Agency is working towards satisfying the 14 very low income restricted unit deficit prior to the end of the planning period in FY 2013/14. 2 The 2000 Implementation Plan identified that 190 new units were developed and 33 units were substantially rehabilitated in the Project Area.Since that time there were six new infill units constructed. 3 The previous Midterm Review identified that the County/Agency facilitated the acquisition and rehabilitation of the 72 unit Willowbrook Apartments and the 88 unit Hidden Cove Apartments by private parties through the issuance of tax exempt bonds. 4 Prior to 1/1/02,inclusionary housing requirements applied to all new and rehabilitated units in the project area As of 1/1/02, single family dwelling units(with one or two units)that are substantially rehabilitated with agency assistance and multifamily rented dwelling units that are substantially rehabbed,with or without Agency assistance are subject to inclusionary housing requirements. 5 Occupancy of affordable housing for very low income residents is restricted occupancy to households with incomes up to 50 percent of area median.Affordable housing for moderate income residents is restricted to occupancy by households with incomes up to 110 percent of the area median. b When units are produced or substantially rehabilitated by the Agency,30 percent of units must be made affordable,of which 50 percent of the affordable units must be allocated for very low income households.Therefore,the Agency has a housing production obligation for 83 affordable units(15 percent of 233 units plus 30 percent of 160 units),of which 38 units (40 percent of 35 units plus 50 percent of 48 units)must be affordable to very low income households. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-30 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Table VI-5 Housing Production and Affordable Housing Obligation Bay Point Project Area FY 2004/05 to FY 2008/09 Agency Directly TOTAL TOTAL Assisted Produced Produced FY 2007/08-FY 2009/10 FY 2004/05 FY 2014/15 Total over Through Through FY Through FY FY 2004/05- FY 2008/09 FY 2013/14 n Percent S S FY 2013/14 End of Plan Life of Plao FY 2003/04 2003/04 2003/04 FY 2006/07 Housing Production in Project Area` NewUnits 1 1961 01 196 272 315 547 1,134 329 1,659 Substantial Rehabilitation 1 37 1601 197 01 01 0 0 01 197 Total 1 7-331 1601 393 2721 3151 547 1134 32 1956 CRL Affordable Housing Obligation" Very Low 1 141 241 38 171 191 33 69 2 127 mixed:6%,15% Very Low,Low or Moderate 1 351 481 831 411 481 831 172 500 305 mixed:15%,300/. Projected Production of Affordable Housing' Very Loa 1 81 331 41 01 1621 25 187 1 243 Very Low,Low or Moderate I 26 160 186 1 3111 82 394630 Affordable Production Surplus(Deficit)' Very Low 1 (6)l 9 1 3 17 143 1 (8) 118 (5) 116 IVery Low,Low or Moderate I (9)l 112 1 103 1 (40 -63 1 (1) 222 1 011325 Note:Percentages may not add exactly due to rounding.CRL affordable housing production requirements are rounded up to the nearest whole unit. a As required by CRL,total units over ten year compliance period(Section 33490(a)(2)(13)). b.As required by the CRL,total units over the life of the Redevelopment Plan(Section 33490(a)(2)(B)). c,Total units produced in the Project Area during the specified time period. d.Number of affordable units required based on units produced.Affordable housing production obligation for non-Agency developed housing requires 15%oftotal units to be available at affordable cost Of those units,at least 40%must be affordable to very low income households(6%of the total units). Agency developed housing has a 300/inclusionary requirement,of which 50%must be affordable to very low income households(15%oftotal units). During the prior Implementation Plan period,the Agency directly developed the substantial rehabilitation of the 72 unit Willowbrook Apartments and the 88 unit Hidden Cove Apartments. e.Number of units satisfying CRL affordable housing production obligation.Affordable units produced outside Project Area counted on a one for two basis. f.Remaining affordable housing surplus or obligation at the end of the period. Source:Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-31 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan 1. Future Housing Production and Affordable Housing Obligations The Agency has evaluated the potential for future housing production in the Bay Point Project Area through the end of the Redevelopment Plan. Based on the Agency's analysis of the potential for new development on existing vacant residential parcels, the opportunity for substantial rehabilitation with Agency assistance, the possibility for federal and state funding, and the anticipated date of development, the Agency has developed a projection for the number of units likely to be produced in the Project Area over the next ten years and through the life of the Redevelopment Plan. A total of 1,134 units are estimated to be produced in the next ten year compliance period.' It is also projected that 394 units of affordable housing will be produced, of which 187 units will be affordable to very low income households. It is projected that the Agency will meet its legal requirements to produce affordable housing during the ten year compliance period. Based upon the ten year forecast of housing production in the Project Area, the CRL obligates the Agency to produce 172 affordable units, of which 69 units must be for very low income households. The Agency is anticipating creating 394 affordable units of which 187 will be very low income restricted, leaving the Agency will have a surplus at the end of the planning period. Based on historical production and an analysis of remaining developable residential land,the potential for substantial rehabilitation with Agency assistance, and other opportunities, the Agency projects that a total of 1,856 units could potentially be produced in the Project Area prior to the end of the Redevelopment Plan activities. The Agency also anticipates that over the life of the Redevelopment Plan, 630 housing units affordable to very low, low and moderate income households will be produced, and of these 243 will be affordable to very low income households. Based upon this projection, the Agency expects that it will meet its affordable housing production obligation over the life of the Redevelopment Plan. The CRL obligates the Agency to produce 305 affordable units, of which 127 units must be for very low income households. 'During the next five years,the Agency estimates 219 housing units would be produced in the Project Area. During the following five year period,the Agency estimates 587 housing units will be produced in the Project Area. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-32 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan L. Replacement Housing Requirements The Agency is required to replace any Project Area housing that has been removed within four years after the removal has occurred. Previous redevelopment activities resulted in the removal of 12 dilapidated low and moderate income units in 1993 (See Table VI-6). The 14 unit Elaine Null Apartments were built to replace these units in 1996 with six very low-income and eight low to moderate-income units. This means that the Agency does not have a remaining replacement housing obligation, as all housing units that were removed from the Project Area have been replaced as required by law. The Existing Implementation Plan anticipated that approximately ten units may be destroyed to accommodate the North Broadway Mixed Use Development. The Agency planned to replace these units with affordable new development or substantial rehabilitation. The 84 unit DeAnza Gardens public housing project was also anticipated to be demolished and replaced with 180 new units, 84 of which would be counted as replacement units. No replacement housing obligation resulted from the North Broadway Mixed Use Development; however an adjacent road project removed some structures that were replaced with units built on-site in 2002. No replacement housing obligation remains. The Agency is facilitating the Orbisonia Heights Redevelopment Project to create a mixed-use transit- oriented development. Implementation of this project will result in the permanent displacement of up to 26 residential units. The Agency must replace the same number of units at the same income levels within four years from the date of acquisition of the displaced properties. The Agency will replace the units on- site within the Orbisonia Heights project. The Agency may undertake additional projects that could result in the displacement of households in the next ten years. In the event that the removal of housing occurs, the Agency will plan for and undertake replacement of any units and will follow all state requirements for replacement housing and relocation! Table VI-6 Replacement Housing Obligation Bay Point Project Area Years Units Removed Units Replaced Historical through FY 2003/04 (Actual) 12 12 FY 2004/05-FY 2006/07(Actual) 94 94 FY 2007/08-FY2013/14 (Estimated 26 26 Total 106 106 Source:Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency. M. Income and Age Targeting Requirements for Housing Fund Expenditures The Amended Implementation Plan must provide annual estimates of the units to be assisted and the expenditures anticipated to be made during the next five years.' Accordingly, the Agency plans to expend $2.3 million to support the development of more affordable housing over the next five year period. (See 8 As of January 1,2002,AB 637 requires an agency to maintain a list of displaced households who are to be given priority.The agency may establish rules to determine priority on this list. 9 Compliance with targeting requirements is measured based on dollars expended over the current compliance period,which ends in 2014. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-33 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Table VI-7.) The Agency plans to allocate housing fund expenditures on at least 35 percent very low income and 20 percent on low income households, and no more than 45 percent on moderate income households in accordance with Section 65584 of the Government Code. In addition, the Agency is required to target its Housing Fund expenditures based on housing need by income level and age.'' Thus, the Housing Fund should be expended to assist households in the same proportion to the housing need by income, as indicated by the regional fair share allocation, and by age level in the community, as indicated by the most recent U.S. Census. Table VI-7 Housing Fund Targeting Expenditures Bay Point Project Area FY 2004/05 to FY 2006/07 H using Fund Expenditures County's Affordable Fair Share Housing Projects Allocation FY FY FY % and Programs' 1999-2006 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 Total Total Minimum Targeted to Very Low Income Families 35% $135,700 $181,400 $145,800 $462,900 27% Minimum Targeted to Low and Families 20% $42,067 $224,223 $105,462 $371,752 22% Maximum Targeted to Moderate Income Familiesb 45% $93,946 $499,077 $234,738 $827,761 50% Total $271,400 $904,700 $486,000 $1,662,413 a.Housing Program costs do not include Agency administration costs. b. The Agency may expend 45%of their housing funds on housing for very low, low or moderate income residents,however must not exceed spending this percentage on moderate income housing. Source: Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency and Association of Bay Area Governments. The CRL requires the Agency to allocate its Housing Fund in a manner that is consistent with the household income distribution requirements imbedded in the Contra Costa County's Fair Share Allocation.''` That is, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) determination for the 1999- 2006 County's Fair Share Allocation indicates that the Agency should target at least 35 percent of its housing funds to very low-income households, 20 percent on low income households, and not more than 45 percent to moderate income households. The remainder of the housing fund should be spent on projects and activities for very low, low or moderate income households.13 '1 Assembly Bill 637 becomes effective on January 1,2002. 12 The Agency plans to meet its income targeting requirements based on its fair share of regional housing needs as determined by ABAG,from January 1,2002 through the end of the ten year compliance period in 2014. 13 The determination of the targeting by age is based on 2000 Census data,which indicates that 89 percentof the County's population is under 65 years of age.The Agency has the option of spending a disproportionate amount of its Housing Funds for very low-income households and to subtract a commensurate amount from the low and/or moderate-income thresholds.The Agency can also provide a disproportionate amount of funding for low income housing by reducing the amount of funds Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-34 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan The Agency met its household income targeting requirements from January 1, 2002 through June 30, 2004. Review of this Amended Implementation Plan indicates that currently the Agency is partially satisfying targeting requirements. The Agency has met targeting requirements for low income households by spending at least 20 percent of housing fund expenditures on this income group. The Agency needed to increase expenditures on very low income households by 8 percent and reduce expenditures on moderate income households by 5 percent to satisfy targeting limits for theses income groups. ABAG has determined the County's Fair Share Allocation for 2007-2014, adjusting the Agency's targeting requirements during the next Implementation Plan covering FY2009/10 through 2013/14. The Agency's new targeting requirements require housing fund expenditures are spent on at least 39 percent very low income and 28 percent on low income households, and no more than 33 percent on moderate income households. The Agency will focus on continuing to meet targeting requirements determined by ABAG for 1999-2006 until the next implementation plan period. Table VI-8 shows the Agency's projected expenditures by income level for each year from 2007/08 to 2013/14. Table VI-8 Projected Housing Fund Targeting Expenditures Bay Point Project Area FY 2007/08 to FY 2013/14 Affordable Housing Minimum Minimum Maximum Total Projects and Targeted o Targeted to Targeted to Programsa Very Low Income Low Income Moderate Income Families Families Familiesb County's Fair Share Allocation 2006-2014 35% 20% 45% FY 2007-08 987,655 336,321 259,714 1,583,690 FY 2008-09 1,487,655 336,321 259,714 2,083,690 FY 2009-10 1,487,655 336,321 259,714 2,083,690 FY 2010-11 1,184,321 296,321 169,714 1,650,357 FY 2011-12 880,571 262,571 169,714 1,312,857 FY 2012-13 164,571 208,571 169,714 542,857 FY 2013-14 164,571 208,571 169,714 542,857 Total 6,357,000 1,985,000 1,458,000 9,800,000 %Total 65% 20% 15% 100% a.Housing Program costs do not include Agency administration costs. b. The Agency may expend 45%of their housing funds on housing for very low, low or moderate income residents,however must not exceed spending this percentage on moderate income housing. Source: Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency and Association of Bay Area Governments The CRL also requires the Agency to allocate its housing funds in a way that is consistent with the population by age distribution present in the community. In 2006, the CRL's formula for determining the amount of expenditures for households with a member under age 65 changed to"low income households with a member under age 65". The Census Bureau does not provide data in this format; the Agency does allocated to housing affordable to moderate income households.In no event can the expenditures targeted to housing affordable to moderate income households exceed the threshold amount(45 percent). 15 This requirement must be achieved over the period between January 1,2002 and the current compliance period ending in 2014. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-35 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan not need to address this until the next Implementation Plan is completed and will continue to work with the preexisting age targeting goals. That is, the Agency should spend no more than 11 percent of its Housing Fund to support age restricted affordable housing.' The Agency has not expended funds on age restricted housing.16 Thus, the percentage of Housing Funds spent on non-age restricted housing is more than adequate to satisfy the CRL requirement of a minimum expenditure of funds. The Agency will continue to monitor Housing Fund expenditures in order to comply with the requirement for minimum expenditures on non-age restricted housing. N. Projected 10 Year Housing Projects and Activities The Agency will undertake affordable housing projects and programs in the Bay Point Project Area during a ten-year planning period from 2004/05 to 2013/14 in order to comply with affordable housing production requirements mandated by the CRL. The Agency will work to expand the Project Area's supply housing affordable to very low, low and moderate income persons. A minimum portion of housing will be non-age restricted and a maximum portion housing will be restricted to seniors age 65 and over. The anticipated expenditures listed under each project reflect expenditures through FY 2013/14. Project/Program Description Expenditures Anticipated Through Completion FY 2013-14 Low to Moderate Housing Program Agency funds will be used for preserving and Expenditures to Date: Ongoing increasing the Project Area's supply of $0 affordable units. Activities may include, but are not limited to, site acquisition, developer subsidies for constructing affordable units, Anticipated infill housing, rehabilitation of existing Expenditures: housing for moderate income households, $1,000,000 and purchasing affordability covenants. Habitat for Humanity The Agency will assist with the land acquisition and development of nine newly Expenditures to Date: 2010 constructed units as part of a 9-unit infill $0 affordable housing development in the Bella Vista neighborhood of Bay Point. Anticipated Expenditures: $700,000 16 Data on age restricted housing expenditures have been provided by the Agency. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-36 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan BiBett Predevelopment Financial assistance will be given to facilitate the relocation of an alcohol and drug Expenditures to Date: 2010 rehabilitation group home from the Orbisonia $0 Heights area to an alternative location in Bay Point. The group home is being relocated to implement a residential mixed-use, transit Anticipated oriented project in Orbisonia Heights. Expenditures: $600,000 BART Specific Plan Implementation— Development Zone 2 A transit-oriented development is being Expenditures to Date: 2011 implemented in the vicinity of the $0 Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station. The Agency may participate in land assemblage, predevelopment assistance, infrastructure Anticipated assistance, or construction financing for Expenditures: affordable, higher density residential and/or $1,350,000 mixed-use projects. Land assembly activity is currently underway in the Orbisonia Heights area, which is just east of the BART Station. BART Specific Plan Implementation— Development Zone 3 The Agency may provide future assistance Expenditures to Date: 2012 with the Far Hills site and the Canal $0 Road/Bailey Road area sites in relation to the transit-oriented development described under BART Specific Plan Implementation Anticipated Development Zone 2. Expenditures: $1,350,000 Youth Homes Financial assistance will be provided to facilitate the relocation of this group home Expenditures to Date: 2010 for homeless youth from the Orbisonia $0 Heights area. Considering is being given to relocating to a site owned by the Agency on Bel Air lane. Anticipated Expenditures: $300,000 Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-37 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan 1 Hertz Property The Agency is considering acquiring a multifamily site at Alberts and Willow Pass Expenditures to Date: 2012 Road to maintain as affordable housing. The $0 current owner, the Hertz Family Trust, has completed the removal of an underground gasoline storage tank and is marketing the Anticipated property for development. Expenditures: $2,000,000 Housing Rehabilitation Program The Agency has funds available for loans to low and moderate income homeowners to Expenditures to Date: 2016 repair and modernize single family loans. $0 Loans are also available to investor owners who wish to upgrade their rental properties. Anticipated Expenditures: $1,000,000 Homebuyer Resale Transaction Costs The Agency has provided financial assistance to homebuyers in the past. These deed- Expenditures to Date: 2016 restricted units have a right-to-first-refusal $0 for the Agency to acquire in order to maintain the affordability. Funds are required to purchase, hold, and resell these Anticipated properties. Expenditures: $640,000 Housing Development Fund The Agency holds a reserve fund to act as a catalyst for additional affordable housing Expenditures to Date: 2016 development projects and programs. $0 Anticipated Expenditures: $860,000 Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-38 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan Expenditures to Date: $0 TOTAL Anticipated Expenditures: $9,800,000 O. Completion of Housing Obligations The Agency is required to comply with and fulfill its affordable housing responsibilities, including housing fund, replacement housing, and affordable housing production responsibilities, prior to the expiration of the time limit on redevelopment plan effectiveness."The law further requires that for a Redevelopment Project that is within six years of reaching its limit on plan effectiveness, an implementation plan needs to address the ability of the agency to comply with its housing responsibilities. The Project Area will not reach its time limit on plan effectiveness prior to the expiration of this Amended Implementation Plan and is not within six years of reaching this time limit, thus this Amended Implementation Plan does not need to address how the Agency will complete its housing obligations. 17 CRL Section 33333.8,as amended by SB 211. Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency VI-39 Amended Five Year Implementation Plan APPENDIX B ADOPTED RELOCATION POLICIES Excerpt from the December 1987 Report on the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point (formerly West Pittsburg) Redevelopment Project O RSG APPENDIX B / 103 available to the Agency through adoption of a redevelopment plan for the Project Area. The real test for the future will be to use the combined initiative and ingenuity of the Agency and the private sector to actually implement the Plan in a manner that is cost-efficient, timely and responsive to evolving market conditions and community needs. PART IV. GENERAL RELOCATION PLAN A. INTRODUCTION This plan sets forth the general policies for the administration of the relocation program and the provisions of services and benefits to displaced families , individuals, businesses , and community institutions. This document should be considered as only a general plan. As recommended in an October, 1982 State Department of Housing and Community Development study entitled "A Study of Relocation and Housing Development in California Redevelopment Agencies, " a comprehensive and detailed plan will not be developed until relocation, if any, is imminent. At such time, a more specific analysis will be prepared, pursuant to Title 25, Section 6038 of the California Administrative Code. It should be noted at the outset that the Redevelopment Agency does not contemplate at this time that any relocation of households and/or businesses will be necessary to implement the Redevelopment Plan. Should relocation become necessary to effectively. implement the programs outlined in the Redevelopment Plan, the policies and procedures set forth in this Part below will govern such relocation. Further, the Agency does not intend to commence any necessary relocation within the Project Area until it has firm commitments from competent developers that the desired redevelopment of the area will take place in a timely manner. B. RELOCATION POLICIES AND PROCEDURES In order to implement the California Relocation Assistance Act in the West Pittsburg Project Area, the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency has adopted for local use the relocation guidelines issued by the State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development, pursuant to Government Code Section 7268 and Health & Safety Code Section 50460. These relocation guidelines are set forth in the California Administrative Code, Title 25 , Chapter 6 , Subchapter 1 (Section 6000 et sere . ) and are incorporated fully herein by this reference. Relocation of displaced persons , families , and businesses , if any, within the West Pittsburg Redevelopment Project Area will be accomplished in full compliance with the State guidelines. -51- It is a the policy of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors and the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency { that: 1) Redevelopment activities will be carried out in a manner which minimizes relocation and hardship; 2) No persons or families of low- and moderate-income shall be displaced unless and until there is a suitable housing unit available and ready for occupancy by such persons which is safe, decent and sanitary and available at comparable rents; 3) All displaced families and individuals will be afforded the opportunity to live in a decent, safe and sanitary dwelling without overcrowding; 4) The cost of such housing shall be reasonable relative to family income; 5) There will be no discrimination based upon race, color, creed, religion , sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin or ancestry in relocation activities; 6) Displaced households will be offered the opportunity to occupy housing that is reasonably accessible to their places of employment, public transportation, shopping and public facilities; (� 7) Business concerns and nonprofit organizations to be displaced will be provided maximum assistance to aid in their satisfactory re-establishment with a minimum of delay and loss of earnings; 8) Eligible persons will be made aware of the availability or relocation benefits and assistance within 15 days following the initiation of negotiations for a parcel of property; 9) Each eligible person and business will be provided information on availability and prices of comparable sales and rental housing and commercial properties . When necessary, counseling and referral service will be provided; 10) Persons and families of low- and moderate-income displaced by the redevelopment project will be given priority in renting or buying any low- or moderate-income housing unit developed in the West Pittsburg Redevelopment Project Area. Rules and regulations detailing procedures for providing services and making payments will be made in accordance with the above-mentioned guidelines and applicable state law. C. RELOCATION STANDARDS t -52- 1 . Physical Standards a . Decent, Safe, and Sanitary All replacement units must be structurally sound, in clean and weather-tight condition, in good repair and adequately maintained, in conformance with the applicable state and local building, plumbing, electrical , housing and occupancy codes or similar ordinances or regulations. b. Comparable to the Existing Dwelling All replacement dwellings must be comparable to the existing dwelling with respect to number of rooms, habitable living space , and type and quality of construction, but not lesser in rooms or living space than necessary to accommodate the displaced person. 2 . Financial Means All replacement dwellings must be within the financial means of the displaced person. A replacement dwelling will be considered within the financial means of a displaced person if the monthly housing cost (including payments for mortgage, insurance, fees , if any, and property taxes) or rental cost (including utilities and other reasonable recurring expenses) minus relocation payments available to the person (as provided in Section F. below) does not exceed 25% of the family or individual gross monthly income. A replacement dwelling is also within the financial means of a displaced person if the \ . purchase price of the dwelling, including increased interest costs and other reasonable expenses , does not exceed the total amount of just compensation provided for the acquired dwelling and the replacement housing payment available to the person. 3 . Environmental Standards Replacement dwellings shall be in areas not subject to unreasonable adverse environmental conditions from either _ natural or man-made sources, and not generally less desirable than the acquired dwelling with respect to public utilities, public and commercial facilities and pubic services, and reasonably accessible to the displaced person' s place of employment. 4 . Equal Opportunity Standard Replacement housing shall be available to all persons regardless of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin or ancestry or any other characteristic protected by state or federal law. D. METHODS FOR ASSURING AVAILABILITY OF RELOCATION HOUSING -53- The Redevelopment Agency will work with the Housing Authority of Contra Costa County and nonprofit sponsors of other subsidized housing within the County so that those persons who may be eligible and wish to apply for subsidized housing within the County can be assisted in obtaining priority for placement in those units. It is recognized, however, that waiting lists are quite extensive, federal subsidies are limited, and it will be difficult to obtain placement in subsidized units . Information on the private housing sector will be compiled and updated to ensure availability of necessary units. Sections H and I below provide an assessment of relocation needs and resources at the time of Plan adoption which provides the Agency and the Board of Supervisors with a basis for determining that it is feasible to relocate the limited numbers of households that may be required to be relocated as a result of Plan implementation. If, during the course of program implementation, it is determined that adequate replacement housing is not available and cannot otherwise be made available, the Agency may take action to develop such housing in accordance with state guidelines . E. RELOCATION NEEDS AND SERVICES I) Determination of Need ( Prior to the preparation of the detailed Relocation Plan, \ the Agency will interview all eligible persons, business concerns and nonprofit organizations to obtain information to plan for housing and business accommodations , as well as counseling and other assistance needs. The Agency will cooperate with any other organization which might be conducting surveys in the area at the same time to avoid duplication. A referral system for social service needs will be established. Survey results will be updated as appropriate. The purpose of the survey and nature and extent of relocation payments and assistance that may become available will be discussed with each individual during the interview. On the basis of information obtained during the interview, the Agency will prepare and maintain a relocation record for each person to be displaced. The record will contain a description of the pertinent characteristics and the assistance which will be required. 2) Information Programs Written informational materials will be prepared and distributed to all potential displacees . Public meetings with the relocation staff will also be held. The address, telephone number and business hours of the Agency and the name -54- of the Agency staff person supervising relocation will be made available, as well as a written description of the procedure for filing grievances . l 3) Assistance in Obtaining Housing Displacees will be provided full access to relocation resources and assistance will be provided in obtaining and moving to suitable locations . Information on sizes, rental and sales prices of units will be recorded and made available at the Agency office to those seeking housing referrals. Contacts will be maintained with real estate agents, brokers , landlords and others for the purpose of obtaining listings of standard relocation housing. Units will be inspected prior to referral to determine whether they are decent, safe and sanitary. 4) Social Services Displacees who require assistance will be referred to the appropriate social service resource. Counseling will be available prior to, during and -after relocation. Employment, financial , educational, health and other services will be offered, and relocation staff will follow up on all referrals to determine whether appropriate assistance has been provided. 5 ) Assistance to Business Concerns and Non Profit Organizations Should it become necessary for the implementation of the Redevelopment Plan to displace businesses in the Redevelopment Project Areas , Agency staff assistance will be provided to aid in nearby relocation of such businesses. Information will be maintained on the availability, costs and square footage of commercial and industrial locations and listings will be requested from real estate brokers who may be able to provide information on suitable accommodations for businesses. Efforts will be made to keep displaced businesses within the redevelopment area, if possible. 6) Eviction Policy To the extent possible, the Agency will attempt to acquire property only where there is a willingness to sell on the part of the property owner. Occupants of acquired properties will be evicted only as a last resort. Eviction will not affect the eligibility of displacees to receive relocation payments. F. RELOCATION PAYMENTS Relocation payments will be made to all eligible displaced persons , businesses and nonprofit organizations -55- pursuant to Section 7260 of the Government Code. Assistance in completing applications will be provided. G. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE Any person who disagrees with a determination regarding eligibility for, or amount of, a relocation payment, or who believes the Agency has failed to refer him or her to comparable replacement housing, may have his or her claim reviewed. As a first step, a grievance should be brought to the Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency. If a displaced person believes that his or her complaint has not been satisfactorily answered, he or she may appeal to the Relocation Appeals Board. This Board will promptly hear all complaints relating to relocation and will determine if the Redevelopment Agency has complied with applicable laws. After the public hearing the Relocation Appeals Board will present its findings and recommendations to the Redevelopment Agency. H. POTENTIAL RELOCATION WORKLOAD The programs slated for the Project Area -- construction of new affordable housing, housing rehabilitation and infill construction in existing residential neighborhoods , provision of infrastructure improvements and facilitation of commercial and industrial development - will not foreseeably require any residential or commercial relocation. Should relocation become necessary the numbers of affected persons or businesses will be extremely small . I. HOUSING RESOURCES The Agency anticipates assisting in the rehabilitation of approximately 500 existing housing units in the Project Area and in the new construction of approximately 88 units. Pursuant to the General Plan, it is projected that another approximately 793 housing units will be constructed in the Project Area without Agency assistance. In addition, the Redevelopment Plan itself provides for the allocation of a minimum of 20% of tax increment revenue for the improvement and expansion of the Project Area housing stock. _ Therefore, the Agency anticipates spending a minimum of $23 .2 million on housing construction and rehabilitation programs . A substantial amount of these funds will be spent on housing to serve persons in the very low, lower, and moderate income categories. These resources can readily be applied to produce additional housing for relocation purposes to the extent that public and private market units may prove inadequate to meet needs. Displaced households , if any, would have first priority to occupy any housing constructed with Agency assistance. -56- Given the above, it is reasonable to conclude that the Agency can provide suitable dwelling units in numbers equal to or greater than the maximum foreseeable relocation workload. Pursuant to State law requirements and Agency goals, a substantial number of the newly constructed units will be affordable to low- and moderate-income households, including households earning less than 50% of the area median income. Subsidies will be made available to assist any displacees who are relocating into housing which is not within their " financial means" (as defined in Section C of this General Relocation Plan) . J. DEVELOPER ASSISTANCE Developer assistance to meet relocation costs will be sought wherever feasible and will be required as a condition for land assembly assistance when other sources for paying any necessary subsidy are unavailable. In addition, to minimize the impact of relocation costs on worthwhile, but economically marginal, private developments, the Agency anticipates the use of tax increment revenue in selected instances to write-down land assembly costs and thus, effectively pay any necessary subsidy. Part III , Section C describes in detail the land write-down technique. In summary, it is reasonable to conclude at the time of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan that the Agency has a feasible method, and that sufficient suitable housing units are or can be made available at affordable cost, to meet the maximum foreseeable relocation workload to be generated by the Plan. As emphasized in Section A above, if any, relocation becomes necessary specific relocation plans, containing detailed household and housing availability surveys, will be prepared at the initiation of each particular land assembly project to ensure that such conditions prevail at that time as well. Land assembly involving relocation will be authorized by the Agency only if the specific relocation plan can ensure the availability of sufficient suitable and affordable housing to meet the specific relocation needs created by the land assembly project. K. RELOCATION OF BUSINESSES It is not anticipated that any businesses will be displaced by the Redevelopment Project. However, should it become necessary to displace a business within the Project Area, staff assistance will be provided to aid in nearby relocation of the business (es) , and efforts will be made to keep the business (es) within the redevelopment area, if possible. The Agency will give preference to businesses currently within the Project Area to continue or to re-enter the business in the manner set forth in the Agency' s adopted Rules for Business Preference and Owner Participation. -57- APPENDIX C 1987 ANALYSIS OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAN & ORIGINAL PRELIMINARY PLAN Excerpt from the December 1987 Report on the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point (formerly West Pittsburg) Redevelopment Project O RSG APPENDIX C / 104 PART V. ANALYSIS OF PRELIMINARY PLAN t A Preliminary Plan for the West Pittsburg Redevelopment Project Area was adopted by the East County Regional Planning Commission on January 12 , 1987. Thereafter the East County Regional. Planning Commission further expanded the project area boundaries on March 9 , 1987 , and again on August 10, 1987. The Preliminary Plan set forth the boundaries of the Project Area, the existing and proposed land uses, the principal streets, population densities and building intensities, proposed standards for redevelopment, as well as the anticipated impact of the Project upon the surrounding neighborhood. Agency staff has developed a final Redevelopment Plan which conforms to the revised boundaries approved by the East County Regional Planning Commission on August 10 , 1987 and adopts the same standards, uses and programs set forth in the Preliminary Plan. As there are no changes from the Preliminary Plan, the analysis of the Preliminary Plan is in fact an analysis of the final Redevelopment Plan which is addressed in the body of this Report. The Redevelopment Plan reaffirms provisions in the Preliminary Plan which established standards for development, ensured enforceability of Plan objectives , and required that development activities conform to the Contra Costa County General Plan. Such additions as have been made in the final Plan have been designed to clarify and provide requisite detail as contemplated by the Community Redevelopment Law. Such additions are fully consistent with the adopted goals and objectives of the Preliminary Plan. -58- PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR THE WEST PITTSBURG AREA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PREPARED FOR THE EAST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY November, 1986 CONTENTS I . INTRODUCTION II . DESCRIPTION OF BOUNDARIES OF THE PROJECT AREA. III. STATEMENT OF LAND USE. IV. STATEMENT OF PROPOSED LAYOUT OF PRINCIPAL STREETS. V. STATEMENT OF PROPOSED POPULATION DENSITIES. VI . STATEMENT OF PROPOSED BUILDING INTENSITIES. VII . STATEMENT OF PROPOSED BUILDING STANDARDS. VIII . ATTAINMENT OF THE PURPOSES OF THE CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LAW. IX. CONFORMANCE TO THE GENERAL PLAN. X. GENERAL IMPACT OF THE PROJECT. EXHIBIT 1: PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY MAP EXHIBIT 2: LAND USE MAP PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR THE WEST PITTSBURG AREA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT I. INTRODUCTION The West Pittsburg Area Redevelopment Project Preliminary Plan has been prepared pursuant to the Constitution of the State of California, the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California, and all applicable laws and local ordinances. The California Community redevelopment Law requires the Planning Commission of the local jurisdiction to formulate a preliminary plan for each project area. The preliminary plan is the basis for the development of the ulti- mate redevelopment plan. In general terms, the preliminary plan must describe the boundaries of the project area, provide a general statement of land uses, layout of principal streets, population densities, building intensities and standards proposed as a basis for the redevelopment of the project area. The Preliminary Plan should show how the project goals would be attained by redevelopment, show conformance of the preliminary plan to the General Plan, and describe the impact of the project upon residents thereof, and upon the surrounding neighborhood. c II . Description of Boundaries of the Project Area: The West Pittsburg Redevelopment Project Area, as proposed, is as shown on the "Project Area Map" attached hereto as Exhibit 1. The area is commonly known as West Pittsburg and is west of the City of Pittsburg. III . Statement of Land Use. As a basis for the redevelopment of the Project Area, it is proposed that, in general , the land uses in the Project Area shall be Residential , Shopping, Office, Commercial Recreation, Industrial , Park and Recreation and General Open Space as illustrated on the "Land Use Map" attached hereto as Exhibit 2. IV. Statement of Proposed Layout of Principal Streets. As a basis for the redevelopment of the Project Area, it is proposed that, in general , the principal streets be as shown on the Project Area Map, to include: A. North-South Streets: 1. Port Chicago Highway 2. Bailey Road t B. East West Streets: 1. State Route 4 2. Willow Pass Road Existing streets within the Project Area may be closed, widened or otherwise improved, and additional streets may be created as necessary for proper vehicular and pedestrian circulation. V. Statement of Proposed Population Densities. As a basis for the redevelopment of the Project Area, it is proposed that, in general , population densities shall be consistent with the densities established in the Land Use Element-Residential of the West Pittsburg General Plan. This element establishes the follo- wing designations and densities: VI . Statement of Proposed Building Intensities: As a basis for the redevelopment of the Project Area, it is proposed that, in general , building intensities be controlled by limits on: (a) the percentage of ground area covered by buildings (lot coverage) ; (b) the ratio of total floor area for all stories of the buildings to areas of the building sites (floor area ratio); (c) the size and location of the buildable areas on building sites; and (d) the heights of buildings. The land coverage, size and location of buildable areas should be limited as feasible to provide adequate open space. VII . Statement of Proposed Building Standards As a basis for the redevelopment of the Project Area, it is proposed that building standards should generally conform to the building requirements of applicable state statutes and local codes. VIII . Attainment of the Purposes of the California Community Redevelopment Law. The purposes of the California Community Redevelopment Law would be attained by the proposed redevelopment through: (a) the elimination or environmental deficiencies, including but not limited to, aging, deteriorating and poorly maintained structures; inadequate and obsolete utilities, drainage, sewers and streets; conflicting, incompatible and inappropriate land uses; and small and irregular lots. (b) the assemblage of land into parcels suitable for modern integrated development with improved pedestrian and vehicular circulation. (c) the replanning, redesign and development of undeveloped areas which are stagnant or improperly utilized. IX. Conformance to the General Plan of the County of Contra Costa This Preliminary Plan conforms to the West Pittsburg Area General Plan of Contra Costa County. This Preliminary Plan proposes a similar pattern of land uses and includes all rights of way and public facili- ties indicated by the General Plan. X. General Impact of the Project upon the Residents thereof and upon the Surrounding Neighborhood. The goals of the Plan should have a positive impact both on the residents of the Project Area and upon the surrounding neighborhood. The area is marked by a high percentage of substandard housing, mixed land uses and uses within buildings, large number of parcels of irregular form and shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development, land uses no longer appropriate to the area, and inade- quate and/or deteriorated public improvements and facilities. As such, the proposed Project Area does meet the definition of blight- physical , social and economic as stated in Article 3, Chapter 1, of Community Redevelopment Law. The conditions present are of such a nature and degree that they cannot reasonably be expected to be alleviated by private enterprise acting alone without public partici- pation and assistance. The project proposes to repair or replace deteriorated infrastructure, and stimulate commercial and industrial development through public improvements. GR:krc ra6:ppwest.pit ;M ® I� m® ® m m a s N CH n QMM Mme �® v "M= ate_ viva e�-�� �a as yrs im rsEf Q.SIIa iii]ILe M MCil�f 1a7 am a© cars mors s ienva moa �r a� � C2 4w Ilan= El - ® � , �R v sy �►'� ���6 OWEN rM IMM IN I in son �1FAN. CnN CA _ CR T vCNrO Clr�� A N Sq TNf RN AA CAp Nr� AZ""0 rE • • • ASIC w4r ti:�Li: _ills. t i :IFIL :I:f�:l��i l:li LIL ��•'• --- arC,.,tO• _I.:• a ° , � ,i.}r SII' �, = i ?}Rr.:� •� • all: :L Ll cli 1. ivn- SUM •'+>1v'• • I•'=I i� is t. .' . n slf If C "• cw - '� t KC.1 u+ _ L� e .c.. _�L _ MA-1— n ft LF 1 / I AMBR_SE "r PEC I"art:s .�• �I t \ IYI CENTER / ka ' '�•Y�w+ MPLa h- '>- " __� .�1� liactl.��� Ie�e�yAC._J �wIN. ''• i°t'_?.. F 9 w 7"8 CCSP. loo !c ro *L4 It u I E ZR TV �- c � � „ '.� •.. .a i ia{i•SS S_---- moi. .e"�IL .ihl °'3.i:..>.3.i:i ''':I :1a.£!!ter c..�:a> a►•: •• "I f�:"�/�/` L "use ;s�' z. cos7.1 ';duel � ..:CJI' ;• ;�g c<NIL _ 2t-.Ainp f_�+ '•/� III-'. .i.._ _ rpt :.y __ _�•�-� •ir' °prf I f 639!� •.8392 CON PE • --� SSS t'tT! �. EXNIBIi 1 �y Mao 2 of 3 ' 1 •T i µ � N f e• CP COSTA COO.TT •• E •V[E t.° , } + \ ••l'••F tiCark. �X — '•aa °•e r� 41 • Y � +.�-+-��I ® ® T t All $ ° • a 3 9 .< ' rt•ciw i �� � I 'I'1�•i .o..>,.•TT ` ��i--•=o.. l .11, 1 E I LL — Kfa I1DII^liil' T '�C a .. ~`♦t •t• tr.. •> •c...1•• tt �I I;Ni BEL AIR •< < L'•C! SCHOOL % _`�• •F t :ii. COSTA & CANAIt+� •r'Q tc_°o.[. STATE [K[E>r•T COSTA AMBROSE GAR CON`RI I �i y ' REC 8 PARKWAY I _ 'I •"a [[ ,•.L. CC ao (I .o/ •• ^��.` < — =� p .. Irk-—� �i • s r= tri --d _ .-_.t/fes q� •_. �� ..... .,., 0001�i:S° _ •::: ' '\.. -�"��-a.� �� '^ .,., ri, err c... eon `=`=- - :...«•:::« �J•,•:a r"� ..�� 1 :+: �.,�" n—,- _ M•�•� w •www. •NNN•••N•••• •«.• ` • ti--. Z i_ acoo •••::••••.•.• ��:•:::•31 $etNT«`:« ..•ww•«•• ��' • j0_�o • ••• •.•.•• ••N«• iw q •_:i.•-••••i.ii_«:.iio.:ii�••uo•••s, • h u••••.• •• •0000 • N•:• 'r • • R.R ........... ..: elri.' •J •• w i:N ;r: -�'1}� ••• «• • WILLOW—PA ROAD • �•' Yl j•.�7 w•�' •+moi •�• ••: NOT •u►:+.I•�:.�•�1 .... 49 •• SP .►IH is v "•rww.•. 1 •'' ;1 �!'j .i .-. ... :...,, a.. S. -� - ••..••. Rout• 6.. FOPOSEDREDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WEST PITTSBURG AREA •"':::••'•"""""" "'••••••• �, .......... ..2't N. LEG"c'i0 ® Commercial Recreation Single Family Residential - Low .lillow Pass Road Mixed 'Ise Corridor Single Family Residential - vedium :::: Industry •• Single Family Residential - rlign Lignt industry :multiple Family Residential - Low �•�': ;,gricultur,l Preserve f-� ,multiple Family Residential - 'tedium ?ubliC 3 Semi-Public leignbornooa 3usiness ?arks ; Recreaticn 7TiTTiTTT� Retail Business ,�- General Open Space u111LLuu Office Planned Unit :rea C=nercial F City Limits i"=4,800' i r / r_• yqy� _ �uwn�...•`�'„�5. S j IrrY.��,I IKr I�I.S�I • L4 'O i , -�:�mcaatet �I>:!ir�jlferrt'�id�•�j,�� r+�—�t> I Mo ii T. i"h�1�4gtrf�V}� f `.;�t — +rL.'. �f ,• •} UtiX'LSA.aiy�j'+1���1J1�J)1f� VA I, Jar W ii -5EM , MIT.! I �•.�.� rr' J! Ill TV i r ��'ti 'ti.• 4v' ur 4c APPENDIX D NEGATIVE DECLARATION O RSG APPENDIX E / 105 Community Dennis M.Barry,AICP Contra Community Development Director Development Costa Department County 2530 Arnold Drive Suite 190 Martinez, California 94553-8611 n Phone: -- (925)335-7230 dr - Febnmy14,2008 rq covr5`� NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND INTENT TO ADOPT A PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN AMENDMENT Pursuant to the State of California Public Resources Code and the"Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970"as amended to date,this is to advise you that the Community Development Department of Contra Costa County has prepared an initial study on the following project: BAY POINT REDEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project involves amending the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area (Project Area) as authorized by the Califomia Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.), to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency from $116 million to approximately $689 million and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness from $60 million to approximately $220 million (subject to further refinement and adjustment by the Agency as appropriate),to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan.The Bay Point Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors by Ordinance No. 87-102, adopted on December 29, 1987, as amended by Ordinance No. 94-64,adopted on December 6, 1994, as amended by Ordinance No. 99-05,adopted on February 23, 1999,as further amended by Ordinance No.99-54,adopted on October 19, 1999,as further amended by Ordinance No. 2006-33, adopted on July 18, 2006, as further amended by Ordinance No.2007-25, adopted on June 5, 2007. PROJECT LOCATION: The Project Area is located in the Bay Point area of east Contra Costa County. The primary access to this unincorporated area is via State Route 4 which connects to Interstate 680.Secondary access routes to the area include Willow Pass Road and Bailey Road.The project area consists of approximately 2100 acres of land designated for various uses in the County General Plan and the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area Specific Plan. The project includes approximately 240 acres within the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area(this is also within the Redevelopment Area). No significant impacts have been identified in the initial study. A copy of the Negative Declaration and all documents referenced in the Negative Declaration may be reviewed in the offices of the Community Development Department,and 2530 Arnold Drive. Suite 190,Martinez,during normal business hours. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - The period for accepting comments on the adequacy of the environmental documents extends to 5:00 P.M.,Monday,March 17, 2008. Any comments should be in writing and submitted to the following address: Maureen Toms, AICP Contra Costa County Redevelopment Department 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite 190 Martinez,CA 94553 It is anticipated that the proposed Negative Declaration will be considered for adoption at a meeting of the Contra Costa County Planning Commission on Tuesday April 22, 2008. The meeting is anticipated to be held at 7:00 pm at the Board Chambers at 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA. It is expected that the Board of Supervisors will also conduct a hearing on the amendment to the Redevelopment Plan at the same meeting. Interested parties may contact staff at(925) 335-7230 to confirm date and time of the meeting. Al Maureen Toms,AICP Principal Planner cc:County Clerk's Office(2 copies) Public Works-Steve Wright C DATAMPWRI)A1N"01 -2- California Environmental Quality Act Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Bay Point Redevelopment Area Plan Amendment 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Contra Costa County Community Development Dept. 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite 190 Martinez,CA 94553 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Maureen Toms(925)335-7230 4. Project Location: Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area, East Contra Costa County 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite 190 Martinez, CA 94553 6. General Plan Land Use Designation: Various: (Commercial, Mixed Use, Heavy and Light Industrial, Single-Family Residential, Multiple-Family Residential, Public/Semi-Public, Parks and Recreation, and Open Space). 7. Zoning: Planned-Unit(P-1)District 8. Project Description: The proposed project involves amending the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area (Project Area) as authorized by the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 etseg.), to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency from $116 million to $689 million and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness from $60 million to $220 million (subject to further refinement and adjustment by the Agency as appropriate), to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. The Bay Point Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors by Ordinance No. 87-102, adopted on December 29, 1987, as amended by Ordinance No. 94-64, adopted on December 6, 19945 as amended by Ordinance No. 99-05, adopted on February 23, 1999, as further amended by Ordinance No. 99-54, adopted on October 19, 1999, as further amended by Ordinance No. 2006-33, adopted on July 18,2006, as further amended by Ordinance No.2007-25,adopted on June 5, 2007. 9. Setting, Site Description and Surrounding Land Uses: The Project Area is located in the Bay Point area of east Contra Costa County. The primary access to this unincorporated area is via the State Route 4. Secondary access routes to the area include Willow Pass Road and Bailey Road. The Project Area consists of approximately 2,100 acres of land designated for various uses in the County General Plan and Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area Specific Plan. The project includes approximately 240 acres within the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area (this is also within the Redevelopment Area). 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g. permits. financing, approval or participation agreement):Contra Costa County Redevelopment Department ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages: Aesthetics Agricultural Resources Air Quality _ Biological Resources _ Cultural Resources _ Geology& Soils Hazards& Hydrology& Land Use& Hazardous Materials Water Quality Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population &Housing _ Public Services _ Recreation _ Transportation/Circulation Utilities& Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this Initial Study: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a ✓ NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier E1R pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Prepared by: Talin Aghazarian Date Approved by: Maure n Toms,Principal Planner Date Contra Costa County Community Development Department SOURCES In the process of preparing the Checklist and conducting the evaluation, the following references (which are available for review at the Contra Costa County Community Development Department, 2350 Arnold Drive, Suite 190, Martinez)were consulted: 1. Contra Costa County Resource Mapping System—Quad Sheet Panel—Honker Bay,CA 2. Contra Costa County General Plan ,January 2005 3. General Plan and Zoning Maps 4. Project Description 5. The Bay Point Redevelopment Plan and Environmental Impact Report, December 1987 6. The Bay Point Redevelopment Area Planned-Unit District Zoning Program 7. The Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area Specific Plan and EIR,December 2001. 8. Contra Costa County Code—Title 8 (Zoning) 9. Contra Costa County Geographic Information System Data Layers 10. Contra Costa County Important Farmland Map,2002 11. Bay Area Air Quality Management 2005 Ozone Strategy, January 2006 12. Planning&Zoning Laws 2007 13. California Environmental Quality Act 2007 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated impact Impact I. AESTHETICS—Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?(Sources: 4,5,6) X b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?(Source 4,5,6 ) X C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?(Source: 4,5,6) X d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?(Source:4,5,6 ) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to aesthetics. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the aesthetic quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES —In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural and farmland. Would the project: 5 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Fact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? (Source: 1,2,5,6,7,10) X b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract?(Sources: 1,2,5,6,7,10) X C. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non- agricultural use? (Sources: 1,2,5,6,7,10) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to agricultural resources. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. III. AIR QUALITY — Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: 6 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Sources: 4,9,11) X b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (Sources: 4, 9,11) X C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is a non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?(Sources: 4,9,11) X d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Sources: 4,9,11) X C. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Sources: 4,9,11) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to air quality. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. 7 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES—Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impar,t Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Sources: 2,5,7,9,) X b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Sources:2,5,7,9) X— C. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?(Sources: 2,5,7,9) X d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Sources: 2,5,7,9) X e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Sources: 2,5,7,9) X I 8 f Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan?(Source: 2,5,7,9) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to biological resources. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Fact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 (Source: 2,5,7) X b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5?(Source 2,5,7) X C. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? (Sources: 2,5,7) X d• Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?(Sources: 2,5,7) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to cultural resources. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources 9 for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. VT. GEOLOGY AND SOILS—Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No impact Incorporated ]fact Imnact a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence' of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.(Source: 5,7,9) X 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? (Source: 5,7,9 ) X 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? (Source:5,7,9) X 4. Landslides?(Sources: 5,7,9 ) X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?(Source 5,7,9 ) X C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?(Sources: 5,7,9) X 10 d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1998), creating substantial risks to life or property?(Source: 5,7,9 ) X e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? (Source: 5,7,9) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to geology and soils. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS—Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal ofhazardous materials?(Source:4,5,7) X b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?(Source: 4,5,7 ) X 11 C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Source 4,5,7) X d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65862.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?(Source: 415,7 ) X e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a pian has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. (Source:4,5,7) X f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?(Source 4,5,7 ) X g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Sources: 4,5,7) X h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?(Source: 4,5,7) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to hazards and hazardous materials. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area.Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier 12 environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY—Would the project: Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No fact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Source: 4,5,7,) X b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? (Sources: 4,5,7 ) X C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? (Sources: 4,5,7) X d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface run-off in a manner that would result in flooding on-or off-site? (Sources: 4,5,7) X 13 e. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Sources: 4,5,7 ) X f Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?(Sources: 4,5,7) X g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Sources: 4,5,7) X h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows?(Sources: 4,5,7) X i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?(Sources: 4,5,7) X Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or j. mudflow?(Sources: 4,5,7) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to hydrology and water quality. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. 14 Ix. LAND USE AND PLANNING—Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Imvact Incorporated lm act Impact a. Physically divide an established community? (Sources: 2,3,4,) X Conflict with any applicable land use b. plan, policy, or the regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Sources: 2,3,4) X C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (Source:2,3,4) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to land use and planning. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. 15 X. MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated impact Impact a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?(Source: 4,5 ) X b. Result in the loss or availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? (Source: 4,5) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to mineral resources. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the Countv. X1. NOISE—Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (Source: 4',5,7) X 16 b. Exposure of � persons to, or generation of, excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? (Source: 4,5,7) X C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Source: 4,5,7 ) X d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Source:4,5,7 ) X C. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?(Source: 4,5,7 ) X f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?(Source:4,5,7 ) X 17 SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to noise. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area.Actual development and construction Of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. 18 XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Imag a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?(Source:2,3,4) X b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Source: 2,3,4) X C. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Source: 2,3,4 X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to population and housing. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. 19 XHI. PUBLIC SERVICES Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact incorporated Impact IMI)act a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services?(Sources: 2.;4,5,7,9) 1. Fire Protection? X 2. Police Protection? X 3. Schools? x 4. Parks? X 5. Other public facilities? X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to public services. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. 20 XIV. RECREATION Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impac Inco orated Impact fact a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?(Source: 1,2,4) X Does the project include b. recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?(Source: 1,2,4) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to recreation. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC—Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? (Source:4,5,7,9) X 21 b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (Source: 4,5,7,9) X C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (Source:4,5,7,9 ) X d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?(Source:4,5,7,9 ) X e. Result in inadequate emergency access?(Sources: 4,5,7,9) X f. Result in inadequate parking capacity?(Sources: 4,5,7,9 ) X g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Sources: 4,5,7,9 ) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to transportation/traffic. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. 22 XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated lmt)ac ImawLt a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (Source: 4,5,7) X b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?(Sources: 4,5,7) X C. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (Sources: 4,5,7) X d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (Source:4,5,7) X e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?(Source: 4,5,7 ) X f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's waste disposal needs?(Source: 4,5,7) X 23 g. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (Source: 4,5,7 ) X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness is an administrative activity which does not involve physical development or construction, and therefore would not result in any negative impacts to utilities and service systems. The proposed Plan Amendment is necessary to provide sufficient financial resources for the Agency to complete the redevelopment of the Project Area consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by helping to eliminate blight and increase the quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan would be undertaken pursuant to CEQA, which may rely on earlier environmental impact analysis or require additional environmental review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. XVIL MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No impact Incomorated JmDact imp u a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish and wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?(Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? X 24 C. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X SUMMARY: Amending the Redevelopment Plan does not involve physical development or construction,therefore would not result in any negative impacts to degrade the quality of the environments(see III-Air Quality, N-Biological Resources,VI-Geologic Problems, VIII-Hydrology and Water Quality). The Plan Amendment is proposing to help eliminate blight and increase the aesthetic quality of the area. Actual development and construction of projects to implement the Redevelopment Plan will be subject to further CEQA review when project specific applications are submitted to the County. The incremental effects of the proposed project were reviewed in connection with the effect of past projects,current projects and future projects.These projects included the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan,the West Pittsburg Area Redevelopment Plan,the widening of Willow Pass Road, Port Chicago Highway,and Alves Lane/Canal Road along with frontage improvements, redesign and reconstruction of the State Route 4/Willow Pass Road and State Route 4/Bailey Road,agency assisted drainage improvements,and residential frontage improvements which are all analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan in 1987. Additional projects reviewed included the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area Specific Plan and the Bay Point Redevelopment Area Planned-Unit Zoning District Program. Based on a review of these projects,the cumulative impacts associated with amending the Redevelopment Plan to increase the limit on the amount of tax increment that may be received by the Agency and to increase the limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness, are less than significant. APPENDIX E 1987 NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACT REPORT Excerpt from the December 1987 Report on the Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point (formerly West Pittsburg) Redevelopment Project O RSG APPENDIX E / 106 PART XII . NEIGHBORDOOD IMPACT REPORT A. INTRODUCTION The Project Area is a contiguous area of approximately 1550 acres , generally bounded on the east by the City of Pittsburg, on the south by State Route 4 , on the west by Port Chicago Highway, and on the north by Suisun Bay and the Sacramento Northern Right-of--Way. The Project Area contains a large number of occupied and several abandoned structures which have deteriorated due to lack of maintenance and upkeep. It is estimated that 25% of the residential structures are in need of substantial rehabilitation. The Project Area is characterized by a wide-range of blighting conditions , including: substandard housing; deteriorated, obsolete and abandoned structures; shifting of land uses; inadequate parcelization underutilization of a significant number of properties; inadequate public improvements; and flooding. Please refer to Part II of this Report for a comprehensive description of the Project Area and the blighting conditions affecting the Area. The overall purpose and impact of redevelopment activities will be to achieve five major goals. First, it seeks to stimulate the construction of new affordable housing in the Project Area. Second, the Plan seeks to upgrade the existing residential neighborhoods through rehabilitation of a substantial number of existing housing units as -well as the facilitation of infill housing construction. Third, the Plan is intended to provide major infrastructure improvements in the Project Area in order to better serve the existing area residents and businesses , as well as to accommodate new residential , commercial , and industrial development. Fourth, the Plan seeks to revitalize and expand commercial development in the area. Fifth, the Plan is intended to stimulate new industrial development in the Project Area in order that it may become a productive and attractive economic center, providing jobs for community residents and enhancing the local tax base. For a more detailed description of potential redevelopment activities, please refer to Part IV of the Plan and Part III of this Report. Pursuant to Section 33352 (1) , this Part presents an overview of redevelopment impacts on Project Area neighborhoods and then discusses in greater detail the impacts of redevelopment on the following: traffic circulation; environmental quality; community facilities and services; school population and the quality of education; property taxes; relocation needs and housing (with emphasis on housing production for low- and { moderate-income households) . -so- In many instances , the information set forth in this Part XII is a synopsis of the more detailed information and impact evaluation contained in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report for the Plan (Part VII of this Report) . Please refer to the Draft and Final EIR for such additional information and evaluation. B. OVERVIEW OF REDEVELOPMENT IMPACTS The direct impact of the redevelopment activities will be to alleviate the blighting conditions in the Project Area. Indeed, the Plan activities have been expressly structured to eliminate the impediments to private development that have been identified in the Area. The secondary impact of the redevelopment activities will be to (1) stabilize and improve the quality of the existing residential neighborhood; (2) expand the supply of affordable housing in the Project Area; and (3) create a more attractive and efficient environment for persons living and working in the Project Area. This growth and stabilization will, in turn, produce several impacts, which are discussed in the following sections. C. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION The redevelopment program is designated both to encourage new development by providing an adequate traffic circulation system and to mitigate the effects of increased traffic generated by such new development. Specifically, planned improvements in the Project Area include widening of major arterials, frontage improvements and landscaping (including curbs , gutters , and sidewalks) , intersection improvements, installation of warning devices at grade crossings, freeway interchange improvements, and street paving. These improvements are projected to improve access to the area and to reduce existing safety hazards for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles . However, projected new development in the Project Area, in combination with cumulative development in the West Pittsburg vicinity, will result in increased in local traffic volumes that may exceed the capacity of most local arterials, even with the completion of the planned road widenings and interchange improvements . Please see Section IV.C. of the Environmental Impact Report for a detailed and comprehensive traffic and circulation analysis. D. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY The environmental quality of the Project Area will generally be enhanced by the Plan activities, including: 1) rehabilitation of dilapidated homes; 2) provision of infill housing; 3) upgrading of residential neighborhoods through street and landscaping improvisions , construction of curbs , gutters and sidewalks , and provision of mini-parks and -81- tot lots; 4) major road and infrastructure improvements, and 5) elimination of flooding conditions. r` These activities are aimed at eliminating the blighting conditions in the Project Area. In general , the public perceives blighting conditions to be negative environmental factors and the removal of blight to be an improvement in environmental quality. The Plan will create two additional impacts which have both positive and negative aspects. First, the Plan is intended to stimulate new development, which will tend to increase the density of structures and to create a more concentrated urbanized environment. Depending on the perspective of the individual observer, a more concentrated urbanized environment may be viewed as a positive or negative impact. The activities called for in the Plan and the mitigation measures set forth in the Draft EIR are designed to permit urbanization to proceed in a more coordinated and beneficial manner to residents and businesses than might otherwise be the case. Second, the development that is stimulated by the Plan will cause overall increases in traffic and attendant increases in noise and air emissions. Redevelopment activities related to improvement of traffic circulation patterns in the Project Area are designed to help mitigate these adverse environmental effects of the Plan. E. COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES The Plan will improve the availability and quality of public facilities in the Project Area , including improvement of drainage facilities; repair, redesign and/or reconstruction of streets and intersections; provision of neighborhood open space (mini-parks , tot lots , and trail) ; and development of area serving retail facilities . These improvements will, in turn, lead to improvements in the provision of various public services. For example , road circulation improvements should improve traffic circulation , permitting improvement in the response times for fire, police and other emergency services. On the other hand, development induced by the Plan will generate increased demands in the Project Area for police, fire , school, and other public services. With the exception of the Riverview Fire Protection District, during the life of the Plan , service-providing agencies that rely on property tax revenue will continue to receive the same level of tax revenue from the Project Area as they obtained prior to Plan adoption (assuming no change in tax rate) . Increases in tax revenue due to new development will be allocated to the Agency to pay for various -82- I . redevelopment activities. Thus, at least during the first approximately twenty years of the Plan period, service-providing agencies will have to rely exclusively on increased property tax revenues from those portions of their jurisdictions outside the Project Area to meet the demand for increased services . As described in Part XI of this Report, the impact on service-providing agencies of "freezing" or holding constant the Project Area tax base should not be significant in most instances. In the long run, after the Plan is implemented, all increases in tax revenue from the Project Area will be allocated to service-providing entities to defray the costs of providing expanded services . After the Plan is implemented, the Agency intends to pass-through to service providing agencies tax revenue not needed to pay for redevelopment activities. Further, during the life of the Plan, prior to complete implementation, redevelopment activities within the Project Area may produce a "spillover" stimulus to investment in nearby properties outside the Project Area , the tax benefits from which will accrue directly to the service-providing entities. F. SCHOOL IMPACTS To assist in increasing the supply of affordable housing in the Project Area and the County, the Plan will encourage the construction of housing in the Project Area. It is estimated that over the life of the Plan 723 units of housing may be added to the Project Area housing stock. As described in the EIR, this may add as many as 506 school children to the pupil numbers in the Mt. Diablo and Pittsburg Unified School Districts. However, this increase is expected to be very gradual given the extended buildout period of twenty-five years or more. Because of this extended build-out period, it is difficult to predict the impact Project generated enrollment increases would have on area schools. Enrollment patterns could change significantly over this period, as could District facilities. The rate at which the residential expansion takes place will be a major factor in determining the impact on school enrollment (i.e. , gradual development would have less significant effects than building new units all at once or in large segments) . In any event, Project-related increases in the residential population would probably require some expansion of school district facilities over the long term. Assembly Bill 2926, which became law on January 2 , 1987 , provides for the imposition of school impact fees for new development prior to the issuance of building permits. It is anticipated that Project-assisted housing construction will be subject to such impact fees , mitigating the impact of increased school enrollment due to redevelopment activities. r -83- G. IMPACT ON TAX LEVELS j The establishment of a redevelopment project and use of tax increment financing will have no effect on the ad valorem property tax rate or total ad valorem property tax bill levied against properties inside or outside the Project Area. Tax increment financing does not affect the tax rate, but instead alters the distribution of property ta, revenue that would be collected in any event, so that a portion (the tax increments generated by increased assessed value of Project Area property over the frozen base) is allocated to the Agency to contribute to the elimination of blight in the Project Area. Please refer to Part III for a further discussion of the tax increment financing technique . Some redevelopment activities may be financed in part through the creation of assessment districts that would levy taxes against Project Area property. According to State enabling legislation, such assessment districts may be established only with the approval of property owners who together own property representing a majority (or in some instances, a supermajority) of the assessed value of the proposed district. In recognition of the limited resources available to residential and business property owners in the Project Area, the Method of Financing the Plan (Part III of this Report) acknowledges that this use of assessment districts will not be a feasible financing method in most instances . For this very reason, the establishment of a redevelopment project and the use of tax increment financing has been C- established as a last resort financing mechanism to provide blight-alleviating public improvements that cannot feasibly be financed by property owners acting alone. H. RELOCATION It is not anticipated that any households would be displaced over the forty year life of the Plan. As noted in Part VI of the Plan, the Agency will conduct its activities to minimize the relocation of households and businesses. While household relocation involves a certain inconvenience and hardship, the Plan and the accompanying relocation plan (which is set forth in Part IV of this Report) contain policies, procedures and safeguards to minimize such inconvenience and hardship and to ensure timely, satisfactory relocation of any households that must move as a result of redevelopment activities. I . HOUSING As noted above, it is not anticipated that any dwelling units will be removed from the Project Area housing stock to accommodate redevelopment activities. l -84- 1 The total number of dwelling units, housing persons and families of low- or moderate-income that will be constructed or rehabilitated will depend on the following factors: j 1 . The Agency will work with housing developers to ensure that at least the percentage of low- and moderate- income housing required by Health and Safety Code Section 33413 (b) is constructed within the Project Area. That Section requires that at least 30% of all units constructed or rehabilitated by the Agency be available at affordable housing costs to low- and moderate- income households, and that at least 15% of all units constructed or rehabilitated by private developers or other governmental entities be available at affordable housing cost to such households. The Section contains further requirements regarding availability of housing to very low-income households . of all units that are constructed in the Project Area, at least th`e percentages described in Section 33413 (b) shall be available at affordable cost to low- and moderate-income households . 2 . The Agency intends to use the tax increment housing fund for rehabilitation and new construction of low- and moderate-income housing within the Project Area. Given the limit of $116 million on tax increment revenue that the Agency may claim (please refer to the discussion in Part XI of this Report) , up to $23.2 million will be available for this purpose. While the number of units to be constructed or rehabilitated with this housing fund will depend on the mix of new construction and rehabilitation that is undertaken, project-assisted rehabilitation of existing deteriorated residential structures may result in direct improvements to as many as 500 structures . In addition, project-assisted infill housing is expected to provide approximately 20 parcels to private developers for residential construction. Finally, project-assisted new housing construction is expected to produce approximately 90 units of multifamily housing, one-half of which are planned to be affordable to very low income households , and 144 units of single family housing, 34% of which are planned to be affordable to very low income and lower income households. Please refer to the extensive discussion of Agency housing activities contained in Part III, Section C4 of this Report. Methods for financing construction of housing for low and moderate-income persons and families may include: 1 . The housing fund comprising 20 percent of tax increment revenues and additional tax increment revenue available in the later years of the Plan term; 2 . Mortgage revenue bonds; 3 . Community Development Block Grant funds (if the program exists) ; -65- and 4 . Other Federal and State housing assistance programs; 5 . Developer contributions. The precise method for-' financing any specific project that will include low- and moderate-income housing will depend on market conditions and financing availability at the time of development. To the extent feasible, the Agency will require developers of projects that necessitate removal of units from the low- and moderate-income housing stock to contribute to the replacement of such units . Further, as noted above, the Agency can expect to receive in the range of $23 million of tax increment revenue for housing purposes , a portion of which could be used to finance the costs of any replacement housing obligation, as necessary. it is projected that all of the Plan' s relocation and replacement housing obligations, if any, will be accomplished within forty years. As required by state law, dwelling units housing low- and moderate-income persons and families which are removed from the housing market because of redevelopment will be replaced within four years of removal . No persons or families of low- and moderate-income shall be displaced unless and until there is suitable housing available and ready for occupancy by such persons or families. 12/14/87 #B012/B32007 -86- Executive Summary Bay Point Redevelopment Plan Amendment The Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") has initiated a redevelopment plan amendment process to amend the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan"). The proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan ("2008 Bay Point Amendment") would accomplish the following: 1. Increase the total amount of tax increment revenues the Agency may receive in Bay Point from $116 million to $689 million; and 2. Increase the amount of bonds that can be outstanding at any one time from $60 million to $220 million. The 2008 Bay Point Amendment will enable the Agency to more effectively implement redevelopment projects and activities eliminating blighting conditions within the Project Area. The proposed amendment does not increase the territory of the Project Area, or alter the Redevelopment Plan's eminent domain and property acquisition provisions. By receiving additional tax increment revenue and increasing the bonding capacity the Agency will be able to substantially enhance its' ability to reinvest funds in Bay Point, enhance the job base by revitalizing commercial and industrial areas, and increasing, improving, and preserving the supply of affordable housing. All redevelopment activities will be subject to future review and approval by the Agency, and/or Board of Supervisors. The Agency has also established the Bay Point Project Area Committee to work with it in establishing priorities, and developing projects and programs Plan Amendment Process: A Report to the Board of Supervisors ("Report") is one of several documents the Agency is required to prepare during the amendment process. The Report is intended to provide the decision makers with comprehensive information concerning the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. The Agency Report contains all of the elements required by law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq). Reasons for Amending the Redevelopment Plan: Since its 1987 adoption of the Redevelopment Plan the Agency has made progress in revitalizing the Bay Point. The Agency has made progress in eliminating blight throughout the Project Area by actively pursuing revitalization opportunities and assisting in redevelopment activities such as: • North Broadway Infrastructure Program; • Bella Monte Apartments/Nantucket Cove homes; • Elaine Null Apartments; • Willow Pass Road improvement program • Bailey Road/Willow Pass Road Banner Program • BART Station land assemblage for Transit-Oriented Development (TOD); and • Community Group Funding Program Unfortunately, blighting conditions still remain within Bay Point and the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment is necessary to continue the Agency's efforts in eliminating physical and economic blight and attracting private investment to the community. REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Recevelopment Projecl Area Exhibit A-1 z v m L D I h N Q 3 _O 3 M d Jc Z pa Xaiiee } a' Q f7 Z Q _ 3 W o tY = Q 3 H I(MH e�y7 7 U W 0 a !— P410 o»eV4 ues Z W E a � O w w m a ul a a Q Q a jG POOM7J110 N d O � N a a p) oil. mQ J Z Q RSG A / 4 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY oF._. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite 190 Martinez, CA 94553 Telephone: 925/335-7225 Fax: 925/335-7201 T0: Board of Supervis edev lopment Agency Governing Board FROM: James y, a veloprr Director DATE: y 20, 2 SUBJECT: oar Supervisors Agenda Item and D.2, May 20, 2008 (Bay oint Redevelopment Plan Amendment) The Redevelopment Agency has received a second letter which is viewed to be a written objection* to the adoption of the Plan Amendment. This May 17, 2008 letter from Norma and Dorothy Siegfried, Bay Point is attached. As a result staff will be advising that the Bay Point Joint Hearing be conducted and closed, but that consideration of the Resolutions to adopt the Bay Point Plan Amendment be continued to June 3 in order for staff and counsel to prepare the necessary response and accompanying resolution. At this time there are only two written objections that have been received for Bay Point the Stoneking letter of May 14 and Siegf Ted's letter of May 17, 2008. As of the date of this memo no written objection has been received on the North Richmond Redevelopment Plan Amendment. If no written objections are received the Board may consider adoption of the North Richmond Plan Amendments on May 20. * Written comments objecting to the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment--In addition to making comments at public meetings and hearings, persons may make comments in writing. If a written comment is received at or prior to a hearing before the legislative body(the Board of Supervisors) considering a Redevelopment Plan Amendment objects to the adoption of the Plan Amendment the Board of Supervisors must respond to the objection in the record. Furthermore,the response to any written objections must be adopted by Resolution prior to the adoption of the Plan Amendment and that consideration of such a Resolution may not be considered for adoption until a least one week after commencement of the joint public hearing(Section 33364 of the California Health and Safety Code). In effect,if a written objection is received any action to adopt a Plan Amendment is delayed by at least one week. I May 17, 2008 RE: Redevelopment Plan Amendment 1. If there were more emphasis on public/private partnerships, would it be necessary to increase the amount of tax increment revenues or increase the amount of bonds that can be outstanding at one time? Or as much? 2. It was stated at the PAC meeting that increasing the increment will not affect property taxes? How about increasing the amount of bonds outstanding at one time? Who pays the interest on those bonds? Property owners? 3. Does the $22 million pass through that goes to the County have any strings attached? Or is it merely to help the Board of Supervisors reduce their budget deficit because they can? - How much of the 22 million pass through to the General Fund money will be taken from other Redevelopment areas? - Are the General Fund pass through funds taken only when incremental increases take place? Are monies taken in the pass through to the General Fund by the Board of Supervisors only spent in areas where the funds are taken (example: Bay Point being one where funds are taken)? - Is the pass through money a one time thing or will the increases take place every year or with each increase? 4. Community Improvement Program - Can additional Code Enforcement personnel be provided with redevelopment funds? For Bay Point only? - Garbage remediation and vacant lot yard clean-up should always be at the owners' expense, not redevelopment. 5. Low/Moderate-Affordable Housing Programs - Since Bay Point has already exceeded the requirements for such housing for the foreseeable future, can that be factored against the 20% stated as a requirement. - Was that % (percent) an increase? Does the State still require 10-15%? - If there are more public/private partnerships, does the 20% still hold? - How can we ensure non profit agencies don't use credits from other geographical areas in the state to build low rent projects in Bay Point? How can we ensure that cities outside of Bay Point don't dump their low- moderate or affordable housing in Bay Point? - Comment: All projects of this nature, especially the new ones, have resulted in increased crime as a result of benign management and lack of oversight of section 8 (eight) participants. Only developments that have hired outside security companies have turned that around. Let's make it a requirement Norma and Dorothy Siegfried Private Citizens and Members of the MAC/ PAC respectively /V\ � CATS N Jim Kennedy/CD/CCC To John Gioia/BOS/CCC@CCC, Federal D 05/16/2008 09:10 AM Glover/BOS/CCC@CCC, Gayle B Uilkema/BOS/CCC@CCC, Mary Piepho/BOS/CCC@CCC, cc jcullen@ehsd.cccounty.us@CCC, Dennis Barry/CD/CCC@CCC,Julie Enea/CAO/CCC@CCC,Jason bcc Crapo/CAO/CCC@CCC,Victoria Mejia/CAO/CCC@CCC, Subject Supplemental Material-Items D.1 and D.2 (North Richmond and Bay Point Redevelopment Plan Amendments)-May 20, 2008 Joint Public Hearing Attached is supplemental material transmitting comments received by the Redevelopment Agency on the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendments for North Richmond and Bay Point. I want to direct your attention to the discussion related to written objections received on the Bay Point Plan Amendment. As a result of receiving a written objection the Board will be opening and closing the Public Hearing on May 20, it will have to continue to June 3 any action to adopt the Bay Point RDA Plan. Amendment. Jim Kennedy NR&BP RDA Supplemental.pdf My contact information is: James Kennedy, Redevelopment Director Department of Conservation and Development 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite 190 Martinez, CA 94553 (925) 335-7225 (925) 335-7201 FAX jkenn@cd.cccounty.us ti� CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite 190 >, Martinez, CA 94553 Telephone: 925/335-7225 Fax: 925/335-7201 TO: Board of Super ors/Redevelopment Agency Governing Board -1 FROM: Ja . edevelopment Director DATE: Ma ; 2008 SUBJECT: Board of Supervisors Agenda Items D.1 and D.2, May 20, 2008 (North Richmond Redevelopment Plan Amendment and Bay Point Redevelopment Plan Amendment) PUBLIC MEETING COMMENTS On your May 20 Board Agenda are public hearings related to the adoption of two Redevelopment Plan Amendments for the North Richmond Project Area (Item D.1), and the Bay Point Project Area(Item 13.2). The Report to the Board of Supervisors for the respective Plan Amendments included a Section I summarizing public comments received. Earlier this week public meetings were held in North Richmond (May 13, 2008) and Bay Point(May 14, 2008) to receive comments. The purpose of this memo is to transmit a Supplement to Section I of the Report to the Board of Supervisors incorporating comments received at these public meetings. Attached are the following: • Report to the Board of Supervisors for the Amended Redevelopment Plan for the North Richmond Redevelopment Project—Supplement to Section I of the Report: Incorporating Comments Received at the May 13, 2008 Municipal Advisory Council Meeting; and • Report to the Board of Supervisors for the Amended Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project—Supplement to Section I of the Report: Incorporating Comments Received at the May 14, 2008 Project Area Committee Meeting. WRITTEN COMMENTS OBJECTING TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS In addition to making comments at public meetings and hearings, persons may make comments in writing. if a written comment is received at or prior to a hearing before the legislative body(the Board of Supervisors) considering a Redevelopment Plan Amendment objects to the adoption of the Plan Amendment the Board of Supervisors must respond to the objection in the record. Furthermore,the response to any written objections must be adopted by Resolution prior to the adoption of the Plan Amendment and that consideration of such a Resolution may not be considered for adoption until a least one week after commencement of the joint public hearing(Section 33364 of the California Health and Safety Code). In effect,if a written objection is received any action to adopt a Plan Amendment is delayed by at least one week. On May 14, 2008 the Redevelopment Agency received a letter from John Stoneking, 615 Bailey Road, Bay Point. While the letter is primarily related to the Agency's current initiative to assemble properties for transit-oriented development in the Orbasonia Heights area of Bay Point,our Redevelopment Counsel has advised that we should treat the Stoneking letter as a written objection to the Plan Amendment. As a result staff will be advising that the Bay Point Joint Hearing be conducted and closed, but that consideration of the Resolutions to adopt the Bay Point Plan Amendment be continued to June 3 in order for staff and counsel to prepare the necessary response and accompanying resolution. At this time this is the only written objection that has been received for Bay Point As of the date of this memo no written objection has been received on the North Richmond Redevelopment Plan Amendment. If no written objections are received the Board may consider adoption of the North Richmond Plan Amendments on May 20. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 a` Report to the Board of Supervisors for the Amended Redevelopment Plan for the North Richmond Redevelopment Project -Supplement to Section I of the Report: Incorporating Comments Received at the May 13, 2008, Municipal Area Committee Meeting May 15, 2008 • RSG INTELLIGENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP INC. T 714 5414585 309 WEST 4TH STREET F 714 5411175 SANTA ANA,CALIFORNIA E INFO,a>WEBRSG.COM 92701.4502 W EBRSG.COM SECTION Report and Recommendation of the Project Area Committee Pursuant to Section 33385.3 of the CRL, a Project Area Committee ("PAC") is required if the Agency proposes to amend a redevelopment plan to: (1) grant the authority to the Agency to acquire by eminent domain property on which persons reside in a project area in which a substantial number of low- and moderate-income persons reside; or (2) add territory in which a substantial number of low-and moderate-income persons reside and grant the authority to the Agency to acquire, by eminent domain, property on which persons reside in the added territory. The proposed Amendment to The North Richmond Project Area does not involve any of these activities. Therefore, there is no requirement to form a PAC. However, while there is no requirement for a PAC, as defined by the CRL, the Agency has taken steps to ensure that the North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council ("MAC"), local residents, business owners and other interested parties are aware of, and involved in, the proposed 2008 North Richmond Amendment, and took the Amended Plan to the MAC for its consideration and recommendation at a meeting on May 13, 2008. Recommendations and comments received from the MAC and other members of the community are summarized and incorporated into this supplement to the Agency's Report to Board, dated May 7, 2008. Notices of this joint public hearing were mailed to all Project Area property owners, residents, business owners, and affected taxing agencies. Additionally, notices were duly published in the West County Times (a local newspaper of general circulation) in accordance with the CRL. Collectively, these measures ensure that the views of local residents and business owners as well as those of other interested parties can be made known. The following bullet points provide a summary of phone conversations held between the Agency and local residents, business owners, and any other interested parties that were made aware of, and involved in, the proposed 2008 North Richmond Amendment. • On May 5, 2008, the Agency had a phone conversation with Tim Johnson, who owns a local commercial business at 1900 7'h St, regarding the proposed 2008 North Richmond Amendment. Mr. Johnson expressed general interest in the Agency's proposed 2008 North Richmond Amendment and a concern for the negative effect of crime on the marketability of his property. Agency staff directed Mr. Johnson to the website for more information on the Report on the Plan. Agency staff indicates that there is no need for a follow up or required response. • On May 7, 2008, the Agency had a phone conversation with another local business owner, who runs an auto dismantling business, which is located at 400 West Gertrude. The owner asked Agency staff to keep him informed about the status of the proposed 2008 North Richmond Plan Amendment and for a clearer boundary map of the North Richmond Project Area. Agency staff RSG REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redeveloprnent Agency North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area has provided the business owner with the requested information and indicates that there is no need for a follow up or required response. In addition to the above comments received by Agency staff from interested members of the community, provided below is a summary of the recommendations and comments received at a MAC meeting on May 13, 2008, regarding the 2008 North Richmond Amendment. It should be noted that the MAC recommended approval of the 2008 North Richmond. • Ms. Jannat Muhammad, the NRMAC Secretary, wanted to know how long the extension of the 2008 North Richmond Amendment would be. Ms. Muhammad also wanted to know what year Agency redevelopment activities would end. • Mr. Muhammad (no relation) wanted to see the Agency work hard to create opportunities for local North Richmond businesses that want to grow. Mr. Muhammad also felt that the Agency should facilitate local job development and encourage local manufacturing businesses to work with developers and contractors that the Agency selects. • Henry Clark, member of the NRMAC, requested a study session on the pros and cons of renewable technology and how it might help with the creation of jobs in North Richmond. Mr. Clark mentioned that the purpose of this study session is to determine how the North Richmond community might benefit from renewable energy sources and thinking Green. Mr, Clark added that a study session should be coordinated after the appointment of new NRMAC members in June, 2008. • Greg Karass, member of Communities for a Better Environment ("CBE"), stated that he was in favor of North Richmond going Green but added that all energy has an impact on the environment. Karass argued that the community will face tough choices in the future if they decide to embrace environmentally friendly alternatives. Karass added that closing a company, like the Chevron Richmond Refinery, may improve the environment but may decrease available jobs in the community. Karass also stated that Green products produce 4-10 times more jobs than other industries. Mr. Karass also felt that there is not enough emphasis on local job training. • Joe Wallace, member of the NRMAC, stated that he is not in favor of letting the City of Richmond take over the unincorporated community of North Richmond. Mr. Wallace said that the North Richmond has been struggling for over 40 years and the City of Richmond has not attempted to help improve the area. Wallace fears that if North Richmond starts to improve the area with redevelopment, then the City of Richmond will try to reap the benefits. 0 RSG I / 2 Redevelopment Agency Contra Commissioners 2530 Arnold Drive Y �O��r,a John Glola Suite 190 1st District Martinez, California 94553-8611 County Gayle B.Ullkema 2nd District John Cullen Executive Director Mary N.Piepho 3rd District Dennis M.Barry,AICP Susan Bonilla Assistant Executive Director s 4th District May 13,2008 Federal D.Glover James Kennedy 5th District Redevelopment Director (925)335-7200 Mr. Jim Kennedy Redevelopment Director Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite#190 Martinez, CA 94553 RE: North Richmond Redevelopment Plan Amendments Dear Mr. Kennedy: On Tuesday May 13, 2008 the North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council heard and considered the Redevelopment Agency's proposed Sixth Amendment to the North Richmond Redevelopment Plan. The attached constitutes a summary of comments received and the recommendation of the NRMAC to the Board of Supervisors. Sincerely, Lee Jones Chair,North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council cc: D'Andre Wells File D1.6(b)6 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY '< 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 s. ;r Report to the Board of Supervisors for the Amended Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project -Supplement to Section I of the Report: Incorporating Comments Received at the May 14, 2008, Project Area Committee Meeting May 15, 2008 ® RSG INTELLIGENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP INC. T 714 541 4585 309 WEST 41H STREET F 714 5411175 SANTA ANA,CALIFORNIA E INFO&WEEIRS&COM 92701-4502 WEBRS&COM SECTION Report and Recommendation of the Project Area Committee Pursuant to Section 33385.3 of the CRL, a Project Area Committee ("PAC") is required if the Agency proposes to amend a redevelopment plan to: (1) grant the authority to the Agency to acquire by eminent domain property on which persons reside in a project area in which a substantial number of low- and moderate-income persons reside; or (2) add territory in which a substantial number of low-and moderate-income persons reside and grant the authority to the Agency to acquire, by eminent domain, property on which persons reside in the added territory. The proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment does not involve any of these activities. Therefore, there is no requirement to form a PAC. However, while there is no requirement for a PAC, as defined by the CRL, the Agency has taken steps to ensure that local residents, business owners and other interested parties are aware of, and involved in, the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment, and took the Amended Plan to the PAC for its consideration and recommendation at a meeting on May 14, 2008. Recommendations and comments received from the PAC and other members of the community are summarized and incorporated into this supplement to the Agency's Report to Board, dated May 7, 2008. Notices of this joint public hearing were mailed to all Project Area property owners, residents, business owners, and affected taxing agencies. Additionally, notices were duly published in the Contra Costa Times (a local newspaper of general circulation) in accordance with the CRL. Collectively, these measures ensure that the views of local residents and business owners as well as those of other interested parties can be made known. The following bullet points provide a summary of the requests, comments, and recommendations received by the Agency from interested property owners, residents and business owners regarding the proposed 2008 Bay Point Amendment. • On April 15, 2008, the Agency received an email from Steve Hoagland requesting a hard copy of the Redevelopment Plan. • On April 16, 2008, Connie Tolleson requested copies of all ordinances referenced in the joint public hearing notice. Agency staff subsequently sent copies of the ordinances to Ms. Tolleson, • On April 17, 2008, Paulina Zazueta requested additional information regarding the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. Subsequently Agency staff sent Ms. Zazueta information regarding the Agency's residential rehabilitation program. ■ On April 17, 2008, the Agency received an inquiry for basic information regarding the 2008 Bay Point Amendment from Linda Wheale. Ms. Wheale asked whether the Agency was going to "take our homes". 4..'! R S G iii REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area ■ On April 18, 2008, Kathryn Qualls inquired about the effects of the 2008 Bay Point Amendment on her property in the City of Pittsburg. It was determined that Ms. Qualls had received the joint public hearing notice because she also owned property in the Project Area (Orbisonia Heights) which had recently been purchased by the Agency. ■ On April 21, 2008, Ken Bartlett requested information about infrastructure improvements for the South Willow Pass Road area neighborhood. In addition to the above requests, comments, and recommendations received by Agency staff from interested members of the community, provided below is a summary of the recommendations and comments received at a PAC meeting on May 14, 2008, regarding the 2008 Bay Point Amendment. It should be noted that the PAC recommended approval (M/S Lee Mason/Sterling Stevenson, 5-0-1, Siegfried Abstained) of the 2008 Bay Point Amendment and authorized the Chair to communicate this action to the Board. • Francisco Leon Guerrero (30 Bella Vista, Bay Point, CA) wanted to know if there was a problem with his property and what plans there are for his property. ■ Maria Guerrero (30 Bella Vista Avenue, Bay Point, CA) submitted in writing that her home is in foreclosure and that she is looking for a place to rent for two senior citizens. • John C. Stoneking (615 Bailey Road, Bay Point, CA) submitted the following comment in writing, "City of Pittsburg is drilling 3-ft. holes in my mom's property following city plans. You're putting the cart before the horse." Verbally, Mr. Stoneking expressed his disgust with property values and suggested that the Specific Plan and the 2008 Bay Point Amendment be rejected- commenting further that over the years the neighborhood has been hurt by the Plan. He stated that he put his concerns in writing earlier in the day. ■ Dee Ferro (23 Island View Drive, Bay Point, CA) questioned notification of the May 14, 2008, PAC meeting. She stated that she did not receive a notice, but that her landlord did. She also stated that several other property owners in her neighborhood had not received notices of the meeting either. Ms. Ferro asked how the 2008 Bay Point Amendment would affect the base tax level. Ms. Ferro also commented on how the map of the Project Area only includes lower income neighborhoods and does not include homes on the "hill" or the Lynbrook neighborhood and that the CEQA document did not address Green Sturgeon, which are endangered. Ms. Ferro also wanted to know how much of the bond/tax increment increase would be going to private development? ■ Erik Kochkefola (115 Alberts Avenue, Bay Point, CA) asked why the amount of proposed tax increment and bond cap are more than quadrupled from the existing levels. ■ Dorothy Siegfried (PAC Member) asked about the County pass-throughs. O RSG I / 2 Redevea opment Agency Contra Commissioners 2530 Arnold Drive Costa John Gioia Suite 190 1st District Martinez, California 94553-8611 County Gayle B.Uilkema 2nd District John Cullen ,< < Executive Director wary N.Plepho 3rd District Dennis M.Barry,AICD Susan Bonilla Assistant Executive Director r 4th District James Kennedy Federal D.Glover Redevelopment Director 5th District (925) 335-7200 May I4, 2008 James Kennedy, Redevelopment Director Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite 190 Martinez, CA 94553 Dean Mr. Kennedy: RE: Bay Point Redevelopment Plan Amendment On Wednesday, May 14, 2008,the Bay Point Project Area Committee(PAC)heard and considered the Redevelopment Agency's proposed Sixth Amendment to the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan. The PAC recommends approval of the plan amendment to the Board of Supervisors. The attached constitutes a summary of the comments received, and the recommendation of the PAC to the Board of Supervisors. Sincere]-,/, Debra Mason, Chair Bay Point Project Area Committee Ce: Maureen Toms File E1.6 (b)(6) 1008 MAY 74 P I O I Ud iC� �%�OGt �✓"F ry�.9c�-e �Z..� Ave /70 96 0 � �