ANNOTATED AGENDA
Antioch City Council
REGULAR MEETING
Date: Tuesday, January 24, 2023
Time: 6:15 P.M. – Closed Session
7:00 P.M. – Regular Meeting
Place: Council Chambers
200 ‘H’ Street
Antioch, CA 94509
City Council meetings are televised live on Comcast channel 24, AT&T U-verse channel 99, or live stream (at www.antiochca.gov). Please see inside cover for detailed Speaker Rules.
PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES BEFORE ENTERING COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
Lamar Thorpe, Mayor Ellie Householder, City Clerk
Tamisha Torres-Walker, Mayor Pro Tem (District 1) Lauren Posada, City Treasurer Michael Barbanica, Council Member District 2
Lori Ogorchock, Council Member District 3 Cornelius Johnson, City Manager Monica E. Wilson, Council Member District 4 Thomas Lloyd Smith, City Attorney
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and California law, it is the policy of the City of Antioch to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to everyone, including individuals with disabilities. If you are a person with a disability and require information or materials in an appropriate alternative format; or if you require any other accommodation, please contact the ADA Coordinator at the number or address below at least 72 hours prior to the meeting or when you desire to receive services. Advance notification within this guideline will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. The City’s ADA Coordinator can be reached @ Phone:
(925) 779-6950, and e-mail: [email protected].
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL -1- JANUARY 24, 2023
Notice of Availability of Reports
This agenda is a summary of the actions proposed to be taken by the City Council. For almost every agenda item, materials have been prepared by the City staff for the Council's consideration. These materials include staff reports which explain in detail the item before the Council and the reason for the recommendation. The materials may also include resolutions or ordinances which are proposed to be adopted. Other materials, such as maps and diagrams, may also be inc luded. Unless otherwise noted, City Council actions include a determination that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply. City Council Agendas, including Staff Reports are posted onto our City’s Website 72 hours before each Council Meeting. To be notified when the agenda packets are posted onto our City’s Website, simply click on this link: https://www.antiochca.gov/notifications/ and enter your e -mail address to subscribe. To view the agenda information, click on the following link:
https://www.antiochca.gov/government/agendas-and-minutes/city-council/. Questions may be directed to the staff member who prepared the staff report, or to the City Clerk's Office, who will refer you to the appropriate person.
Notice of Opportunity to Address Council
The public has the opportu nity to address the Council on each agenda item. Please see the Speaker Rules on the inside cover of this Agenda for additional information on public participation.
6:15 P.M. ROLL CALL – CLOSED SESSION – for Council Members – All Present
PUBLIC COMMENTS for Closed Session – None
CLOSED SESSION:
1) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION – pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9: DAVID L. COOK, Plaintiff, v.
MARCOS TORRES, et al., Defendants, United States District Court, Northern District of California, Case 4:19-cv-01270-PJH.
Case Settlement of $10,000 was approved by Council, 4/1 (Torres-Walker)
2) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: CITY
MANAGER. This closed session is authorized pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b)(1).
No reportable action
3) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: CITY
ATTORNEY. This closed session is authorized pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b)(1).
No reportable action
6:16 P.M. ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION
7:08 P.M. ROLL CALL – REGULAR MEETING – for Council Members – All Present
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CITY ATTORNEY TO REPORT OUT ON CLOSED SESSION
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL -2- JANUARY 24, 2023
COUNCIL MEMBER OGORCHOCK REQUESTED A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO MOVE COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA ITEM #10 TO BE HEARD AFTER ITEM #3 PROCLAMATIONS; APPROVED 5/0
1. IN HONOR OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., DAY – “I HAVE A DREAM”, REMARKS BY DR. LAMONT FRANCIES, SENIOR PASTOR OF DELTA BAY CHURCH
2. INSPIRATION FOR THE NEW YEAR BY ANTIOCH’S HONORARY POET LAUREATE
JOSE CORDON
MAYOR THORPE REQUESTED A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO MOVE COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS #7 AND #8 TO BE HEARD AS THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS; APPROVED 5/0
COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA
7. BOARD OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS APPOINTMENT FOR ONE VACANCY EXPIRING MARCH 2024
Reso No. 2023/09 adopted appointing Antwon R. Webster, Sr., to the Board of Administrative Appeals for the vacancy expiring March 2024, 5/0 Recommended Action: It is recommended that:
1) The Mayor nominate one (1) member to the Board of
Administrative Appeals for the vacancy expiring March 2024.
2) The City Council appoint [Antwon R. Webster, Sr.] by resolution as a member of the Board of Administrative Appeals for the vacancy expiring March 2024.
8. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS FOR ONE (1) VACANCY EXPIRING APRIL 2026
Reso No. 2023/10 adopted appointing Dorothy Ellis to the Parks and Recreation Commission for the vacancy expiring April 2026, 5/0 Recommended Action: It is recommended that:
1) The Mayor nominate one (1) member to the Parks and
Recreation Commission for the vacancy expiring April 2026.
2) The City Council appoint [Dorothy Ellis] by resolution as a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission for the
vacancy expiring April 2026.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL -3- JANUARY 24, 2023
3. PROCLAMATIONS
• In Honor of Autrey James, Antioch’s 2022/23 Lifetime Veteran of the Year • In Recognition of Health for Humanity – Yogathon, January 14 – 29, 2023 • Proclamation Recognizing Human Trafficking Prevention Month, January 2023 • Proclamation Declaring Grace Bible Fellowship of Antioch Day, January 27, 2023 Approved, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the proclamations.
COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA
10. DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR SALARY ADJUSTMENTS
Tabled, 4/1 (Torres-Walker)
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution:
1) Approving a new salary range for department directors;
2) Approving an effective date of the first full pay period after October 1, 2022; and
3) Authorizing the City Manager or designee to make the necessary Fiscal Year 2023 budget adjustments.
4. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF BOARD AND COMMISSION OPENINGS
➢ SALES TAX CITIZENS’ OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
➢ ANTIOCH POLICE OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
PUBLIC COMMENTS – Members of the public may comment only on unagendized items.
The public may comment on agendized items when they come up on this Agenda.
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COMMUNICATIONS
MAYOR’S COMMENTS
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL -4- JANUARY 24, 2023
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 15, 2022 Approved, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Special Meeting Minutes.
B. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 22, 2022 Approved, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Meeting Minutes.
C. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13, 2022 Approved, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Special Meeting Minutes.
D. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13, 2022 Approved, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Regular Meeting Minutes.
E. COUNCIL MEETING FOR JANUARY 10, 2023 – NO QUORUM
Approved, 5/0
Action: January 10, 2023 – Order of Adjournment due to lack of a quorum.
F. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES FOR JANUARY 13, 2023 Continued, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council continue the Special Meeting Minutes.
G. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL WARRANTS
Approved, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the warrants.
H. REJECTION OF CLAIMS: DYNISHA HODGES; PAT AND CORY STACK Rejected, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council reject the claims submitted by Dynisha Hodges and Pat and Cory Stack.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL -5- JANUARY 24, 2023
CONSENT CALENDAR – Continued
I. APPROVAL OF TREASURER’S REPORT FOR OCTOBER 2022
Received and filed, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the October 2022 Treasurer’s Report.
J. APPROVAL OF TREASURER’S REPORT FOR NOVEMBER 2022
Received and filed, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the November 2022 Treasurer’s Report.
K. RESOLUTION CONTINUING THE DECLARATION OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY
CONCERNING THE SEVERE WINTER STORMS
Reso No. 2023/11 adopted, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the resolution continuing the declaration of a local emergency associated with the State Declared Severe Winter Storms, locally identified as the 2023 January Winter Storm Event.
L. APPROVAL OF LICENSE & MARKETING AGREEMENT FOR THE RESIDENTIAL SERVICE LINE PROTECTION, PROPOSAL NO. 961-0202-22A, AWARD Reso No. 2023/12 adopted, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution to:
1) Approve the Proposal included in the Draft License & Marketing Agreement submitted by HomeServe as the Sole
Provider to the City of Antioch for Residential Service Line Protection for four (4) years,
2) Authorize the City Attorney to release the City Logo for the purpose of publication re garding the Residential Service Line Protection to HomeServe; and
3) Authorize the City Manager to execute a four (4) year License & Marketing agreement with HomeServe in a form approved by the City Attorney.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL -6- JANUARY 24, 2023
CONSENT CALENDAR – Continued
M. ARPA FUNDED SMALL BUSINESS AND FAÇADE UPGRADE GRANT PROGRAMS Reso No. 2023/13 adopted, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the following resolution:
1) Approving the City’s Small Business Grant Program and Façade Upgrade Program to be administered by the Economic Development Department; and
2) Authorizing the Economic Development Director to disburse American Rescue Plan Act funds up to $500,000 for Small Business Grants and up to $500,000 for Façade Upgrade
Grants, provided that all such funds are disbursed in
accordance with the required contract provisions for federal awards and the City.
N. AB 361: RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS NECESSARY TO CONDUCT BROWN ACT
MEETINGS BY TELECONFERENCE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, BOARDS,
COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES
Reso No. 2023/14 adopted, 5/0
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing remote teleconference/virtual meetings of the legislative bodies of the City of Antioch, which includes the City Council, boards, commissions, and committees.
9:35 P.M. FIVE MINUTE RECESS
9:44 P.M. RECONVENED, ROLL CALL – All Present
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL -7- JANUARY 24, 2023
PUBLIC HEARING
6. CITY OF ANTIOCH 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the 2023 -2031 following Resolutions and Ordinances related to the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update:
Reso No. 2023/15 adopted, 4/1 (Barbanica)
1) Adopt a Resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and make all the findings required to approve the project, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Reso No. 2023/16 adopted, 4/1 (Barbanica)
2) Adopt a Resolution approving the Housing Element.
Reso No. 2023/17 adopted, 4/1 (Barbanica)
3) Adopt a Resolution approving the Amendments to the Land Use and Environmental Hazards Elements.
To 02/14/2023 for Adoption, 4/1 (Barbanica)
4) Introduce, read by title only, and waive further reading of the ordinance approving Amendments to the East Lone Tree
Specific Plan.
To 02/14/2023 for Adoption, 4/1 (Barbanica)
5) Introduce, read by title only, and waive further reading of the ordinance approving the Zoning Text Amendments and Zoning Map Amendments to implement the 6 th Cycle Housing
Element.
Reso No. 2023/18 adopted, 4/1 (Barbanica)
6) Adopt a Resolution approving the Multi -Family Residential Objective Design Standards.
CEQA: An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the project.
COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA
9. RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF CANNABIS OPERATING AGREEMENT FOR NATURAL SUPPLEMENTS, INC.
Reso No. 2023/19 adopted, 3/2 (Barbanica, Ogorchock)
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council consider and take action to adopt a resolution approving the operating agreement for Natural Supplements, Inc.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL -8- JANUARY 24, 2023
COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA – Continued
11. STANDBY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council appoint the following nominees as standby city council members:
Council Member District 2 Barbanica: 1) William Barbanica, II; 2) Benjamin McCurdy; 3) Michael Schneider
12. CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS TO COUNCIL COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS [“Exhibit 1” Appointments Attached]
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council review and discuss City Council Committee Assignments. Mayor Thorpe will advance appointments for City Council approval by majority vote to be acted upon as follows:
Approved, 5/0
1) Motion to approve all appointments for Mayor Thorpe.
Approved, 5/0
2) Motion to approve all appointments for Mayor Pro Tem (Council Member District 1) – Torres-Walker.
Approved, 4/0/1 (Barbanica abstained)
3) Motion to approve all appointments for Council Member District 2 – Barbanica.
Approved, 4/0/1 (Ogorchock abstained)
4) Motion to approve all appointments for Council Member District 3 – Ogorchock.
Approved, 5/0
5) Motion to approve all appointments for Council Member District 4 – Wilson.
PUBLIC COMMENT
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS – Council Members report out various activities and any Council Member may place an item for discussion and direction on a future agenda. Timing determined by Mayor and City Manager – no longer than 6 months.
MOTION TO ADJOURN – After Council Communications and Future Agenda Items, the Mayor will make a motion to adjourn the meeting. A second of the motion is required, and then a majority vote is required to adjourn the meeting.
Motioned to adjourn Regular Meeting at 11:19 p.m., 5/0
CITY OF ANTIOCH EXHIBIT 1
COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE INFORMATION
ABAG
(Association of Bay Area Govmt)
Mayor Pro Tem Torres-Walker
Council Member Ogorchock (alt.) General Assembly- once a year Chamber of Commerce Liaison Council Member Ogorchock
2nd Thursday of month,
8:00 A.M.
Chamber Conference Room
Community Advisory Board- SF
Bay Water Emergency Transit
Authority
Mayor Pro Tem Torres-Walker TBD
Delta Diablo Mayor Thorpe
Council Member Wilson (alt.)
2nd Wednesday of month,
4:30 P.M.,
2500 Pittsburg/Antioch Highway
East Bay Division
(League of California Cities) Council Member Barbanica
3rd Thursday of month,
6:00 P.M.
Rotates between Contra Costa and
Alameda Counties
TRANSPLAN Mayor Thorpe
Council Member Wilson (alt.)
2nd Thursday of month,
6:30 P.M.
Tri Delta Transit - 801 Wilbur Ave
East Contra Costa Regional Fee
and Financing Authority
(ECCRFA)
Mayor Thorpe
Council Member Wilson (alt.)
2nd Thursday of month,
6:30 P.M.
Tri Delta Transit - 801 Wilbur Ave
State Route 4 By-Pass Authority Mayor Thorpe
Council Member Wilson (alt.)
2nd Thursday of month,
6:30 P.M.
Tri Delta Transit - 801 Wilbur Ave
East County Water Management
Association Council Member Barbanica As needed, 2-3 times per year Tri Delta Board of Directors
Eastern Contra Costa Transit
Authority
Mayor Thorpe
Council Member Wilson (alt.)
4th Wednesday of month,
4:00 P.M.,
Tri Delta Transit, 801 Wilbur Ave
Northeast Antioch Annexation Council Member Ogorchock As needed Mayors' Conference Mayor Thorpe
Council Member Wilson (alt.)
1st Thursday of month,
6:30 P.M.
Rotates between cities of Contra
Costa County
Council Appointments
December 2022 to December 2024
CITY OF ANTIOCH EXHIBIT 1
Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) Committee
Mayor Pro Tem Torres-Walker
Council Member Barbanica
Standing Committee - As needed
Community Development Dept. to
develop agenda and handle noticing
Lone Tree Golf Course
Committee
Council Member Wilson
Council Member Ogorchock
Standing Committee - As needed
Parks and Rec. Dept. to develop
agenda and handle noticing
City/School Committee Mayor Pro Tem Torres-Walker
Council Member Ogorchock
Standing Committee - As needed
City Manager's to develop agenda
and handle noticing
Cannabis Committee Mayor Pro Tem Torres-Walker
Council Member Wilson
Standing Committee - As needed
City Attorney's Office to develop
agenda and handle noticing
Waterfront Revitalization
Committee
Mayor Pro Tem Torres-Walker
Council Member Wilson
Standing Committee - As needed
City Manager's Office to develop
agenda and handle noticing
Council Committee Assignments
What If
What if we loved with no fear?
No limits, no restraints
What if we loved for love’s sake with no strings to manipulate? What if the things that made us congregate were mostly to celebrate? I know that might be unrealistic, but why not ask that question today? What if the human connection was invested in like 5G?
What if 5G was being developed by more people that look like me? See, I have of these questions about equity in society and sometimes my thoughts get scattered
But one thing I can clearly see, is that representation matters But what if it didn’t happen to meet a diversity quota? What if it just happened because that’s the way that our kids grow up? What if every kid knew exactly what it meant to be loved and they saw opportunity wherever their gaze was?
What if we took more risks?
Ran for more public offices and started more businesses? What if we sat down and settled our differences?
El pueblo unido jamás será vencido, I hope you’re listening What if si se puede was internalized?
A little light at the end of the tunnel whenever we fall and cry What if depression in our communities was recognized and physical and mental health were both equally prioritized?
So what if? Matter of fact somebody said it better, why not? Go all in, give it everything we’ve got
With no excuses
Take our talents and strengths and use them
To lift each other up in unison
“What if”
Is a hypothetical and also a possibility
What if
We all treated each other with love, respect, and dignity? -Jose Cordon
IN HONOR OF
AUTREY JAMES
Antioch Lifetime Veteran of the Year 2022-2023
WHEREAS, Autrey James began his career as a Police Officer in 1985 with the San Leandro Police Department (SLPD), joined the U.S. Coast Guard Reserves in 1990, served in Operation Desert Shield in 1991 and continued to serve as a small boat operator and boarding officer;
WHEREAS, upon returning from active duty, Autrey resumed public service at SLPD, retiring in 2005 as a Police Sergeant and starting a career as a Deputy District Attorney ;
WHEREAS, since 2005, Autrey has been a member of the Harding-Noia, American Legion Post 161 in Antioch, served as Post Commander and as Post Adjutant for the last 5 years, and led the efforts to visit and provide gifts to veterans at Antioch nursing facilities; WHEREAS, Autrey worked with Delta Veterans Group (DVG) to collect and distribute clothing for the first Stand Down on the Delta and has continued since then, organizing the Stand Down Veterans Courts;
WHEREAS, Autrey served as the American Legion District Commander, organized events for veterans throughout California, cooked for 200+ National Guard members, organized with The Veterans of Foreign Wars Department and The American Legion National Finance Commission to provide funds and supplies for displaced veterans affected by the California wildfires, created committees and raised funds to help veterans with housing costs and mental health through education, resources, and support;
WHEREAS, Autrey was recently assigned as Chairman of the National American Legion Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Commission, writing 3 resolutions onto the Legislative Agenda; and
WHEREAS, in March 2022, Autrey retired from the Alameda County District Senior Assistant Deputy District Attorney, but remains active in the Antioch veterans community as a member of the American Legion Post, Veterans and Military Families Advisory Council of America, Save our Service-Members, and as a new member of the DVG Board of Directors.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, LAMAR A. THORPE, Mayor of the City of Antioch, do hereby salute, commend and honor AUTREY JAMES for his dedication, commitment, and positive influence to our community and the veterans in the City of Antioch.
JANUARY 24, 2023
__________________________________________
LAMAR A. THORPE, Mayor 3.01
01-24-23
IN RECOGNITION OF
HEALTH FOR HUMANITY - YOGATHON
January 14th to January 29th, 2023
WHEREAS, YOGA is an ancient Hindu practice developed thousands of years ago in the Indian subcontinent for maintaining spiritual, mental, and physical well-being;
WHEREAS, Surya Namaskara, or Sun Salutation, is a traditional yogic practice combining a sequence of postures with breathing exercises;
WHEREAS, Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh, or HSS, is a non-profit charitable organization with over 235 branches in 164 cities and in 34 states, committed to Hindu values, education, and community service activities such as food drives, hot meals to shelters, and other Sewa (service) activities in California;
WHEREAS, HSS is organizing its annual Health for Humanity Yogathon with the goal of having over 10,000 individual participants practice Surya Namaskar to promote the spiritual, mental, and physical well-being of all members of the community; and
WHEREAS, YOGA enthusiasts, yoga studios, local schools, and other community organizations are participating in the HSS Health for Humanity Yogathon.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, LAMAR A. THORPE, Mayor of the City of Antioch, hereby recognize Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh for organizing its 16th annual Health for Humanity Yogathon and encourage citizens to participate in this health awareness activity that celebrates the benfits of Yoga and the advantages of achieving a healthy body, mind, and spirit.
JANUARY 24, 2023
__________________________________________
LAMAR A. THORPE, Mayor
3.02 01-24-23
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING
HUMAN TRAFFICKING PREVENTION MONTH
January 2023
WHEREAS, human trafficking is a form of interpersonal violence in which force, fraud or coercion is used to control victims for the purpose of commercial sexual and labor exploitation, and occurs in many industries, affecting individuals of all genders and ages;
WHEREAS, human trafficking is a fast-growing criminal industry, yet is consistently underreported, and relies upon exploitive and violent tactics which violate an individual's privacy, dignity, security, and humanity due to the systematic use of physical, emotional, sexual, psychological, and economic exploitation, control and abuse;
WHEREAS, in 2020, 16,658 human trafficking victims were identified nationwide through reports to the National Human Trafficking Resource Center, and California led all other states in reported cases, accounting for nearly 13 percent of all such reported cases;
WHEREAS, in Contra Costa County, from April 2019 through December 2021, 108 cases of sex and labor trafficking were investigated, 207 suspected victims of human trafficking were identified, and the District Attorney filed 42 human trafficking cases through the collaborative efforts of partners to the Contra Costa Human Trafficking Task Force; and
WHEREAS, the City of Antioch is working to raise awareness about human trafficking with the belief that a more informed public will better understand how behaviors can contribute to a patriarchal culture that facilitates and tolerates the systemic abuse of vulnerable populations, and will take actions to counte,r and prevent human trafficking.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, LAMAR A. THORPE, Mayor of the City of Antioch, hereby proclaim January 2023 as Human Trafficking Prevention Month, and urge all residents to participate in the efforts to raise awareness and promote prevention.
During this month, we recognize the survivors, and commit to building a future in which no person is denied their inherent human rights of freedom and dignity. Let it be known that human trafficking has no place in this city, this county, this nation or this world.
JANUARY 24, 2023
__________________________________________
LAMAR A. THORPE, Mayor 3.03
01-24-23
PROCLAMATION DECLARING
GRACE BIBLE FELLOWSHIP OF ANTIOCH DAY
January 27, 2023
WHEREAS, in 2003, Grace Bible Fellowship was birthed in a local hair salon owned by Reverend Kirkland A. Smith and Senior Pastor, First Lady Qwivander Smith and its members believe blessed the weekly bible study held for one year at the Heavenly Hair Beauty Salon in Antioch;
WHEREAS, in January 2003, remaining faithful to Christ and to the leadership at Fremont Bible Fellowship, the Reverend and First Lady Smith, along with 30 charter members, marched into what is now known as Grace Bible Fellowship of Antioch;
WHEREAS, within one year, Grace Bible Fellowship of Antioch celebrated abundant growth in ministry and membership. It now serves over 1,500 members and supports countless ministries designed to meet the needs of the community;
WHEREAS, in 2022, Grace Bible Fellowship of Antioch increased its presence in Antioch by offering Afterschool Tutoring, Grace Closet-Food and Clothing Pantry, Overcomers for those struggling with addictions, Grace House for Men transitioning back into society and/or overcoming homelessness, and Midnight Basketball to give at-risk young men another alternative on Friday nights other than the streets. Lastly, Grace Daycare is opening soon, offering quality affordable daycare for parents; and
WHEREAS, January 2023 marks 20 years of ministry for Grace Bible Fellowship of Antioch located at 3415 Oakley Road, Antioch, California. Grace will continue to be a light in the City of Antioch by breaking ground on their new Multi-Purpose Center, Indoor Gymnasium, and Bowling Alley.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, LAMAR A. THORPE, Mayor of the City of Antioch, hereby proclaim January 27, 2023, as Grace Bible Fellowship of Antioch Day, in recognition and celebration of the significant contributions to the local community in the City of Antioch.
JANUARY 24, 2023
__________________________________________
LAMAR A. THORPE, Mayor 3.04
01-24-23
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENTS
4 01-24-23
The City of Antioch urges residents to become involved in their local community! One way to do so is to serve on the various Boards, Commissions, and Committees.
Any interested resident is encouraged to apply for the vacancies listed below by their corresponding deadline.
SALES TAX
o EXTENDED Deadline: Friday, January 27, 2023
ANTIOCH POLICE OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
o EXTENDED Deadline: Friday, February 17, 2023
To be considered for the vacancy position(s) listed above, please fill out and sign the Community Service Application form, available at City Hall or online at https://www.antiochca.gov/government/boards-commissions/.
Then, e-mail it to [email protected], or print and mail/drop off in the water billing drop-off box outside City Hall at: City Clerk, 200 H Street, Antioch, CA 94509
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENTS
SALES TAX CITIZENSOVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
PURPOSE:
The Committees function is to review the expenditure records of the Citys voter-approved Measure W one-cent sales tax effective April 1, 2019 and must report the results of their review to the City Council by April 1 each year.
CURRENT VACANCIES:
(4) Full-Term seats, expiring March 2026
(1) Partial-Term seat, expiring March 2024
MEETINGS:
At least 2 times annually,
virtually on Zoom
SEATS:
1 Chair
1 Vice Chair
5 Committee Members
REQUIREMENTS:
All members must reside in the City of Antioch
To be considered for the vacancy position(s) listed above, please fill out and sign theCommunity Service Applicationform on the next page, or online at https://www.antiochca.gov/government/boards-commissions/.
Then, e-mail it [email protected], or print and mail/drop off in the water billing drop-off box outside City Hall at:City Clerk, 200 H Street, Antioch, CA 94509
DEADLINE: AY, JANUARY, 2023
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENTS
ANTIOCH POLICE OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
PURPOSE:
The Commission shall advise the City Council and Staff on the administration of the Antioch Police Department and public safety issues to ensure that the policies conform to national standards of constitutional policing.
The Commission shall promote, encourage, and facilitate community participation and oversight by reviewing and recommending policies that is sensitive to the diverse needs of residents, aiming to inform the community of its rights and responsibilities on interactions with police officers.
CURRENT VACANCIES:
(2) 1-year terms, expiring November 30, 2023
(2) 2-year terms, expiring November 30, 2024
(3) 3-year terms, expiring November 30, 2025
MEETINGS:
Twice a month, except in July and December,
when meetings occur only once.
SEATS:
4 representatives, 1 from each District
1 representative from Faith-based community
1 representative from Business community
1 employee or student from
Antioch Unified School District
REQUIREMENTS:
All members must reside in the City of Antioch
Nota spouse of, or a current/former City employee / department-sworn employee / sworn police officer / sworn police officer association representative To be considered for the vacancy position(s) listed above, please fill out and sign the Community Service Applicationform on the next page, or online at https://www.antiochca.gov/government/boards-commissions/.
Then, e-mail it [email protected], or print and mail/drop off in the water billing drop-off box outside City Hall at:City Clerk, 200 H Street, Antioch, CA 94509 DEADLINE:DAY, UARY 17, 2023
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
INCLUDING THE ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
ACTING AS HOUSING SUCCESSOR
TO THE ANTIOCH DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Special Meeting November 15, 2022
7:00 P.M. Council Chambers
7:00 P.M. SPECIAL MEETING
Mayor Thorpe called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M., and City Clerk Householder called the roll.
Present: Council/Agency Members District 1 Torres-Walker, District 3 Ogorchock, District 4 Wilson, Mayor Pro Tem (District 2) Barbanica and Mayor Thorpe
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Thorpe led the Pledge of Allegiance.
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COMMUNICATIONS
Councilmember Torres-Walker reported on her attendance at the Cannabis Standing Committee meeting.
Councilmember Wilson reported on her attendance at the Cannabis Standing Committee, Tri Delta Transit and Delta Diablo meetings.
Mayor Thorpe reported on his attendance at the Delta Diablo meeting and Contra Costa Transportation Authority Conference.
Mayor Thorpe thanked those who ran for public office. He spoke to disruptions occurring at Council meetings and recognized the respect Council had for each other. He announced that he would no longer allow speakers to yield their public comment time to others and he would be overseeing the speaker cards for Council meetings. He stated he looked forward to serving the community in a professional manner, for the remainder of his term.
1. PROCLAMATIONS
Family Court Awareness Month, November 2022
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously approved the proclamations.
A
01- -23
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Special Meeting
November 15, 2022 Page 2 of 8
Environmental Resource Coordinator Haas-Wajdowicz accepted the proclamation. She recognized the Commercial Organics Participants in attendance this evening.
Tina Swithin accepted the Family Court Awareness Month proclamation and thanked the City Council for the recognition.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF CIVIC AND COMMUNITY EVENTS
Lucas Stuart-Chilcoat announced a list of Christmas light displays was located at californiachristmaslights.com. He provided his address and noted they would be participating in the event.
Mayor Thorpe announced a turkey giveaway event would be held at 4:00 P.M. on November 18, 2022, at the Antioch Community Center.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR for City /City Council Members acting as Housing Successor to the Antioch Development Agency
A. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL WARRANTS
B. APPROVAL OF HOUSING SUCCESSOR WARRANTS
C. REJECTION OF CLAIMS: KIMBERLY KIRKLAND AND JAVIER AGUILAR
D. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/190 INCREASE TO THE CURRENT PURCHASE ORDER WITH BADGER METER, INC. FOR WATER METER PURCHASES
E. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/191 SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CDM SMITH, INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT SERVICES RELATED TO THE BRACKISH WATER DESALINATION PROJECT (P.W. 694)
F. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/192 ACCEPTANCE OF BID AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO SATELLITE PAINTING, INC. FOR THE MAINTENANCE SERVICE CENTER INTERIOR WALL PAINTING, BID NO. 968-1019-22B
G. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/193 RESCINDING THE SEPTEMBER 27, 2022, AWARD OF
THE CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK REPAIR INCLUDING TREE REMOVAL AND
STUMP GRINDING AND INSTALLATION OF CONCRETE CURB RAMPS AND MISCELLANEOUS LOCATIONS 2022/2023 AGREEMENT TO MG AND JC CONCRETE; REJECTING THE BIDS OF MG AND JC CONCRETE AND ANCHOR
CONCRETE AS NON-RESPONSIVE AND AWARDING THE AGREEMENT TO MAURI CONCRETE (P.W. 507-19)
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Special Meeting
November 15, 2022 Page 3 of 8
H. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/194 APPROVING THE FINAL MAP AND SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PROMENADE VINEYARDS AT SAND CREEK PHASE 4 SUBDIVISION 9567 (TRI POINTE HOMES HOLDINGS) (P.W. 697-4)
I. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/195 SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH INDIGO HAMMOND+PLAYLE ARCHITECTS, LLP
FOR DESIGN ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO THE COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT (P.W. 700-1)
J. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/196 CONSIDERATION OF BIDS FOR THE MAINTENANCE SERVICE CENTER WAREHOUSE IMPROVEMENTS (P.W. 143-R)
K. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/197 CONSIDERATION OF QUOTE AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO NC FLOORING GROUP, INC. OF UNION CITY, CA FOR
MAINTENANCE SERVICE CENTER AND MARINA FLOORING REPLACEMENTS
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously approved the Council Consent Calendar with the exception of items H and I which were pulled for further discussion.
Item H Andrew Becker expressed concern that the City would be adding more market rate housing at a time when there was a housing crisis in Antioch.
Katie Felch yielded her speaker time to Andrew Becker.
Andrew Becker encouraged the City to seek program incentives that would allow them to provide the correct type of housing.
Mayor Thorpe clarified that he had allowed Ms. Finch to yield her speaker time since Mr. Becker was not aware of new procedures. He reiterated that moving forward, he would no longer allow speakers to yield their time to others.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson clarified that this project was approved several years ago. He noted it was the final phase of the project and the applicant had met all obligations of their approval.
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously approved Item H.
Item I Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson explained that this item was brought forward because there was direction to staff and the Ad Hoc Committee to explore locations for the Public Safety and Community Resources Department. He reported upon investigation of the Rivertown Community Center as a possible location, the consultant determined extensive renovations would be required. He noted direction was then given to explore construction of a new building. He further noted this action was to increase the agreement amount with the
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Special Meeting
November 15, 2022 Page 4 of 8
consultant so they could perform the evaluation and then both options would be presented to Council for consideration.
On motion by Councilmember Wilson, seconded by Councilmember Torres-Walker the City Council approved item I. The motion carried the following vote:
Ayes: Torres-Walker, Wilson, Thorpe Noes: Ogorchock, Barbanica
PUBLIC HEARING
3. RESOLUTION ANNEXING CERTAIN PARCELS OF AG EHC II (MTH) CA 2, L.P. (DEER VALLEY ESTATES), INTO CFD NO. 2018-02 (POLICE PROTECTION)
Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson presented the staff report dated November 15, 2022, recommending the City Council adopt the resolution annexing certain parcels of AG EHC II (MTH) CA 2, L.P. (Deer Valley Estates), into Community Facilities Districts (CFD) No. 2018-02 (Police Protection).
Mayor Thorpe opened and closed the public hearing with no members of the public requesting to speak.
In response to Councilmember Ogorchock, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson reported this development was in the process of annexing into the new fire department CFD. He noted that item would not be coming to Council because the City did not oversee or administer th CFD.
RESOLUTION NO. 2022/198
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously adopted the resolution annexing certain parcels of AG EHC II (MTH) CA 2, L.P. (Deer Valley Estates), into Community Facilities Districts (CFD) No. 2018-02 (Police Protection).
4. RESOLUTION ANNEXING CERTAIN PARCELS OF AG EHC II (MTH) CA 2, L.P. (DEER VALLEY ESTATES) INTO CFD NO. 2022-01 (PUBLIC SERVICES)
Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson presented the staff report dated November 15, 2022, recommending the City Council adopt the resolution annexing certain parcels of AG EHC II (MTH) CA 2, L.P. (Deer Valley Estates), into Community Facilities Districts No. 2022-01 (Public Services).
Mayor Thorpe opened the public hearing.
Johnny Walker asked if Mayor Thorpe would read his comment.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Special Meeting
November 15, 2022 Page 5 of 8
Mayor Thorpe instructed City Clerk Householder to turn off the audio for the speaker and closed the public hearing.
RESOLUTION NO. 2022/199
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica, the City Council unanimously adopted the resolution annexing certain parcels of AG EHC II (MTH) CA 2, L.P. (Deer Valley Estates), into Community Facilities Districts No. 2022-01 (Public Services).
COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA
5. CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY BILL (AB) 844: GREEN EMPOWERMENT ZONE
Michael Sponsler, District Director representing Assemblyman Tim Greyson, provided a brief presentation of California Assembly Bill (AB) 844 Green Empowerment Zone.
Johnny Walker question if this item was related to an increase in garbage service fees.
Mayor Thorpe responded that this was not related to that item and instructed City Clerk Householder to turn off the audio for the speaker.
Councilmember Ogorchock and Mayor Thorpe nominated themselves representative.
representative and Mayor Thorpe nominated himself to serve in the position.
On motion by Councilmember Wilson, seconded by Councilmember Torres-Walker, the City Council appointed Mayor Thorpe to the Green Empowerment Zone Board of Directors for a two (2) year term. The motion carried the following vote:
Ayes: Torres-Walker, Wilson, Thorpe Noes: Ogorchock, Barbanica
6. PURCHASE OF SHOTSPOTTER RESPOND TECHNOLOGY WITH SOLE SOURCE
JUSTIFICATION REQUEST
Interim Police Chief Ford introduced Sergeant Gonzalez who presented the staff report dated November 15, 2022, recommending the City Council adopt a resolution: 1) Approving the sole Selecting a five-year purchase agreement with ShotSpotter, Inc., with a one-time $10,000 startup fee: a. In an annual amount of $210,000, not to exceed a total amount of $1,060,000 over 5 years OR b. In an annual amount of $280,000, not to exceed a total amount of $1,410,000 over 5 years; 3) Authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement; and 4) Re-allocating Police Department salary savings in the Fiscal Year 2022/23 General Fund budget to fund the first-year cost per the agreement selected.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Special Meeting
November 15, 2022 Page 6 of 8
Terri Greene, Western Region Director, stated they were grateful for the opportunity to serve Antioch and bring technology that would help reduce gun violence, be a deterrent and improve response times.
Ron Teachman introduced himself and provided a professional history. He stated he was grateful to serve Antioch and available to answer any questions.
Andrew Becker questioned which areas would be served by ShotSpotter.
Leslie May spoke in support of the purchase and deployment of the ShotSpotter program.
Johnny Walker and Mike Katz-Lacabe spoke in opposition to the purchase and deployment of the ShotSpotter program.
Councilmember Ogorchock questioned if there was an RFP or RFQ process for this item.
Lieutenant Fortner explained the sole source justification letter was included as exhibit A to the resolution. He noted that ShotSpotter technology and resources would be sole source and integrate with other ShotSpotter technology in the area.
City Attorney Smith added that the Sole Source justification was correct; however, if Council had concerns related to the costs, it could be further researched.
Lieutenant Fortner reported the APD had researched other technology; however, they did not offer the same services, so they did not consider them a competitor.
Councilmember Ogorchock suggested utilizing ARPA funding to pay for the ShotSpotter technology.
In response to Councilmember Barbanica, Lieutenant Fortner confirmed other technologies would not integrate with ShotSpotter utilized in nearby jurisdictions.
Ron Teachman explained ShotSpotter provided technology and human review to determine if the noise detected was gunfire.
Councilmember Barbanica stated he supported this item since there had been an increase in gunfire and because it was supported by Chief Ford.
Councilmember Torres-Walker thanked staff for the presentation. She reported other communities utilized ShotSpotter technology; however, it had not resulted in reduced gun violence.
Interim Police Chief Ford explained ShotSpotter detected gun violence and crime scenes as well as improved response times. He commented that there had been a lot of gun activity and confiscations in Antioch. He stated he believed that collectively all their tools and resources in
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Special Meeting
November 15, 2022 Page 7 of 8
conjunction with ShotSpotter would mitigate some gun violence. He encouraged Council to look at this expense as an investment in public safety.
Councilmember Torres-Walker stated she believed the cost of gun violence was much higher than the cost to prevent gun violence and the City could do more to address public safety.
Mayor Thorpe thanked Lieutenant Fortner for bringing this item forward. He stated with concerns related to police staffing levels, he felt it was important to use technology to help provide services needed to assist the police department. He discussed the investments Council had made in public safety and aiding the APD.
A motion was made by Councilmember Barbanica to adopt a resolution: 1) Approving the sole Selecting a five-year purchase agreement with ShotSpotter, Inc., with a one-time $10,000 startup fee: In an annual amount of $280,000, not to exceed a total amount of $1,410,000 over 5 years; 3) Authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement; and 4) Re-allocating Police Department salary savings in the Fiscal Year 2022/23 General Fund budget to fund the first-year cost per the agreement selected.
Councilmember Ogorchock seconded the motion and requested a friendly amendment to utilize ARPA funds to fund the first-year cost per the agreement selected. Councilmember Barbanica agreed to the amendment which was then followed by a substitute motion by Mayor Thorpe.
Councilmember Ogorchock speaking to the following substitute motion, clarified that if she voted against this item, it was only a vote against the funding source.
In response to Councilmember Barbanica, Interim Police Chief Ford stated that this cost would not place an undue hardship on the Antioch Police Department.
Councilmember Ogorchock commented the City had historically used salary savings on one- time items.
RESOLUTION NO. 2022/200
On motion by Mayor Thorpe, seconded by Councilmember Torres-Walker, the City Council adopted a resolution: 1) Approving the sole source request for the purchase and deployment of Selecting a five-year purchase agreement with
ShotSpotter, Inc., with a one-time $10,000 startup fee: In an annual amount of $280,000, not to exceed a total amount of $1,410,000 over 5 years; 3) Authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement; and 4) Re-allocating Police Department salary savings in the Fiscal Year 2022/23 General Fund budget to fund the first-year cost per the agreement selected. The motion carried the following vote:
Ayes: Torres-Walker, Wilson, Barbanica, Thorpe Noes: Ogorchock
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Special Meeting
November 15, 2022 Page 8 of 8
7. TENTATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANTIOCH AND ANTIOCH
POLICE SWORN MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (APSMA) FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 1, 2022 AUGUST 31, 2025
Director of Human Resources Cortez presented the staff report dated November 15, 2022, recommending the City Council adopt a resolution: 1) Approving the Tentative Agreement between the City of Antioch and the Antioch Police Sworn Management Association (APSMA); and 2) Authorizing the City Manager or designee to make any necessary adjustments to the Fiscal Year 2021/23 budget to implement the provisions of the Tentative Agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 2022/201
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica, the City Council unanimously adopted a resolution: 1) Approving the Tentative Agreement between the City of Antioch and the Antioch Police Sworn Management Association (APSMA); and 2) Authorizing the City Manager or designee to make any necessary adjustments to the Fiscal Year 2021/23 budget to implement the provisions of the Tentative Agreement.
8. TENTATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANTIOCH AND ANTIOCH APRIL 1, 2022 MARCH 31, 2026
Director of Human Resources Cortez presented the staff report dated November 15, 2022, recommending the City Council adopt a resolution: 1) Approving the Tentative Agreement between the City of Antioch and the Antioch Public Works Employees Association (APWEA); and 2) Authorizing the City Manager or designee to make any necessary adjustments to the Fiscal Year 2022/23 budget to implement the provisions of the Tentative Agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 2022/202
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica, the City Council unanimously adopted a resolution: 1) Approving the Tentative Agreement between the City of Antioch and the Antioch Public Works Employees Association (APWEA); and 2) Authorizing the City Manager or designee to make any necessary adjustments to the Fiscal Year 2022/23 budget to implement the provisions of the Tentative Agreement.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:41 P.M.
Respectfully submitted:
Kitty Eiden
KITTY EIDEN, Minutes Clerk
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
INCLUDING THE ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
ACTING AS SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING SUCCESSOR
TO THE ANTIOCH DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Regular Meeting November 22, 2022
7:00 P.M. Council Chambers
5:45 P.M. - CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Thorpe called Closed Session to order at 5:45P.M., and City Clerk Householder called the roll.
Present: Council/Agency Members District 1 Torres-Walker, District 3 Ogorchock, District 4 Wilson, Mayor Pro Tem (District 2) Barbanica and Mayor Thorpe PUBLIC COMMENTNone
1. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: CITY MANAGER. This closed session is authorized pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b)(1).
2. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: CITY ATTORNEY. This closed session is authorized pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b)(1).
3. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONSEXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to California Government Code section 54956.8; Property: 4527 Deerfield Drive, Antioch, CA; Agency Negotiation: City of Antioch Negotiators: Cornelius H. Johnson, City Manager and Thomas Lloyd Smith, City Attorney; Negotiating Parties: City of Antioch and Yellow Roof Foundation, Negotiator Trent Sanson; Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment.
ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Thorpe adjourned to Closed Session at 5:46 P.M.
7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Thorpe called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M., and City Clerk Householder called the roll.
Present: Council/Agency Members District 1 Torres-Walker, District 3 Ogorchock, District 4 Wilson, Mayor Pro Tem (District 2) Barbanica and Mayor Thorpe
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Thorpe led the Pledge of Allegiance.
B
01- -23
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 2 of 13
CITY ATTORNEY TO REPORT OUT ON CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Smith reported the City Council had been in Closed Session and gave the following report: #1 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: CITY MANAGER, no reportable action, #2 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: CITY ATTORNEY, no reportable action; and, #3 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS EXISTING LITIGATION, direction was given to City Manager and City Attorney.
ON MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER BARBANICA SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WILSON THE CITY COUNCIL MOVED TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO MOVE COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS #11 AND #12 TO BE HEARD AFTER ITEM #5 CONSENT CALENDAR; APPROVED 4/0.
1. INTRODUCTION OF NEW CITY EMPLOYEES
Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson introduced Julie Viray, Administrative Analyst I who stated she looked forward to serving the City.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson introduced Bryan Pitts, Operation Supervisor who thanked Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson for the introduction and stated he looked forward to serving the City in his new position.
2. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF CIVIC AND COMMUNITY EVENTS
Director of Parks and Recreation Helfenberger announced the following civic and community event.
Holiday Delights Celebration December 3, 2022
Councilmember Ogorchock announced Small Business Saturday would be held on November 26, 2022.
Lucas Stuart-Chilcoat announced a list of Christmas light displays was located at californiachristmaslights.com. He provided his address and noted they would be participating in the event December 2 30, 2022.
Director of Public Safety and Community Resources Johnson announced Antioch Council of Teens was hosting a coat drive and donations of coats, socks, scarves and hats would be accepted through December 16, 2022.
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF BOARD AND COMMISSION OPENINGS
City Clerk Householder announced the following Board and Commission openings.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 3 of 13
For more information and to apply, visit: www.antiochca.gov.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Kevin Gustavo Roldan, Antioch resident, stated he utilized the Delta de Anza Trail to bike to school. He requested the City install raised crossings where trails intersected roadways and bollards on bike lanes.
Renee Ya, Hidden Glen resident, stated she submitted a petition for speed humps or speed cushions for their neighborhood as well as documents regarding an accident that had occurred in the area.
Leslie May discussed personal attacks against her on social media and stated she respected everyone.
AJ Potter, Hidden Glen resident, discussed a recent accident that occurred in his neighborhood and requested speed humps or speed cushions be installed in the area. He questioned how the city was addressing traffic concerns throughout the City.
Kathryn Wade reported that her niece was in a fatal traffic accident on the freeway. She requested the APD and the coroner provide her with the reports pertaining to her son death.
Edgar M. expressed concern regarding unsafe traffic conditions in District 1 and encouraged residents in the Hidden Glen neighborhood to continue to pursue their requests for traffic calming measures. He commented that he had not received a response to an email he sent to city staff related to public comment speaker rules. He wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving.
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COMMUNICATIONS None
Mayor Thorpe reported a petition submitted for the Hidden Glen area was under consideration and announced that a stop sign would be installed at Laurel Road. He noted Council may want to consider adding additional funds to the speed hump/cushions program during budget considerations. He further noted that traffic calming along Sycamore Drive would be discussed later in the agenda. He explained the Parks and Recreation Commission oversees parks and trails, so he encouraged residents to share their perspective with them.
4. PRESENTATION
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING POLICIES
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 4 of 13
Planning Manager Hersch presented the staff report dated November 22, 2022, recommending the City Council receive this informational report on inclusionary housing policies.
Mayor Thorpe reported Council had requested two public hearings to be postponed because a majority of Council wanted to learn more about inclusionary housing and how it would impact decisions on those public hearings.
In response to Councilmember Wilson, Planning Manager Hersch reported the economic study would take approximately 12 months so they could take a comprehensive look at the data to determine a fee that would reflect costs. She noted the Housing Element would come back to Council in January and would include a policy regarding pursuing inclusionary policies.
Director of Community Development Ebbs
housing ordinances. He explained that an inclusionary housing ordinance could move forward rather quickly; however, if they were going to offer an in-lieu fee option, it would need to be supported by a study.
Leslie May requested handicapped accessibility be considered for the physically disabled.
Andre Casanova, Antioch resident, requested prevailing wage, local hire and an apprenticeship program be considered.
Mayor Thorpe responded that this item was looking at a potential policy for future projects. He reminded the public that most projects approved in Antioch included a Project Labor Agreement that included local hire and prevailing wage.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR for City /City Council Members acting as Successor Agency/Housing Successor to the Antioch Development Agency
A. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 11, 2022
B. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 25, 2022
C. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 15, 2022
D. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL WARRANTS
E. APPROVAL OF SUCCESSOR AGENCY WARRANTS
F. APPROVAL OF HOUSING SUCCESSOR WARRANTS
G.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 5 of 13
H. ORDINANCE NO. 2220-C-S SECOND READING TRAVIS CREDIT UNION AT 3500 HILLCREST AVENUE (PD-22-03, UP-22-08, AR-22-07) (Introduced on October 25, 2022)
I. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/203 PURCHASE OF SEVEN CODE ENFORCEMENT RADIOS WITH SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $64,481.59
J. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/204 RESCINDING THE COVID-19 MANDATORY TESTING
AND VACCINATION POLICY
K. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/205 AB 361: RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS
NECESSARY TO CONDUCT BROWN ACT MEETINGS BY TELECONFERENCE FOR
THE CITY COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES
L. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/206 REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) NO. 090822:
SELECTION OF RUBICON
PROGRAMS AND AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR UP TO $180,000 IN AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT (ARPA) FUNDING
M. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/207 SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CAROLLO ENGINEERS, INC. FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR THE BRACKISH WATER DESALINATION PROJECT (P.W. 694)
N. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/208 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH GATES AND ASSOCIATES FOR LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES
O. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/209 SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT IMPLEMENTATION ROUND 2 FUNDING APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES FOR THE EAST CONTRA COSTA GROUNDWATER SUBBASIN (P.W. 704-3)
P. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/210 AMENDMENT TO MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANTIOCH AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HEALTH, HOUSING & HOMELESSNESS (H3) FOR THE DELTA LANDING
INTERIM HOUSING PROGRAM
Q. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/211 REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) 081922 2022
REQUEST FOR HOMEKEY QUALIFICATIONS
R. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/212 TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO
A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANTIOCH
AND FELTON INSTITUTE FOR NON-POLICE COMMUNITY CRISIS INTERVENTION
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 6 of 13
RESPONSE PROVIDER SERVICES FOR LOW LEVEL 911 CALLS AS PART OF THE
ANGELO QUINTO CRISIS RESPONSE TEAM PILOT PROGRAM
S. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/213 CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY BILL (AB) 844: GREEN
EMPOWERMENT ZONE
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica, the City Council unanimously approved the Council Consent Calendar with the exception of items I, J, K, P and Q, which were removed for further discussion.
Item I Lucas Stuart-Chilcoat stated he felt the radio costs were excessive and questioned if other models were considered.
Director of Community Development Ebbs responded that these radios systems would tie into the current APD radio systems, and he was unaware of an alternative.
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously approved Item I.
Item J Lucas Stuart-Chilcoat questioned how many employees were unvaccinated. He spoke to the COVID vaccine benefits and discussed precautions that could be taken to decrease severity of symptoms. He reminded ill people to isolate and announced free COVID tests were available through the county and other sources.
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously approved Item J.
Item K Councilmember Barbanica stated AB361 was appropriate when it was COVID related; however, now he felt meetings should be conducted in person.
Councilmember Wilson suggested taking 30-days to ease out of the AB361 provisions.
Councilmember Torres-Walker reported that she had several employees test positive for COVID recently and a potential threat still existed. She discussed the convenience of virtual meetings for those who wanted to be involved and could not attend in-person meetings. She stated she was not in favor of discontinuing this item.
Councilmember Ogorchock stated she supported easing out of the AB361 provisions within the next 30-days.
City Attorney Smith clarified with new legislation passed, a great deal of what is currently in AB361 would be incorporated into general law so the need for this action in the future was questionable.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 7 of 13
On motion by Mayor Thorpe, seconded by Councilmember Torres-Walker the City Council approved Item K. The motion carried the following vote:
Ayes: Torres-Walker, Wilson, Thorpe Noes: Ogorchock, Barbanica
Item P Leslie May requested the City include language that all facilities be accessible for the physically disabled.
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously approved Item P.
Item Q Andrew Becker stated he was disappointed that there was a rejection for a Homekey proposal. He requested Council give staff direction to work with Dignity Moves to pursue a Homekey application for the spring of 2023.
In response to Council, Assistant City Manager Bayon Moore confirmed the City had multiple organizations attend the pre-submission event. She reported that they only received one proposal from Hope Solutions; however, that organization did not have site control or experience developing affordable housing, so staff did not believe it would score strongly enough to advance a proposal to the State. direction to repackage and opportunity for Homekey staff could return with some suggestions for how to structure it to be successful and competitive. She noted they could also consider other funding opportunities that were available at the State level.
Mayor Thorpe suggested bringing this item back to Council at a future Study Session and clarified that the item before Council this evening was to accept or reject the bid.
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously approved Item Q.
COUNCIL MEMBER BARBANICA HAD PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO MOVE COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS #11 AND #12 TO BE HEARD AFTER THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA
11. AMENDATORY AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF ANTIOCH AND CONTRA COSTA
WATER DISTRICT FOR TREATED WATER SERVICE
Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson presented the staff report dated November 22, 2022, recommending the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to approve and execute the amendatory agreement with Contra Costa Water District for treated water service in a form approved by the City Attorney.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 8 of 13
In response to Councilmember Barbanica, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson explained the potential financial impacts of the agreement.
RESOLUTION NO. 2022/214
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Wilson the City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the City Manager to approve and execute the amendatory agreement with Contra Costa Water District for treated water service in a form approved by the City Attorney. The motion carried the following vote:
Ayes: Torres-Walker, Ogorchock, Wilson, Thorpe Noes: Barbanica
12. SYCAMORE TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES
Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson presented the staff report dated November 22, 2022, recommending the City Council discuss and direct staff regarding Sycamore traffic calming needs.
Mayor Thorpe requested Council approve the installation of speed bumps on Sycamore Drive
Leslie May encouraged Council to support the installation of speed bumps on Sycamore Drive.
Lindsay Amezcua stated in addition to speed bumps she suggests the City install a stop sign and crosswalk at the bus stop. Additionally, she felt a center median would prevent cars from illegally passing.
Edgar M stated speed bumps and a center median would help in the Sycamore area and encouraged council to continue to look at other problem areas in Antioch.
Sabrina agreed that Sycamore was a problem area and discussed the importance of the community working with the City to reduce criminal activity.
Councilmember Torres-Walker thanked everyone for their comments. She reported the community had requested raised and lit crosswalks on Manzanita and Spanos as well as medians with forced turn lanes. Additionally, the community has asked for curb cuts in the Lemontree/Peppertree area.
Mayor Thorpe clarified that he was speaking generally when discussing the need for speed bumps for the Sycamore area and noted that something needed to be done immediately.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson stated there were many traffic calming measures that could be consider for the neighborhood. He reported that they were close to being done with the James Donlon Blvd. study and they were in the process of creating some preliminary plans for Sycamore. He stated staff could return with some suggested items. He
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 9 of 13
noted if vertical items were to be considered, he would suggest public meetings be held to allow those affected to provide input. He further noted they could have something back to Council by April.
Councilmember Ogorchock agreed that the Sycamore area should be addressed next and requested staff also prioritize areas around schools.
Councilmember Wilson requested Prewett Ranch be added to the list to be considered for traffic calming measures.
Mayor Thorpe reported CCTA was working on safe routes to schools countywide. He encouraged Councilmembers who want other areas to be considered to send those requests to him so he could consider them as future agenda items.
In response to Councilmember Torres-Walker, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Samuelson explained that striping, signage, and speed feedback signs could be implemented sooner
closures would take longer since they needed to be studied and a public meeting would need to take place.
Following discussion, Council directed staff to bring back traffic calming measures for the Sycamore Neighborhood.
ON MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER BARBANICA SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
OGORCHOCK THE CITY COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY SUSPENDED THE RULES TO MOVE COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA ITEM #8 TO BE HEARD AS THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS.
8. DISCUSSION OF PROVIDING $125,000 TO THE ANTIOCH CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE FOR GENERAL SUPPORT
Director of Economic Development Reed presented the staff report dated November 22, 2022, recommending the City Council discuss support for the Antioch Chamber of Commerce and provide staff with direction.
Daniel Sohn, President and CEO Antioch Chamber of Commerce, gave an overview of their plans for the Small Business Investment Center and the Antioch Convention and Visitor Bureau.
He thanked Council and staff for their support.
Councilmember Ogorchock requested Council also consider replenishing the Antioch Cares Program.
Mr. Sohn reported they had just committed the last $500.00 of the Antioch Cares Program to a local business, and they were looking at replenishing funds for that program.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 10 of 13
In response to Councilmember Barbanica, Mr. Sohn clarified the request for $100,000 would cover a 5-year period and $20,000 annually would be used toward leveraging grant monies. He noted it would also help when seeking additional appropriations and promoting the program. He announced they were working directly with the Office of Small Business and Department of State to obtain a $1M commitment from the state annually for Antioch.
Mayor Thorpe commented that staff would design a program for administering and monitoring the outcomes from the funds.
Mr. Sohn commented that the $1M in funds they were seeking from the state would come to the City to disperse quarterly to the Convention and Visitors Bureau. He noted the Chamber of Commerce Board would have fiduciary responsibility over those dollars and recommended a member of City Staff or Council be appointed to the Advisory Board.
Councilmember Torres-Walker thanked Mr. Sohn for helping to create a relationship between the City and Chamber. She spoke in support of investing in business and local jobs for the community. She also supported staff or Council participation on the Advisory Board.
Mr. Sohn reiterated that they wanted to be good stewards of public money and it would be advantageous to have either staff or a Council Member present during Board meetings, so the city was aware of how the money was being spent and helping to decide how to use it. He stated they were looking for unanimous support of $125,000 in funding and they would be happy to discuss adding Antioch Cares Program funding.
Council consensus supported providing $125,000 of one-time money to the Antioch Chamber of Commerce for General Support and bringing back consideration of the $125,000 for the Antioch Cares Program during ARPA funding consideration.
Following discussion, Council directed staff to bring back a resolution to formalize support to the Antioch Chamber of Commerce.
Mayor Thorpe supported the selection of the Chamber of Commerce CEO and the efforts to build on the success that the Chamber built under former Mayor Sean Wright. He commented that Mr. Sohn was doing the right job for the City and encouraged the Board to not allow people to undermine their process.
PUBLIC HEARING
6. LAKEVIEW CENTER PARCEL 5 REZONE (Z-22-06)
Director of Community Development Ebbs presented the staff report dated November 22, 2022, recommending the City Council introduce, waive the first reading, and read by title only the ordinance rezoning Lakeview Center Parcel 5 to include the Commercial Infill Housing (CIH) Overlay District.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 11 of 13
Mayor Thorpe opened the public hearing.
Jeff Schroeder, Ponderosa Homes representing Bluerock Partners and Reynolds and Brown, stated that this parcel was always intended to be part of the property that was rezoned and to proceed with their application, they needed it to be included in the Commercial Infill Housing (CIH) Overlay District.
Mayor Thorpe closed the public hearing.
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council introduced, waived the first reading, and read by title only the ordinance rezoning Lakeview Center Parcel 5 to include the Commercial Infill Housing (CIH) Overlay District. The motion carried the following vote:
Ayes: Ogorchock, Wilson, Barbanica, Thorpe Noes: Torres-Walker
7. BUCHANAN CROSSINGS PARCEL 7 REZONE (Z-22-05)
Councilmember Barbanica recused himself from item #7 and left the dais.
Director of Community Development Ebbs presented the staff report dated November 22, 2022, recommending the City Council introduce, waive the first reading, and read by title only the ordinance rezoning Buchanan Crossings Parcel 7 to include the Commercial Infill Housing (CIH) Overlay District.
Mayor Thorpe opened the public hearing.
Matt Nohr, Proponent, gave a history of the property. He noted the Commercial Infill Housing Overlay District would allow for multi-family and offer another tool to develop their property. He noted a residential project would offer synergy and reduce environmental impacts. He further noted it was overlooked that the parcel was not included in the boundary, and requested Council approve the ordinance.
Mayor Thorpe closed the public hearing.
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Wilson the City Council introduced, waived the first reading, and read by title only the ordinance rezoning Buchanan Crossings Parcel 7 to include the Commercial Infill Housing (CIH) Overlay District. The month carried the following vote:
Ayes: Ogorchock, Wilson, Thorpe Noes: Torres-Walker
Councilmember Barbanica returned to the dais.
COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA Continued
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 12 of 13
9. SISTER CITIES INTERNATIONAL MEMBERSHIP REQUEST
Director of Economic Development Reed presented the staff report dated November 22, 2022, recommending
membership with Sister Cities International and to return to City Council with a proposed program and annual budget.
Following discussion, Council consensus supported re-establishing membership with Sister Cities International and directed staff to bring back program design.
10. RESOLUTIONS APPROPRIATING EXPENDITURES FOR ENCUMBRANCES AND PROJECT BUDGETS OUTSTANDING TO THE 2022/23 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET AND APPROVING OTHER AMENDMENTS TO THE 2022/23 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET
Finance Director Merchant presented the staff report dated November 22, 2022, recommending the City Council adopt the following resolutions: 1) Resolution of the City Council of the City of Antioch appropriating expenditures for encumbrances and project budgets outstanding to the 2022/23 fiscal year budget and approving other amendments to the 2023 fiscal year budgets. 2) Resolution of the City Council of the City of Antioch approving amendments to the 2023 fiscal year budgets for items considered at the meeting of November 22, 2022.
Finance Director Merchant stated it was anticipated that budget study sessions would begin at the end of March or the beginning of April.
Mayor Thorpe stated he would prefer to consider staffing requests and ARPA funds during future Study Sessions.
City Attorney Smith expressed concern for postponing consideration of the positions requested to administer the Rent Stabilization Ordinance since they had had an overwhelming number of people contact the City prior to having petitions available. He noted the two positions requested were to assist residents with those requests.
In response to Mayor Thorpe, City Attorney Smith commented that it took a year to fill the Assistant City Attorney position and she was hired to oversee legal matters for the entire City.
He noted there was not sufficient staff to administer the Rent Stabilization Program.
RESOLUTION NO. 2022/215
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously adopted the resolution of the City Council of the City of Antioch appropriating expenditures for encumbrances and project budgets outstanding to the 2022/23 fiscal year budget and approving other amendments to the 2023 fiscal year budgets.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
November 22, 2022 Page 13 of 13
Following discussion, Council consensus directed staff to bring back the staffing requests, ARPA funding and one-time revenues for discussion at a future study session, there was also Council consensus to address Water Park slide structure repairs in the amount of $400,000 with one- time revenues.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Johnny Walker discussed the results of the City Council election. He asked why some department heads were absent from the Council meeting. He noted the City could seek assistance from the California Highway Patrol for traffic concerns. He spoke about an elected
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS None
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Ogorchock wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving.
Mayor Thorpe congratulated Councilmembers Wilson and Torres-Walker on their successful reelection campaigns.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Wilson the City Council unanimously adjourned the meeting at 9:55 P.M.
Respectfully submitted:
Kitty Eiden
KITTY EIDEN, Minutes Clerk
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Special Meeting December 13, 2022
6:00 P.M. Council Chambers
6:00 P.M. SPECIAL MEETING
Mayor Thorpe called the meeting to order at 6:03P.M., and City Clerk Householder called the roll.
Present: Council Members District 3 Ogorchock, District 4 Wilson, Mayor Pro Tem (District 2) Barbanica and Mayor Thorpe
Absent: Council Member District 1 Torres-Walker
SM-1. PROCLAMATION
Proclamation Presenting Antioch Resident Bianca Palomera with a Key to the City of Antioch for an Act of Courage, Kindness, and Heroism December 13, 2022 Mayor Thorpe announced following approval of the proclamation refreshments would be served in the City Hall lobby.
Leslie May praised Ms. Palomera for the actions she took to defend a member of the community.
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council members present unanimously approved the proclamation.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously adjourned the meeting at 6:07P.M.
Respectfully submitted:
Kitty Eiden
KITTY EIDEN, Minutes Clerk
C
01- -23
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
INCLUDING THE ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
ACTING AS SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING SUCCESSOR
TO THE ANTIOCH DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Regular Meeting December 13, 2022
7:00 P.M. Council Chambers
7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Pro Tem Barbanica called the meeting to order at 7:14P.M., and City Clerk Householder called the roll.
Present: Council/Agency Members District 1 Torres-Walker, District 3 Ogorchock, District 4 Wilson, Mayor Pro Tem (District 2) Barbanica
Absent: Mayor Thorpe (arrived at 7:20 P.M.)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Pro Tem Barbanica led the Pledge of Allegiance.
CITY ATTORNEY TO REPORT OUT ON CLOSED SESSIONNo Closed Session
1. PROCLAMATIONS
In Honor of Pat Jeremy, United States Navy, Master Chief Petty Officer (E- of the Year 2022-2023
In Honor of Frank E. Ballesteros "Humbug" Week, December 12 16, 2022 On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Wilson the City Council members present unanimously approved the proclamations.
Pat Jeremy accepted the In Honor of Pat Jeremy, United States Navy, Master Chief Petty Officer (E- -2023proclamation and thanked the City Council for
the recognition.
Mayor Thorpe arrived at 7:20 P.M. and presided over the remainder of the meeting.
Frank E. Ballesteros accepted the In Honor of Frank E. Ballesteros "Humbug" Week, December 12 16, 2022proclamation and thanked the City Council for the recognition.
2. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF CIVIC AND COMMUNITY EVENTS
Director of Parks and Recreation Helfenberger announced the following civic and community event.
Bay Miwok Meadows Park, Ribbon Cutting CeremonyDecember 14, 2022 D
01- -23
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
December 13, 2022 Page 2 of 10
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF BOARD AND COMMISSION OPENINGS
City Clerk Householder announced the following Board and Commission openings.
Contra Costa County Library Commission
Antioch Police Oversight Commission
For more information and to apply, visit: www.antiochca.gov.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
J.R. Wilson, Antioch Rivertown Veterans Lions Club, announced Wreaths Across America event would take place at Oakview Memorial Park Cemetery at 12:00 P.M. on December 17, 2022. He thanked Councilmember Ogorchock for bringing and
Reverend Phillips, Faith Alliance for a Moral Economy, thanked the City Council for passing the Rent Stabilization Ordinance and encouraged the City to assist tenants that were still facing illegal rent increases. She spoke in support of Council enacting just cause and anti-harassment ordinances.
Judith Ortiz, Monument Impact, Rocheall Pierre, ECRG, Cecilia Perez, First Five Contra Costa and ECRG, Myriam Saenz, ECRG, Kim Carlson, ACCE, Devin Williams and Tori Wakefield, ACCE, congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns. They thanked Council for passing the Rent Stabilization Ordinance and encouraged the City to assist tenants facing illegal rent increases. They also spoke in support of Council enacting just cause and anti-harassment ordinances.
Lemuel del Castillo, Antioch resident, advocated for bicycle safety and discussed the importance of planning for bicycle and pedestrian transit throughout Antioch.
Mahasin Aleem, Contra Costa County Libraries, introduced herself as the Senior Community Library Manager for the Antioch and Prewett Park Libraries.
Shagoofa Khan, Monument Impact, congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns. She announced Monument Impact was hosting a supply drive for Antioch Unified School District. Contact information was provided. She spoke in support of Council enacting just cause and anti-harassment ordinances.
Ralph Hernandez, Antioch resident, discussed adverse side effects of marijuana use and the negative impacts of the cannabis industry.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
December 13, 2022 Page 3 of 10
Norma Hernandez, Antioch resident representing retail establishments selling tobacco products, Jay Sarang, Business Owner, Jasbir Sooch and Satnam Sanghera, representing convenience stores, requested Council agendize reconsideration of the ordinance related to the restrictions on tobacco businesses.
Jilanda Plaza, ACCE, discussed harassment she had received from her landlord.
Francisco Torres, congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns. He thanked Council for passing the Rent Stabilization Ordinance and encouraged the City assist tenants that were facing illegal rent increases. He also spoke in support of Council enacting just cause and anti-harassment ordinances. He discussed allegations against the Antioch Police Department.
Frank Sterling, Antioch resident, congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns. He thanked Council for passing the Rent Stabilization Ordinance and encouraged the City assist tenants that were facing illegal rent increases. He also spoke in support of Council enacting just cause and anti-harassment ordinances. He discussed his interactions with the Antioch Police Department. He recognized Bianca Palomera for her acts of heroism.
Nisha Toor congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns. On behalf of local liquor and tobacco merchants, she requested Council agendize reconsideration of the ordinance related to restrictions on tobacco businesses.
James Daniels, ACCE, congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns. He spoke in support of Council enacting just cause and anti- harassment ordinances. He offered to provide free rental inspections for the City.
Edgar M. expressed concern that his emails had not successfully been delivered to an Elected Official and he had not received a response to other emails sent to City Officials. He spoke to the need for legal services for tenants and noted a Measure was not being enforced.
Patricia Granados congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns acts of heroism.
She requested an overpayment of wages be refunded to the City. She asked Council to participate in the AB3121 Task Force.
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/COMMUNICATIONS
Councilmember Ogorchock reported on her attendance at the Cal Cities Board of Directors meeting.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
December 13, 2022 Page 4 of 10
Councilmember Wilson announced Tri Delta Transit hired Chief Operations Manager Toan Tran and their next meeting would be held on December 14, 2022. She reported Delta Diablo would be meeting next week.
Mayor Thorpe thanked the community for attending this meeting. He recognized the Antioch Police Department for solving a crime. Speaking to a previous public comment, he clarified the email security system filtered some emails, and messages from the public were not deliberately ignored.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR for City /City Council Members acting as Successor Agency/Housing Successor to the Antioch Development Agency
A. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 15, 2022
B. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 22, 2022
C. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13, 2022
D. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL WARRANTS
E. APPROVAL OF HOUSING SUCCESSOR WARRANTS
F. ORDINANCE NO. 2221-C-S SECOND READING - LAKEVIEW CENTER PARCEL 5 REZONE (Z-22-06) (Introduced on November 22, 2022)
G. ORDINANCE NO. 2222-C-S SECOND READING - BUCHANAN CROSSINGS PARCEL 7 REZONE (Z-22-05) (Introduced on November 22, 2022)
H. ASSEMBLY BILL (AB) 1600 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT
I. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/216 RENEWAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP (VTSM) 9501 DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL CREEKSIDE VINEYARDS AT SAND CREEK
J. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/217 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE UPDATE - GIS BASED
MAPPING FEE
K. SA RESOLUTION NO. 2022/39 RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE (2023-24) FOR THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE ANTIOCH DEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH
L. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/218 APPROVING ONE-TIME MONEY ALLOCATION
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
December 13, 2022 Page 5 of 10
M. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/219 USE AGREEMENT WITH CONGRESSMAN
DESAULNIER'S OFFICE FOR OFFICE SPACE AT THE ANTIOCH COMMUNITY CENTER
N. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/220 CONSIDERATION OF BIDS FOR THE WAYFINDING SIGNS (P.W. 679-1)
O. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/221 ACCEPTING COMPLETED IMPROVEMENTS AND THE RELEASE OF BONDS FOR PARK RIDGE OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS, TRACT NO. 8846 (PW 674-8)
P. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/222 ACCEPTING COMPLETED LAUREL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AND THE RELEASE OF BONDS FOR HIDDEN GLEN UNIT 4 SUBDIVISION 8388 (P.W. 557-4)
Q. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/223 CONSIDERATION OF BIDS FOR ROOF
REPLACEMENTS AT ANTIOCH WATER PARK AND WATER TREATMENT PLANT BID NO. 770-1130-22A AWARD
R. RESOLUTION NO. 2022/224 OF SUPPORT FOR A TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT ACT GRANT FOR THE TRAFFIC CALMING IMPROVEMENTS ALONG WEST 10TH STREET
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica, the City Council unanimously approved the Council Consent Calendar.
COUNCIL REGULAR AGENDA
5. NEW CLASS SPECIFICATIONS, ASSIGNING SALARY RANGES, ASSIGNING THE
CLASSIFICATIONS TO THE BARGAINING UNITS
Director of Public Safety and Community Resources Johnson presented the staff report dated December 13, 2022, recommending the City Council take the following actions: 1) Adopt a Resolution Approving the New Class Specification for Public Safety Manager, Assigning a Salary Range, Assigning the Classification to the Management - Senior Bargaining Unit. 2) Adopt a Resolution Approving the New Class Specification for Community Engagement Coordinator, Assigning a Salary Range, Assigning the Classification to the Confidential Bargaining Unit.
RESOLUTION NO. 2022/225
On motion by Councilmember Wilson, seconded by Councilmember Torres-Walker the City Council adopted a Resolution Approving the New Class Specification for Public Safety Manager, Assigning a Salary Range, Assigning the Classification to the Management - Senior Bargaining Unit. The motion carried the following vote:
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
December 13, 2022 Page 6 of 10
Ayes: Torres-Walker, Wilson, Thorpe Noes: Ogorchock, Barbanica
RESOLUTION NO. 2022/226
On motion by Councilmember Wilson, seconded by Councilmember Torres-Walker the City Council adopted a Resolution Approving the New Class Specification for Community Engagement Coordinator, Assigning a Salary Range, Assigning the Classification to the Confidential Bargaining Unit. The motion carried the following vote:
Ayes: Torres-Walker, Wilson, Thorpe Noes: Ogorchock, Barbanica
6. RESOLUTION APPROVING ALLOCATION FOR THREE PART-TIME SECRETARY
POSITIONS TO SUPPORT CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Thorpe requested this item be postponed so staff could provide three separate resolutions in the event there were Councilmembers who did not support the allocation of three part-time secretaries.
On motion by Councilmember Wilson, seconded by Councilmember Torres-Walker the City Council unanimously postponed consideration of the resolution approving the allocation for three part-time secretary positions to support City Council. The motion carried the following vote:
Ayes: Torres-Walker, Barbanica, Wilson, Thorpe Noes: Ogorchock
7. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS FOR
A PRIVATE PATROL SECURITY COMPANY TO PROVIDE PRIVATE PATROL
SECURITY SERVICES ON OR NEAR DOWNTOWN/RIVERTOWN CITY-OWNED PUBLIC PARKING LOTS.
Sean McCauley presented the staff report dated December 13, 2022, recommending the City Council, at the conclusion of a Downtown/Rivertown Public Parking Lots Security Plan presentation, adopt a resolution to develop a comprehensive Downtown/Rivertown Public Parking Lots Security Plan and authorize the City Manager to issue a Request for Qualifications for a private patrol security services either on and/or near Downtown/Rivertown Area City- Owned public parking lots or other designated downtown areas.
Ralph Hernandez stated he opposed approval of this item because the staff report did not include information on costs, timeline and the services that would be provided. He suggested the Antioch Police Department provide security for this area.
Andrew Becker encouraged the City to participate in community engagement. He suggested blight and transient activity in urban centers be addressed with adequate supportive services.
Frank Sterling stated he did not support hiring private security for the downtown area.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
December 13, 2022 Page 7 of 10
Allen Payton suggested downtown business and property owners assess themselves to provide security services. He stated he believed it would take a collaborative effort between the City and the business/property owners.
Councilmember Ogorchock thanked Mr. McCauley for the presentation. She commented that the City had historically provided this service and suggested city-owned parking lots in other areas outside of the downtown/Rivertown area be considered. She spoke in support of the resolution.
In response to Councilmember Torres-Walker, Mayor Thorpe clarified that this RFQ would be seeking qualifications and expenses related to providing security for the area.
Councilmember Torres-Walker stated public parking lots were public spaces and when they were privatized and over-surveyed, it resulted in marginalizing individuals for whom the spaces were provided. She noted public parking areas provided safe parking opportunities for unhoused residents. She suggested this proposal include a conversation with regards to how to utilize the APD and crisis response team to increase public safety and address the needs of those in public spaces who were potentially unhoused, in crisis and experiencing mental illness
Mayor Thorpe explained that consultants were hired to assist the City when they lacked the internal expertise. He reported Police Chief Ford and City Manager Johnson had the expertise to advise on this matter and had met with the downtown merchants. He noted the focus would be that as they continued to build up downtown new problems/nuisances would occur. He further noted this would create a presence so individuals would feel safe returning to their vehicles.
Councilmember Torres-Walker noted there were times when expertise needed to include other voices because occasionally, they could cause more harm than good.
Mayor Thorpe responded that it was important to take a complete approach.
RESOLUTION NO. 2022/227
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Torres-Walker the City Council unanimously adopted a resolution to develop a comprehensive Downtown/Rivertown Public Parking Lots Security Plan and authorize the City Manager to issue a Request for Qualifications for a private patrol security services either on and/or near Downtown/Rivertown Area City-Owned public parking lots or other designated downtown areas.
8. RESOLUTION CONFIRMING CANVASS BY THE COUNTY CLERK OF CONTRA
COSTA COUNTY OF BALLOTS CAST IN THE GENERAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 8, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. 2022/228
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
December 13, 2022 Page 8 of 10
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously adopted the resolution confirming the certified results received by the County Clerk of Contra Costa County of ballots cast in the General Election held on November 8, 2022.
Mayor Thorpe declared a recess at 9:05 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 9:10 P.M. with all Councilmembers present.
Lucas Stewart Chilcoat, Robert Collins and Frank Sterling congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns.
Ralph Hernandez, Antioch resident, congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns. He questioned when the City would inform the public of the process for the recount for District 1 candidates.
Debra Vinson congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns. She thanked Councilmember Ogorchock for her public service.
OATHS OF OFFICE FOR NEWLY ELECTED COUNCIL
Council Member District 1 - Tamisha Torres-Walker
Council Member District 4 - Monica E. Wilson
City Clerk Householder administered the Oath of Office to Council Member District 1 Tamisha Torres-Walker and Council Member District 4 Monica E. Wilson.
Councilmember Torres-Walker thanked those who participated in her campaign and the residents who voted. She commented that she was grateful for the opportunity to represent the City for the next four years. She appreciated the work of Council and the Antioch community.
Councilmember Wilson thanked those who voted and supported her efforts to serve the City of Antioch. She recognized her family and thanked them for their support.
Councilmember Barbanica congratulated everyone who ran for office and those who won their campaigns.
Councilmember Ogorchock thanked Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson for their public service.
Mayor Thorpe congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns. He stated he looked forward to continuing to serve on Council with them.
ROLL CALL for New Council
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
December 13, 2022 Page 9 of 10
City Clerk Householder called the roll.
Present: Council/Agency Members District 1 Torres-Walker, District 3 Ogorchock, District 4 Wilson, Mayor Pro Tem (District 2) Barbanica and Mayor Thorpe
MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS / COMMENTS None
9. COUNCIL REORGANIZATION - SELECTION OF MAYOR PRO TEMPORE
City Attorney Smith presented the staff report dated December 13, 2022, recommending the City Council select the mayor pro tempore.
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Barbanica the City Council unanimously selected Councilmember Torres-Walker as Mayor Pro Tempore.
Leslie May and Robert Collins congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Andrew Becker congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns. He discussed a state grant opportunity for Project Homekey and requested Council work with Dignity Moves on this endeavor.
Johnny Walker discussed the outcome of a DUI hearing. He congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS None
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Torres-Walker encouraged those with the ability to help, support families in need this holiday season. She thanked Councilmember Barbanica for assisting a family in locating housing. She also thanked the Quinto family for their attendance this evening and would be held on
December 23, 2022. She thanked the Antioch Police Department and Police Chief Ford for their fairness, compassion and providing resources for those in need.
Councilmember Ogorchock requested staff agendize a presentation from Pony Express for January 2023. She wished everyone a Merry Christmas.
Councilmember Wilson requested staff agendize just cause and anti-harassment policies as well as a moratorium on new gas stations. She wished everyone Happy Holidays.
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY/
HOUSING SUCCESSOR
Regular Meeting
December 13, 2022 Page 10 of 10
Councilmember Barbanica wished everyone a Merry Christmas. He congratulated Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson on their successful reelection campaigns. He thanked Councilmember Torres-Walker for referring a family in need of housing.
Mayor Thorpe wished everyone a safe holiday season. He encouraged those who prayed for Council to continue to do so and noted that he truly appreciated it. He stated Council would remain focused and continue to serve residents of Antioch.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion by Councilmember Ogorchock, seconded by Councilmember Wilson the City Council unanimously adjourned the meeting at 9:58 P.M.
Respectfully submitted:
Kitty Eiden
KITTY EIDEN, Minutes Clerk
-2
STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE:
TO:
SUBMITTED BY:
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDED ACTION
FISCAL IMPACT
DISCUSSION
ATTACHMENT
5G_______
H
Agenda Item #
STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: Regular Meeting of January 24, 2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBMITTED BY: Thomas Lloyd Smith, City Attorney TLS
SUBJECT: REJECTION OF CLAIMS: DYNISHA HODGES, PAT AND CORY STACK
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council reject the claims submitted by Pat and Cory Stack and Dynisha Hodges.
Should the City Council desire to discuss these matters, it would be scheduled for a future closed session.
ATTACHMENTS
None.
Agenda Item #
STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: Regular City Council Meeting of January 24, 2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBMITTED BY: Rosanna Bayon Moore, Assistant City Manager RBM Lt. John Fortner, Office of Emergency Services Coordinator SUBJECT: Resolution Continuing the Declaration of a Local Emergency Concerning the Severe Winter Storms
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the resolution continuing the declaration of a local emergency associated with the State Declared Severe Winter Storms, locally identified as the 2023 January Winter Storm Event.
FISCAL IMPACT
The full fiscal impact of a response to the 2023 January Storm Event is yet to be determined. Expenditures associated with the local emergency are currently estimated at $3.8 million dollars.
DISCUSSION
In late December 2022, severe winter storms commenced with high winds, heavy rainfall, and other "atmospheric river" conditions that to date have resulted in flooding, mudslides, fallen trees, and other property damage throughout the San Francisco Bay Area, including Contra Costa County and the City of Antioch.
On January 12, 2023, pursuant to Section 4-2.06(A)(1) of the Antioch Municipal Code, City Manager Cornelius H. Johnson in his capacity as the City’s Director of Emergency Services proclaimed a local emergency concerning the 2023 January Winter Storm Event. The action is in response to emergent local needs, consistent with actions taken by state and regional governments to protect public health, safety, and welfare.
On January 13, 2023, the Antioch City Council took action to ratify the proclamation so that the local emergency can continue in force and effect. The City Council is obligated to review the need for continuing the local emergency declaration per Government Code section 8630. The City of Antioch’s Emergency Operations Plan states the need Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item 2
to continue to the proclamation should be reviewed every 14 days until terminated.
Given that the scope of damage to City property is still in the preliminary stages of assessment, a continuance is requested.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 2023/**
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL CONTINUING THE DECLARATION OF
A LOCAL EMERGENCY IN THE CITY OF ANTIOCH
CONCERNING SEVERE WINTER STORMS
WHEREAS, on January 4, 2023, State of California Governor Gavin Newsom proclaimed a state of emergency exists due to a series of atmospheric river systems that have struck the state with high winds, heavy precipitation and urban flooding; WHEREAS, on January 10, 2023, the Contra Costa County Administrator Monica Nino proclaimed a local emergency due to uncommon and extreme weather conditions consisting of heavy rainfall and high winds, and the resulting impacts of flooding, downed trees and infrastructure damage;
WHEREAS, the City Manager, in his capacity as Director of Emergency Services of the City of Antioch, found that conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property have arisen within the City of Antioch, caused by the 2023 January Winter Storm event at a time that the City Council of the City of Antioch was not in session.
WHEREAS, conditions within Antioch City Limits have resulted in a response to flooding, damage and displacement beyond the control of City services, personnel, equipment, and facilities;
WHEREAS, on January 12, 2023, pursuant to Section 4-2.06(A)(1) of the Antioch Municipal Code, the City Manager, in his capacity as Director of Emergency Services of the City of Antioch, found that conditions warrant a declaration of a local emergency by proclamation; and WHEREAS, the Antioch City Council ratified said action by the Director of Emergency Services on January 13, 2023, proclaiming that a local emergency exists and shall continue to exist in the City of Antioch until the City Council resolves that the local emergency is terminated.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Antioch hereby continues the declaration of a local emergency and, in compliance with California Government Code Section 8630, the City Council shall review the need for continuing the local emergency declaration at least once every 30 days until termination. * * * * * * * * *
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Antioch at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 24thday of January, 2023 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
___________________________________
ELIZABETH HOUSEHOLDER
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH
M
Agenda Item #
STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: Regular Meeting of January 24, 2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBMITTED BY: Kwame P. Reed, Economic Development Director
APPROVED BY: Cornelius H. Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: ARPA Funded Small Business and Façade Upgrade Grant Programs
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the following resolution:
1. Approving the City’s Small Business Grant Program and Façade Upgrade Program to be administered by the Economic Development Department; and
2. Authorizing the Economic Development Director to disburse American Rescue Plan Act funds up to $500,000 for Small Business Grants and up to $500,000 for Façade Upgrade Grants, provided that all such funds are disbursed in accordance with the required contract provisions for federal awards and the City.
FISCAL IMPACT
The funding amounts for the Small Business and Façade Upgrade Grant Programs total $1 million. The source of the funds is the City of Antioch’s American Rescue Plan Act (“ARPA”) allocation.
DISCUSSION
The City of Antioch received a total of $21,550,900 in ARPA funds. On April 12, 2022, City Council allocated $17,360,000 to identified projects. The sum of $2,500,000 was allocated towards small business resources and programs. Because of the continued impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on small businesses, the City has opted to expand two existing grant programs. The first program is the Small Business Grant Program that previously utilized Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act funding and the second program is the Façade Improvement Program which was a pilot program funded by the General Fund.
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023, Agenda Item M 2
City Council has allocated $500,000 to the Small Business Grant Program and $500,000 to the Façade Upgrade Program in ARPA funds.
The Programs
The City of Antioch is partnering with FORWARD to support eligible small businesses in Antioch. FORWARD is a platform that helps public agencies administer programs through an online portal. The FORWARD team will provide a fully integrated program on behalf of the City of Antioch. FORWARD’s scope of work includes marketing/outreach, an application intake portal, application processing, fraud protection, email, chat, and call center support, and data reporting.
The Small Business Grant program will provide grant payments ranging from $5,000 to $15,000 for eligible small businesses that experienced a negative financial impact due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. The grant funding can be used on the following:
overhead costs, rent relief, payment of back utilities, furniture/fixtures/equipment, cost associated with remaining open and safety protocol compliance, employee retention, repairs and expenses due to theft and vandalism, modernization of operations, and marketing and promotional events. To be eligible, a business must be operating within Antioch City limits, possess an active Antioch business license, have less than 25 employees, cannot be a publicly traded company, and be in an active status with the California Secretary of State. The award amount is based on total sales revenue from 2021.
The Façade Upgrade Program will provide reimbursement grants ranging from $5,000 to $25,000 for eligible small businesses that have experienced a negative financial impact from the COVID-19 Pandemic. The grant funding can be used on the following:
first floor/street level improvements, exterior carpentry, awnings, exterior lighting, doors and windows, permanent signage, painting, murals or other permanent affixed artwork and certain accessibility projects. To be eligible, businesses must be operating within Antioch city limits, possess an active Antioch Business License, cannot be a publicly traded company, be in an active status with the California Secretary of State, have storefront, must pay contractors and subcontractors prevailing wage, and have at 3 years remaining on a current lease. The Façade Upgrade Program award amounts are based on the physical size and location of a business or shopping center. An individual store front is eligible for up to $5,000; an individual storefront on a corner is eligible for up to $7,500; a shopping center with up to 5 stores is eligible for up to $10,000; and a shopping center with 6 or more stores is eligible up to $25,000.
The applicant is required to pay for the entire cost of the project. The grant awarded will be 67% of the total eligible project costs, not exceeding the eligible grant amounts mentioned above. This is consistent with the previously approved Façade Improvement Program.
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023, Agenda Item M 3
If the programs are authorized, applicants can visit the following web address for more information and application intake for both programs will begin February 1, 2023 at the following web address: bit.ly/AntiochSmallBizPrograms
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Small Business Programs – Slide Deck
RESOLUTION NO. 2023/XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH
AUTHORIZING THE PROGROMMATIC APPROVAL AND DISBURSEMENT OF AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT UP TO $500,000 FOR THE SMALL BUSINESS GRANT PROGRAM AND $500,000 FOR THE FAÇADE
UPGRADE GRANT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, Antioch’s small businesses are still experiencing the negative financial impact of the COVID-19;
WHEREAS, the City of Antioch received an allocation of $21.55 million in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding;
WHEREAS, disbursement of ARPA funding is subject to required federal contract provisions for federal awards (2 C.F.R. § 200.327) and the City’s proposed Small Business Grant program and the Façade Upgrade Program shall be administered in compliance with those federal provisions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council allocated $1 million towards small business programs that includes $500,000 towards the Small Business Grant and $500,000 towards the Façade Upgrade Programs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Antioch hereby:
1. Approves the City’s Small Business Grant Program and Façade Upgrade Program to be administered by the Economic Development Department; and
2. Authorizes the Economic Development Director to disburse American Rescue Plan Act funds up to $500,000 for Small Business Grants and up to $500,000 for Façade Upgrade Grants, provided that all such funds are disbursed in accordance with the required contract provisions for federal awards and the City.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Antioch at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 24th day of January 2023 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
___________________________________
ELIZABETH HOUSEHOLDER
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH
N
Agenda Item #
STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE:
TO:
Meeting of January 24, 2023
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
SUBMITTED BY: Thomas Lloyd Smith, City Attorney TLS
SUBJECT: AB 361: Resolution Making Findings Necessary to Conduct Brown Act Meetings by Teleconference for the City Council, Boards, Commissions, and Committees
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing remote teleconference/virtual meetings of the legislative bodies of the City of Antioch, which includes the City Council, boards, commissions, and committees.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no anticipated direct or indirect fiscal impact as a result of this item.
DISCUSSION
Even though cases of COVID-19 have dropped, AB 361 is expressly intended “to protect the health and safety of civil servants and the public and does not preference the experience of members of the public who might be able to attend a meeting in a physical location over members of the public who cannot travel or attend that meeting in a physical location” because of physical status.
The City of Antioch has utilized teleconference technology for some time, and since the State of Emergency is still in effect and state officials are still recommending measures to promote social distancing, especially for immunocompromised and sensitive groups (as described in the attached Resolution), the City’s legislative bodies, which include the City Council, boards, commissions, and committees can continue to meet while providing access to the public via teleconference. This resolution makes the findings required by AB 361, and would apply Citywide – i.e., not just to the City Council but to all City commissions and committees subject to the Brown Act as well. Staff requests passage of the attached resolution, which enables “hybrid meetings” including in-person and teleconference public participation or virtual meetings via teleconference for the City Council, boards, commissions, and committees.
Under this resolution, City Council, commissions, boards, and committees can continue holding virtual meetings or hybrid meetings in compliance with the following more flexible standards:
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #N 2
The City is not required to provide a physical location for the public to attend or provide comments.
Public access to the meeting via a call-in or an internet-based service option must be allowed, but the City is not required to have members of the public attend at each teleconference location.
The City is only required to notice and post an agenda in accordance with the Brown Act provisions for in-person meetings. The agenda shall identify and include an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet- based service option.
When notice of the time of the teleconferenced meeting given or the agenda for the meeting is posted, the City shall also give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment.
The City must provide an opportunity for the public to address and offer comment in real time and cannot require all public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH
MAKING THE REQUIRED FINDINGS TO AUTHORIZE REMOTE
TELECONFERENCE/VIRTUAL MEETINGS OF THE LEGISLATIVE
BODIES OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH FOR A PERIOD OF THIRTY
DAYS PURSUANT TO BROWN ACT PROVISIONS
WHEREAS, the City of Antioch is committed to preserving and nurturing public access and participation in public meetings under the Ralph M. Brown Act;
WHEREAS, all meetings of the City’s legislative bodies, which includes the City Council, boards, commissions, and committees, are open and public, as required by the Ralph M. Brown Act (Cal. Gov. Code 54950 – 54963), such that any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business;
WHEREAS, as recently amended by AB 361, Government Code section 54953(e) of the Brown Act makes provisions for remote teleconferencing participation in meetings by members of a legislative body, without compliance with the requirements of Government Code section 54953(b)(3), subject to the existence of certain conditions; WHEREAS, a required condition is that a state of emergency is declared by the Governor pursuant to Government Code section 8625, proclaiming the existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the state caused by conditions as described in Government Code section 8558;
WHEREAS, it is further required that state or local officials have recommended or imposed measures to promote social distancing, or the legislative body determines by majority vote that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees;
WHEREAS, such conditions now exist in the City; specifically, on March 4, 2020, the Governor of the State of California proclaimed a State of Emergency, and such proclamation remains in effect and has not been rescinded or cancelled, and the “SMARTER” plan that the Governor unveiled specifically indicates that the State of Emergency will not be terminated;
WHEREAS, in addition to the above, state officials have issued orders recommending social distancing measures for certain individuals and in certain situations.
For example, and not by way of limitation, social distancing is referenced in guidance on vaccine doses for persons who are immunocompromised and in certain situations under general industry safety orders;
WHEREAS, the state legislature has also made findings that by removing the requirement that public meetings be conducted at a primary physical location with a quorum of members present, AB 361 protects the health and safety of civil servants and the public and does not preference the experience of members of the public who might be able to attend a meeting in a physical location over members of the public who cannot travel or attend that meeting in a physical location;
WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby find that all of the legislative bodies of the City shall conduct their meetings without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Government Code section 54953, as authorized by subdivision (e) of section 54953, and that such legislative bodies shall comply with the requirements to provide the public with access to the meetings as prescribed in paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) of section 54953; and
WHEREAS, the City will provide live call-in and/or internet service-based option for remote public participation and will provide notice for such participation in the agendas posted in advance of the meetings.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference.
Section 2. Findings. The City Council hereby finds that, as set forth above, due to the novel coronavirus a State of Emergency declared by the Governor of the State of California is currently in effect, and that state or local officials are recommending measures promote social distancing.
Section 3. Remote Teleconference Meetings. The City Manager and City Attorney are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary to conduct open and public meetings for all the legislative bodies of the City in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e) and other applicable provisions of the Brown Act.
Section 4. Effective Date of Resolution. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon its adoption and shall remain in effect until the earlier of 30 days from the effective date of this Resolution, or such time the City Council adopts a subsequent resolution in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e)(3) to extend the time during which the legislative bodies of the City may continue to teleconference. * * * * * * * * *
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Antioch at a meeting thereof, held on the 24th day of January, 2023 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
_____________________________________
ELIZABETH HOUSEHOLDER
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 2
• $500,000 is provided through a Local Early Action Panning (LEAP) grant • $41,439 is provided through the Regional Early Action Planning (REAP) grant • $276,066 is provided through the General Fund.
• Total: $817,505.00
Previous City Council Review June 2022
The City Council previously reviewed the draft Housing Element at their meeting on June 14, 2022 and continued the matter to a date certain of June 28, 2022 when staff was authorized to forward the draft Housing Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The Council enhanced the implementation of program measures related to rent stabilization, tenant protections, and just cause eviction s and directed staff to prepare a rent control ordinance, anti -tenant harassment policies, and a just cause eviction ordinance.
DISCUSSION
Background
California Government Code Sections 65580-65589.8 require jurisdictions throughout the State to update the Housing Element of their General Plans every eight years . The Housing Element is required to ensure the City of Antioch adequately plans for the existing and projected housing needs of residents of all income groups. The City received a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) assignment of 3,016 units at varying income levels for the 2023-2031 planning period.
Table 1: City of Antioch’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Income Category
City of Antioch RHNA
Previous Housing Element
Cycle
(2015-2023)
6th Cycle RHNA
(2023-2031)
Very Low
(Less than 50% of AMI)
349 792
Low
(50-80% of AMI)
205 456
Moderate
(80-120% of AMI)
214 493
Above Moderate
(More than 120% of AMI)
680 1,275
Total 1,448 3,016
Source: Final RHNA Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area: 2023-2031
The 6th Cycle Housing Element has a significant amount of new statutory requirements.
These requirements include the obligation for communities to deliberately address, combat, and relieve disparities in housing that have resulted from past patterns of Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 3
segregation, as well as new public participation and transparency requirements related to draft element updates and revisions. For additional information related to these new requirements, see the staff reports to the Planning Commission dated October 6, 2021 and May 18, 2022.
HCD Review
The draft Housing Element was forwarded to HCD for review on July 1, 2022, which started a 90 -day review period. During that time, staff and the consultants had two conversations with HCD staff, on August 15, 2022, and September 8 and 20, 2022, to discuss the draft Element. On September 29, 2022, the City received a letter (attached) from HCD outlining the changes necessary to bring the City’s Housing Element into compliance with State law. The letter is attached to the staff report.
The City’s comments can be grouped into four categories:
1. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing – Comments requesting additional information and analysis of issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) and proposed housing sites.
2. Housing Programs – Comments requesting changes to implementation of housing programs to include specific commitment, timing, and quantified objectives.
3. Housing Sites – Comments requesting additional information on sites inventory including the suitability of specific sites, realistic density capacity and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites.
4. Government Constraints – Comments requesting additional information on land use controls, fees, permitting and processing procedures, constraints on persons with persons with special needs.
The draft Housing Element has been updated to address the comments received from HCD. Additionally, there are several proposed changes to the Land Use Element, the Zoning Code and Zoning Map, Safety Element, and new Objective Design Standards.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
Environmental Hazards Element
Cities must review and update their Sa fety Element to meet certain requirements concurrently with the Housing Element update. The Safety Element must be reviewed and updated to address wildfire, seismic, geologic, and flood risks. Also considered are climate adaptation and resiliency strategie s. Antioch’s Safety Element is called the Environmental Hazards Element.
• SB 1035 and SB 379. Require all cities to address climate change adaptation and resilience in their General Plan Safety Element. SB 379 is triggered by the next update of a jurisdict ion’s local hazard mitigation plan (updated every five years) or before January 1, 2022, whichever is first. SB 1035 built off SB 379, requiring the Safety Element be updated every eight years upon the next Housing Element update.
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 4
• SB 1241. Applies to communities with very high fire hazard severity or unincorporated communities in state responsibility areas. Communities subject to SB 1241 need to ensure consistency between the Housing and Safety Elements to address fire risk.
AB 2911 strengthened the local very high fire hazard severity zone designation. • AB 2140. Authorizes local governments to adopt the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan with the General Plan Safety Element. Integration by reference or annexation is encouraged through a post-disaster financial incentive to cover local shares of the 25 percent non-federal portion of grant-funded post-disaster projects when approved by the legislature.
Land Use Element Text and Map Amendments
The Land Use Element is being updated to reflect allowing up to 35 units per acre in several of the Focus areas and Specific Plans. The primary change is amending the General Plan map for the site identified in the Housing Element that will be changed to allow up to 35 units per acre. The sites are identified in Chapter 6, Adequate Sites of the Housing Element and Exhibit C of Attachment 2 – Resolution recommending adoption of General Plan.
East Lone Tree Specific Plan Amendments
Updates to the East Lone Tree Specific Plan to clarify multi-family development up to 35 units per acres is permitted on certain sites.
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments and Map Amendments
These amendment s allow the City to implement the policies in the Housing Element, address changes to State Law and implement the Objective Design Standards. This includes updating permitted uses in residential and mixed -use zones, compliance with recent changes to State Law for Low Barrier Navigation Centers and Supportive Housing and changes to the Design Review process for multi -family projects. Similar to the General Plan amendments, the primary changes related to zoning is the rezones of parcels to R -35 as identified in the Housing Element. The list of sites is identified in Chapter 6, Adequate Sites of the Housing Element and Exhibit C of Attachment 5 – Resolution recommending adoption of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance.
Multi-Family Residential Objective Design Standards
State legislation, including Senate Bill No. 35, Senate Bill No. 177, and Senate Bill No. 330, require s housing development projects to be reviewed against objective design standards. Below is a summary of the legislation:
• SB 35. Requires approval of qualified housing projects based on objective regulatory standards
• SB 167. Housing Accountability Act - Local government may not deny, reduce density, or make infeasible housing projects consistent with objective design standards • SB 330. Prohibits imposing or enforcing new design standards established on or after January 1, 2020, that are not objective
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 5
Objective design standards are intended to make the requirements that apply to certain eligible residential projects more predictable and easier to interpret for a ll stakeholders, including decision makers, staff, applicants, and members of the public. Objective design standards are defined in Government Code Sections 65913.4 and 66300(a)(7) as standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public o fficial and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official before submittal.
Analysis
To help prepare revisions to the draft Housing Element, staff and the City’s consultant had phone consultations with HCD reviewer Paul McDougal on December 14, 2022 to discuss how the City can best address their comments. In addition, the City is receiving assistance from the Contra Costa County Planning Collaborative which provided additional technical data related to comments on Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH) topics.
Most of the responses to HCD comments entail providing additional informatio n and pointing to information already in the draft document. HCD also requested the goals of the housing element and programs be revised with discrete timelines (e.g., at least annually or month and year) or timeframes earlier in the planning period. Add itionally, it was requested that programs be revised to include specific commitment and actions toward beneficial impacts or housing outcomes. Program language such as “discuss,” “review,” “develop,” and “explore” should be complemented or replaced with commitment such as “adopt,” “pursue,” “apply,” or “identify.” The Goals, Policies, and Implementation measures have been modified accordingly. Some new Goals, Policies, and Implementation programs have been added to address HCD comments primarily related to assistance for extremely low -income households, emergency shelters, transitional housing, and group homes.
A summary of proposed responses to HCD comments is included in Attachment 7. Below are highlights of responses related to housing sites and new p olicies and programs not included in the initial draft that are needed to address HCD comments:
• Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types (Emergency Shelters) – Comment 3h & 4g:
HCD noted that the Element mentions emergency shelters are permitted in an overlay district. However, the Element should also clarify shelters are permitted without discretionary action and discuss available acreage, including typical parcel sizes and the presence of reuse opportunities, proximity to transportation and services and an y conditions inappropriate for human habitability. The analysis should also list and evaluate development standards. Finally, parking requirements appear inconsistent with statutory requirements that limit parking to staff and as a result, the element should add or modify programs to revise parking requirements.
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 6
The Element has been updated to include the information requested and Implementation Program 3.1.5.a. has been updated stating the City will amend the zoning code to remove the per bed parking requirement for emergency shelters to be consistent with state law.
Implementation Program 3.1.1 has been updated to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow for “low barrier navigation centers” as defined by AB 101 (2019) and to allow “supportive housing” as defined by AB 2162 (2018).
• Land Use Controls – Comment 4a: HCD expressed concern that the R-35 District density range of 30 -35 units per acre was too narrow and that multi -family development is generally less than 30 units per acre. Typically, zoning districts have a greater density range. They were concerned the narrow density range could impact the viability of projects. The density range for the R -35 District has been modified to be 25-35 units per acre. This is more consistent with the 25 to 28 units per acre density range that several local developers have indicated is more viable in Antioch for apartments. To be conservative, the realistic capacity for the number of potential units in R-35 District is based on the minimum required density for the district. With the minimum density reduced from 30 units per acre to 25 units per acre, the realistic capacity for the RHNA has been reduced slightly but still meets the required capacity with a sufficient buffer.
Table 2: Current Summary of Residential Sites Inventory
Very
Low-
Income
Units
Low-
Income
Units
Moderate-
Income
Units
Above
Moderat
e-
Income
Units
Total
Units
2023-2031 RHNA 792 456 493 1,275 3,016
Pipeline Units 91 299 0 4 394
Projected ADUs 41 41 41 13 136
Pending Units 4 0 0 286 290
Future Multi-Family
Development 746 420 804 2,091 4,061
Total 882 760 845 2,394 4,881
Surplus 90 304 352 1,119 1,865
Buffer Percentage1 11% 67% 71% 88% 62%
1 A buffer is required to ensure that sufficient capacity exists in the Housing Element to accommodate the RHNA throughout the 2023-2031 planning period. The City is including an additional capacity buffer of least 20 percent above the RHNA in each income category.
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 7
Table 3: Previous Summary of Residential Sites Inventory
Very
Low-
Income
Units
Low-
Income
Units
Moderate-
Income
Units
Above
Moderat
e-
Income
Units
Total
Units
2023-2031 RHNA 792 456 493 1,275 3,016
Pipeline Units 91 299 0 4 394
Projected ADUs 41 41 41 13 136
Future Multi-Family
Development 967 548 947 2,113 4,575
Total 1,099 888 988 2,130 5,105
Surplus 307 432 495 855 2,089
Buffer Percentage 39% 95% 100% 67% 69%
• Special Needs – Comment Bb: HCD commented that the element must include a program to assist in the development of housing for all special needs households (e.g., elderly, homeless, farmworkers, persons with disabilities, female -headed households).
Implementation Measure 3.1.1 has been updated to provide more specificity and concrete programs to assist persons with special needs.
3.1.1 Housing Opportunities for Special Needs Groups . Expand housing opportunities to meet the special housing needs of the elderly; persons with disabilities, including those who have developmental disabilities; large families; female-headed households; farmworkers, and unhoused individuals. Encourage the development of housing opportunities that typically serve special needs groups by facilitating the development of emergency shelters, transitional housing, single room occupancy (SRO) units, accessory dwelling units ( ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs), residential care facilities, and high -density multi-family housing, including:
▪ Continue to support affordable housing development for special needs groups throughout the city, including in areas that are predominantly single- family residential. Special needs groups include seniors; persons with disabilities, including developmental disabilities; female -headed households; and homeless persons, to reduce the displacement risk for these residents from their existing homes and communities. ▪ Continue to promote the use of the density bonus ordinance, and application process streamlining, to encourage affordable housing, with an emphasis on encouraging affordable housing in high -resource areas and areas with limited rental opportunities currently.
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 8
▪ Facilitate the approval process for land divisions, lot line adjustments, and/or specific plans or master plans resulting in parcel sizes that enable affordable housing development.
▪ Amend the Zoning Ordinance by the end of January 31, 2023, to all ow “supportive housing” as defined by AB 2162 (2018) within all zoning districts which allow for multi-family development. Supportive housing uses shall be reviewed consistent with the review of multi -family uses within the same zoning district.
▪ Amend the Zoning Ordinance by January 31, 2023, to allow for “low barrier navigation centers” as defined by AB 101 (2019) as a permitted use, by - right within mixed use and non -residential zoning districts which allow for multi-family development and are subject to streamlined review and approval.
▪ Amend the Zoning Ordinance by January 31, 2023 to rezone 46 parcels to the city’s R-35 zoning district which allows for the by -right development of multi-family uses between 25 and 35 dwelling units per acre, at and above that of the City’s default density necessary to accommodate housing for lower-income residents.
▪ Develop and adopt Multi-family Residential Objective Design Standards by the end of January 31, 2023, to simplify and facilitate the review, permitting and development of multi-family residential uses within the City’s R -10, R- 20, R-25, and R-35 zoning districts.
▪ Amend the Zoning Ordinance by September 30, 2023, to allow for residential care facilities and group homes for 7 or more persons within zoning districts that permit residential development.
The deadline for adoption of the Housing Element is January 31, 2023. Since HCD has 60 days to review any subsequent revised drafts and provide comments, it is unlikely that many jurisdictions in the Bay Area will be able to meet the deadline.
As noted in previous staff reports, there are consequences for not having a legally compliant Housing Element under State law and in recent years the legislature has repeatedly increased the severity of those consequences. One of the adverse consequences includes “Builder’s Remedy” projects which lately have gar nered much attention in the news.
The “Builder’s Remedy” arises from the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) and generally provides that the City cannot deny a housing development project that meets certain criteria if the City does not have a legally adeq uate Housing Element. Additional information on the “Builder’s Remedy” can be found in Attachment E. The “Builder’s Remedy” applies to emergency shelters and housing development projects “for very low, low-, or moderate-income households” that includes either:
• 20% of the total units sold or rented to lower-income households; • 100% of the units sold or rented to moderate-income households; or Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 9
• 100% of the units sold or rented to middle-income households (earning no more than 150% of median income).
With the proposed revisions to the Housing Element, it is recommended that the Planning Commission and City Council make findings that the Housing Element is in “Substantial Compliance” with State law and that the City Council adopt the Housing Element.
Environmental Hazards Element
The Environmental Hazards Element contains an evaluation of natural and human - caused conditions which may pose certain health and safety hazards to life and property in Antioch and includes a comprehensive program to mitigate identi fied hazards. This Element addresses constraints to development from environmental hazards including geologic and seismic conditions, flooding, wildfire, noise, and hazardous materials. To ensure compliance with new requirements, the Element also addresses concerns associated with climate change adaptation and disaster response.
The Environmental Hazards Element includes the following sections:
• Section 11.2, Goals of the Environmental Hazards Element. • Section 11.3, Regulatory Framework presents the applicable requirements relating to safety elements.
• Section 11.4, Geology and Seismicity Hazards presents information on seismically induced surface rupture, ground shaking, ground failure, tsunami, seiche, slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides , subsidence liquefaction, and other seismic hazards. This section also provides goals, policies, and implementation programs to minimize property damage and personal injury posed by seismic and geologic hazards.
• Section 11.5, Flood Protection includes information on flood hazards, flood hazard zones, flood insurance rate maps, levees, historical flooding, dam failure, identification of state, local and federal agencies with responsibility for flood protection, identification of goals, policies, objectives , and implementation measures for the protection of the community from the unreasonable risk of flooding.
• Section 11.6, Fire Hazards provides information regarding fire hazards, including wildland fire, fire hazard severity zones, identification of local state and federal agencies with responsibility for fire protection, and identification of goals, policies, objectives, and implementation measures for the protection of the community from unreasonable risk of wildland fire and wildfire hazards. • Section 11.7, Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience describes the impacts of a warming climate on Antioch, including increased risk of extreme heat events, more frequent and intense storms, sea level rise, and wildfire, and includes goals, policies, and programs to reduce and adapt to the impacts from climate change. • Section 11.8, Noise describes auditory impacts and sounds that may produce physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation, and sleep.
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 10
• Section 11.9, Hazardous Materials includes information relating to risks associated with hazardous materials, transportation, and storage, and goals, policies, and implementation programs to reduce risks to life, property, and the environment resulting from the use, storage, transportation, and disposal of these materials. • Section 11.10, Disaster Response presents information on the City’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), including goals, policies, and implementation programs to provide effective emergency response.
• Section 11.11, Evacuation analyzes evacuation routes throughout and around the City which are utilized in the movement of people that are at risk of being impacted by a disaster to a safer location.
State law changes require municipalities to update the Saf ety Element (which Antioch calls Environmental Hazards) in conjunction with the Housing Element. Below is an outline of the changes:
1. In addition to updating the Element to comply with new State laws, the text and map in the Element have been updated to reflect current conditions.
2. Fire Hazard Policies 11.6.2.a.-11.6.2.n. have been added.
3. Text for Geology and Seismicity have been updated to reflect during conditions.
4. Chapter 11.7, Climate Change Adaption is a new chapter, as required by State law, with new text, goals and policies.
5. Noise Policy 11.8.2.k related to temporary construction has been added.
6. Several new policies related to Hazardous Materials have been in added including:
a. 11.9.2.g. Facilities Siting
b. 11.9.2. Hazardous Materials Policies
c. 11.9.2.k. Facilities Management
d. 11.9.2. Hazardous Materials Policies
e. 11.9.2.t. Hazardous Buildings Materials
f. 11.9.2. Hazardous Materials Policies
g. 11.9.2.u. Hazardous Materials Contamination
h. 11.9.2.v. Hazardous Materials Contamination
7. 11.11 Evacuation is a new chapter, as required by State law, with text, goals, and policies.
Land Use Element
Changes to the Land Use Element include the following:
1. Amendment to Land Use of 154 parcels to High Density Residential Land Use.
2. Amendment to Anti och Commercial Focus Area to allow multi -family residential development, as identified by the Housing Element, consistent with the High-Density Residential Land Use Category.
3. Amendment to the Eastern Waterfront Employment Area Focus Area to allow multi- family residential development, as identified by the Housing Element, consistent with the High-Density Residential Land Use Category.
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 11
4. Amendment to A Street Interchange Focus Area to allow multi -family residential development, as identified by the Housing Element, consistent with the High-Density Residential Land Use Category; and
5. Amendment to East Lone Tree Specific Plan Area to allow multi -family residential development, as identified by the Housing Element, consistent with the High-Density Residential Land Use Category.
East Lone Tree Specific Plan Amendments
The Housing Element identifies several properties in the East Lone Tree Specific Plan for multi-family development. The Specific Plan is being amended to specify that certain properties on Empire Avenue and Apollo Court, as identified by the Housing Element, can develop with multi-family residential up to 35 units per acre. The discussion of Residential Areas, Land Use and Land Use Districts, Site, Height, and Density Criteria are being amended to reflect this change.
Zoning Text and Map Amendments
1. Add definition for Low Barrier Navigation Center and modify the definition for Supportive Housing.
2. Amend the allowed densities in the R-20, R-25 and R-35 districts.
3. Update the Table of Allowed Land Uses to comply with State law requirements.
4. Update the Height, Area & Setback Regulations for Primary Structure to reflect the change in the minimum density in the R -35 district to 25 units per acre from 30 units per acre.
5. Revise the Multi-Family Residential Standards to reflect that multi-family is a permitted use and new Multi-family Objective Design Standards are to replace the existing multi- family standards in the code.
6. Update Design Review Procedures, Duties and Responsibilities to reference the Multi- family Objective Design Standards.
7. Update Special Use Regulations to comply with state law requirements for Low Barrier Navigation Centers to allow them as permitted uses in non-residential and mixed-use zones that allow residential uses.
Multi-Family Residential Objective Design Standards
The Multi-Family Objective Design Standards provide key objective requirements for the development of multi -family residential and mixed -use development on sites zoned for multi-family housing in the City of Antioch. The standards are based on the Objective Design Standards contained in the City’s Commercial Infill Housing Overlay District Design Standards document that were reviewed by the Planning Commission on March 16, 2022 and approved by the City Council on April 12, 2022. The document contains Objective Design Standards for five topic areas:
• Site design
• Building design
• Landscaping
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 12
• Lighting
• Signage
Each standard type begins with an intent statement, followed by specific sta ndards. The intent statements are provided to help the reader understand the overarching principle behind the standard requirements and do not serve as review criteria. The Objective Standards would be used by Planning Staff and the Planning Commission whe n reviewing multi-family and mixed-use projects with residential uses.
Development standards (i.e. , setbacks, lot coverage, and density) for multi -family residential development and different zoning districts can be found in Table 9 -5.601 of Article 6, He ight and Area Regulations in the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Parking requirements can be found in City Zoning Ordinance Section 9 -5.1703.1, Off -Street Parking Requirements by Use.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) an Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the project. The purpose of a DEIR is to evaluate and inform the public and decision makers of a project’s potential environmental impacts. The DEIR is generally divided into project-related impacts, cumulative impacts, and project alternatives. The Draft EIR and the associated technical appendices are available on the Housing Element website (Link to DEIR & DEIR Technical Appendix).
In summary, the Draft EIR found that the project would result in significant unavoidable environmental impacts related to transportation. Implementation of the Project would generate home-based Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per resident that is greater than 85 percent of the Citywide average home -based VMT per resident. Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 Individual housing project development proposals that do not screen out from VMT impact analysis shall provide a quantitative VMT analysis, projects which result in a significant impact shall include travel demand management measures and physical measures to reduce VMT to a less -than-significant level. Potential measures include unbundled parking, car, bike, and/or scooter -sharing programs and subsidized transit passes.
Final EIR
CEQA requires that, following public review and comment on the Draft EIR, a Final EIR (FEIR) and responses to written comments be prepared. The Final EIR includes all agency and public comments (writte n and verbal) received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Project. Written comments on the Draft EIR were received by the City during the public comment period from September 2, 2022, through October 17, 2022. The FEIR includes written respon ses to each comment received. The Final EIR document has been prepared in accordance with the CEQA requirements to be considered by the decision-makers during project hearings (Link to FEIR).
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 13
This Final EIR has been prepared to respond to comments received on the Draft EIR, which are addressed within Chapter II, Response to Comments, of the Final EIR; and to present corrections, revisions, and other clarifications and amplifications to the Draft EIR.
These revisions, including project updates, made in response to comments on the Draft EIR, and as a result of the City of Antioch’s ongoing planning efforts, are individually listed within Chapter III, Revisions of the Draft EIR, of the Final EIR.
A majority of these revisions are a result of modifications to the Draft EIR’s Project Description which necessitate related revisions to the various other sections of the Draft EIR. These revisions to the Project Description are primarily a result of edi ts to the Housing Element Update component of the Project. These edits include:
• Revisions to the Housing Sites Inventory of the Draft EIR’s Project Description to include pipeline units and projected accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in the overall total development potential under the project. While the pipeline units and ADUs were included within the RHNA Credits section of the Draft EIR, the unit counts were not included within the overall housing unit totals for the Project. • Revisions to the Rezonings se ction of the Draft EIR’s Project Description to reflect a decrease in the permitted minimum density allowed within the City’s existing R -35 zoning district from 30 dwelling units per acre to 25 dwelling units per acre.
Accordingly, the R -35 zoning district would allow for housing development between 25 and 35 dwelling units per acre.
• Due to the realistic capacity of housing sites within the Housing Sites Inventory being calculated using the minimum permitted density of proposed zoning districts, these revisions result in an overall net decrease in the total realistic capacity of the Housing Sites Inventory. Additionally, due to a majority of the housing sites included within the Housing Site Inventory planned to accommodate lower -income housing units being rezoned to the R-35 zoning district, this decrease in minimum permitted density results in an overall decrease in the total number of lower -income housing units that can be accommodated by the project’s R-35 rezonings and Housing Sites Inventory. • Revisions to the Rezonings section of the Draft EIR’s Project Description to reflect revisions to the proposed rezoning districts included within the Draft EIR, specifically the City’s existing R -25 zoning district. Whereas the Draft EIR reflected proposed revisions to the R -25 district, primarily renaming the district to “R -30,” this Final EIR does not include those proposed revisions. The City’s existing R -25 zoning district is no longer proposed to be modified as part of the project. • Revisions to the Housing Sites Inventory section of the Draft EIR’s Project Description to reflect the inclusion of a new housing site located in the southeastern portion of the project area, Site No. 183, Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 056 -120-098. This new housing site is approximat ely 6.4 acres in size and is proposed to accommodate a total of 134 above moderate -income units as part of the project. To accommodate development of these units, the new housing site would have its General Plan land use designation amended and be rezoned to the R -25 zoning district as part of the project.
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 14
• Revisions to the Housing Sites Inventory section of the Draft EIR’s Project Description to reflect the inclusion of a new housing site located in the southeastern portion of the project area, Site No. 184, APN 053-060-063. This new housing site is approximately
10.2 acres in size and is proposed to accommodate a total of 216 above moderate - income units as part of the project. Following publishing of the Draft EIR the City of Antioch received a development application for the development of 216 above moderate-income housing units on Site No. 184, in conjunction with the development of housing sites No. 113, 114, and 115 which were already included within the Draft EIR’s Housing Sites Inventory (see bullet below).
• Revisions to the RHNA Credits and Housing Sites Inventory sections of the Draft EIR’s Project Description to reflect the re -classification of three multi -family housing sites (Sites No. 113, 114, 115), and inclusion of one new site (Site No. 184) as "pending units" as part of the project. Pending units are housing units proposed to be developed within the 6 th cycle planning period, but which have not yet received certificate of occupancies. This revision is necessitated by the City of Antioch’s rec eipt of an application for housing development on the four housing sites during the public comment review period of the Draft EIR. This application for development proposes the development of housing on the four sites at approximately 11 dwelling units per acre, as permitted by the sites’ existing zoning, for a total of 216 above moderate - income units.
• Additionally, since the application for development received by the City proposes development consistent with the existing zoning of Housing Sites No. 113 , 114, 115, these sites are no longer proposed to be rezoned as part of the Project. Accordingly, this revision also necessitates revisions to the Rezonings section of the Draft EIR’s Project Description as well.
• Revisions to the Housing Sites Inventory and RHNA Credits sections of the Draft EIR’s Project Description to reflect the reclassification of Housing Sites No. 123, APN 065- 110-006, as "pending units" due to the City of Antioch receiving an application for housing development on the site during the public comment review period of the Draft EIR. Pending units are housing units expected to be developed during the 6 th Cycle planning period, but which have not yet received certificate s of occupancy. This application for development proposes housing deve lopment on the site at approximately 25 dwelling units per acre, as permitted by the site’ s existing zoning and State Density Bonus Law, for a total of 4 very low -income units and 70 above moderate-income units, totaling 74 units. Additionally, since the a pplication for development received by the City proposes development consistent with the existing zoning of Housing Site No. 123, the site is no longer proposed to be rezoned as part of the Project. Accordingly, this revision also necessitates revisions to the Rezonings section of the Draft EIR’s Project Description as well. • Revisions to the Biological Resources section of the Draft EIR to reflect responses to Comment Letter A3 within this Final EIR.
• The Reduced VMT Alternative has been updated to account for the two new housing sites located in T raffic Analysis Zones with a home -based VMT per resident that is above the significance threshold.
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 15
Statement of Overriding Considerations
The EIR has found that the project would result in significant unavoidab le environmental impacts related to transportation. As such, a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared and is included as an attachment to the staff report. CEQA Guidelines Section 15043 provides that a public agency may approve projects even though the project may cause a significant effect on the environment if the agency makes a fully informed and publicly disclosed decision that:
a. There is no feasible way to lessen or avoid the significant effect; and b. Public benefits from the project outweigh the significant environmental impacts of the project as set forth in a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a) “requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region - wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region -wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposal project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental eff ects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable.” Further, “[w]hen the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record,” referred to as the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Section 15093(b)).
The Statement of Overriding Considerations attached to the proposed CEQA resolution sets forth the following as benefits from the project:
a. The Project will improve and conserve existing housing stock. b. The Project will facilitate housing production and provide Antioch Residents w ith a variety of housing options.
c. The Project will redevelop under-utilized and vacant sites. d. The Project will mitigate natural and human-caused hazards, thereby improving public safety and resiliency; and
e. The Project will ensure that all residents have eq ual protection from environmental hazards.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Approval of the project also requires adoption of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) designed to ensure the Project’s compliance with the mitigation measures. The Draft EIR identified mitigation measures that would reduce the environmental impacts generated by the project to less than significant, except transportation which remains significant and unavoidable. A MMRP has been prepared is included with the Final EIR (FEIR). Compliance with the MMRP would be a condition for project approval for individual housing developments.
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 16
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 4, 2023 to review the revised Housing Element Update, Environmental Hazards Element Update, and the associated General Plan Text and Land Use Map Amendments, Specific Plan Amendment, and Zoning Text and Map Amendments, Multi -family Objective Design Standards , and Environmental Impact Report. The Commission received public comment regarding the City’s land use regulations pertaining to transitional housing, specifically the desire to allow transitional housing as a permitted use in zones allowing residential uses. Allowing transitional housing as a permitted use in residential zones is included in Implementing Program 3.1.1 and 3.1.5 which require that the zoning code be amended by September 30, 2023, consistent with State law.
Additionally, the Commission provided feedback and minor suggested edits to the Multi - Family Objective Design Standards to remove redundant text.
The Commission voted 4 -0 to recommend the City Council approve the following resolutions:
1. Certification of the Environmental Impact Report
2. Approval for the Housing Element
3. Approval for the Land Use and Environmental Hazards Amendments
4. Approval of Amendments to the East Lone Tree Specific Plan
5. Approval of the Zoning Text Amendments and Zoning Map Amendments
6. Approval of the Objective Design Standards
NEXT STEPS
Following City Council review of the Housing Element, it will be forwarded to HCD for review. HCD has 60 days to review the revisions. I f comments are received, staff will respond and update the text if necessary. If policy changes are required, the Housing Element will be returned to the Planning Commission and City Council for review.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report and mak ing all the findings required to approve the project, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Housing Element, Environmental Hazards Element, Land Use Element Update and General Plan Map Amendments, East Lone Tree Specific Plan Amendment, Zone Code and Zoning Map Amendments and Objective Design Standards
B. Resolution adopting a General Plan Amendment to Update the Housing Element C. Resolution adopting a General Plan Amendment to update the Land Use and Environmental Hazards Elements
D. Ordinance adopting an amendment to the East Lone Tree Specific Plan E. Ordinance amending the Zoning Code and Zoning Map
Antioch City Council Report
January 24, 2023 Agenda Item #6 17
F. Resolution adopting Multi-Family Objective Design Standards G. Project Timeline
LINKED DOCUMENTS FOR REFERENCE
A. Housing Element Update
B. Environmental Hazards Element Update
C. DEIR
D. FEIR
E. Planning Commission Staff Report for the January 4, 2023, meeting F. PC Resolution 2023-01
Resolution of the Planning Commission recommending the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report
G. PC Resolution 2023-02
Resolution of the Planning Commission recommending City Council approval for the Housing Element
H. PC Resolution 2023-03
Resolution of the Planning Commission recommending City Council approval for the Land Use and Environmental Hazards Amendments
I. PC Resolution 2023-04
Resolution of the Planning Commission recommending City Council approval of amendments to the East Lone Tree Specific Plan
J. PC Resolution 2023-05
Resolution of the Planning Commission recommending City Council approval of the Zoning Text Amendments and Zoning Map Amendments
K. PC Resolution 2023-06
Resolution of the Planning Commission recommending City Council approval of the Multi-Family Objective Design Standards
CI
TY CO
UNCIL
RESOLUTION # 2023-**
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH
CERTIFYING THE HOUSING ELEMENT EIR AND ADOPTING CEQA FINDINGS, A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING
AND REPORTING PROGRAM
W
HEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), in conjunction with the State CEQA Guidelines, requires that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts; W
HEREAS, before the City Council may consider recommendations on approval of any or all of the Housing Element activities it must first consider that the EIR has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and pursuant to requirements of CEQA Guidelines section 15090; W
HEREAS, on November 8, 2021, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines”), the City prepared a Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the City of Antioch 6th Cycle Housing Element (“Housing Element” or “Project”); W
HEREAS, the Notice of Preparation was circulated to and available for comment by local, state, and federal agencies and other interested parties between November 8, 2021 and December 8, 2021;
W
HEREAS, the City held a public scoping meeting on the Draft EIR on November 17, 2021;
W
HEREAS, on September 2, 2022, the city prepared and circulated for public comment the Draft EIR for the Housing Element;
W
HEREAS, the public review period on the Draft EIR ran from September 2, 2022 to October 17, 2022, for a total of 45 days of review;
W
HEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15088 and 15089, the city, as lead agency under CEQA, has completed the Final EIR for the Housing Element, W
HEREAS, the City prepared written responses to the comments received during the comment period, which together with revisions to the DEIR and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and the DEIR constitutes the Final EIR (“FEIR”); W
HEREAS, this document contains the City’s certification of the EIR, its CEQA findings, and its statement of overriding considerations supporting approval of the Project considered in the EIR. The Final EIR is State Clearinghouse No. 2021110146; W
HEREAS, all of the documents referenced in the recitals above are incorporated by reference and can be found on the City of Antioch’s web site at https://www.antiochca.gov/community-development-depar tment/planning-division/housing- element-docs/;
ATTACHMENT A
A1
W
HERE
AS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 4, 2023, considered all public comments received, the presentation by City staff, the staff report, and all other pertinent documents regarding the proposed request and adopted Resolution 2023- 01- recommending that the City Council certify the Housing Element EIR and adopt CEQA findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; W
HEREAS, on January 12, 2023 a public hearing notice was published in the East County Times and posted in three public places pursuant to California Government Code Section 65090 for the City Council public hearing on January 24, 2023; and W
HEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on January 2 4, 2023, considered all public comments received, the presentation by City staff, the staff report, and all other pertinent documents regarding the proposed request.
N
OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND DETERMINED that the City Council of the City of Antioch finds as follows:
1. The abov
e recitals are true and correct and together with the staff report and the application materials, including without limitation the FEIR, and all other documents, reports, studies, memoranda, maps, oral and written testimony, and materials in the City's file for the applications and the Project, and all adopted City planning documents relating to the Project and all associated approved and certified environmental documents, have together served as an adequate and appropriate evidentiary basis for the findings and actions set forth in this Resolution.
2. The C
ity of Antioch is the lead agency under CEQA for preparing the FEIR, and is the entity with final decision-making authority, as defined in Section 15356 of the CEQA Guidelines, with regard to approval of the Project
3. The FE
IR for the project was presented to the City Council, that the FEIR was prepared, published, circulated, reviewed and completed in full compliance with State law and CEQA Guidelines, that there was adequate public review of the DEIR, that it has considered all comments on the DEIR and responses to comments, that the FEIR adequately discusses all significant environmental issues, and that the FEIR reflects the indep endent judgment and analysis of the City Council. The City Council further finds that it has reviewed and considered the information in the FEIR prior to making the following findings.
4. The i
nformation added in the FEIR does not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation, but rather that additional information clarifies or amplifies an adequate EIR.
5. P
ursuant to CEQA section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines section 15091, and in support of its recommendation of approval of the Project, the City Council has reviewed and considered the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Project, attached hereto as Exhibit A incorporated herein by reference, finds that such Findings of Fact are supported by substantial evidence.
6. P
ursuant to CEQA Section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines section 15091 and in support of its approval of the Project the City Council has reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) that requires all mitigation measures described in the FEIR be implemented by means of Project conditions, agreements or other measures, as set forth in the MMRP, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference.
A2
7. The r
ecor
d of proceedings is available for review by responsible agencies and interested members of the public during normal business hours at 200 H St, Antioch, CA 94509.
The custodian of these documents is the City of Antioch’s City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Housing Element Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is hereby CERTIFIED and the CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A), and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (EXHIBIT B) are ADOPTED pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Antioch at a regular meeting thereof held on the 24th day of January 2023, by the following vote:
AYES:
N
OES:
ABSEN
T:
ABST
AIN:
_____________________________________________
ELIZABETH HOUSEHOLDER,
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH
A3
EX
HIBIT A
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
A4
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The following findings of fact and statement of overriding considerations have been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code section 21000 et seq; "CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs. title 14, section 15000 et seq.) by Urban Planning Partners for the City of Antioch in connection with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Housing, Environmental Hazards, and Environmental Justice Elements (the Project), SCH #2021110146. These CEQA findings are attached and incorporated by reference into each and every staff report, resolution and ordinance associated with approval the project.
These findings are based on substantial evidence in the entire administrative record and references to specific reports and specific pages of documents are not intended to identify those sources as the exclusive basis for the findings.
A. BACKGROUND
The Project is being proposed by the City of Antioch (City) to comply with California Government Code Section 65580-65589.8, which requires local jurisdictions to update the Housing Element of their General Plans every eight years to adequately plan for the regional housing needs of residents of all income groups. The Project includes the following components:
Housing Element. Adoption and implementation of the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Update (2023-2031), including the adoption and implementation of rezoning and General Plan amendments to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).
Environmental Hazards Element. Adoption and implementation of related updates to the City’s Environmental Hazards Element.
Environmental Justice (EJ) Element. Adoption and implementation of associated EJ General Plan policies per Senate Bill (SB) 1000.
These three actions are together considered a “Project” under CEQA regulations.
The Draft EIR analyzed the development of up to 4,575 housing units, a scenario slightly different from what is currently proposed. As a result of comments received on the DEIR during the public comment review period, as well as the city’s ongoing planning efforts which necessitate project A5
up
dates, the revised project numbers increase the maximum housing units by 306 units to 4,881 units.
The revisions to the Project were considered in this Final EIR and found that none of the proposed revisions have the potential to modify the Draft EIR findings relative to significant impacts and mitigation measures for any of the topics considered in the Draft EIR. Additionally, none of the proposed revisions would trigger the need for new or different mitigation. As such, the project revisions are not “significant new information” triggering recirculation under CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
Pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the city circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) that briefly described the Project and the environmental topics that would be evaluated in the EIR. The NOP was published on November 8, 2021, and the public comment period for the scope of the EIR lasted from November 8, 2021, to December 8, 2021. The NOP was also sent to responsible and trustee agencies, organizations, and interested individuals. Additionally, the NOP was sent to the State Clearinghouse. One public scoping session was held for the project in conjunction with the Planning Commission meeting on November 17, 2021. Comments received by the city on the NOP at the public scoping meeting were taken into account during the preparation of the EIR. Comments received included comments encouraging infill development in Antioch and to use applicable state regulations related to transportation and tribal consultation. The NOP and the written public review comments are included in Appendix A of the Draft EIR.
The Final EIR analyzes the project’s potential environmental impacts to land use and planning; transportation; air quality; greenhouse gas emissions; energy; cultural and tribal resources; aesthetics; biological resources; geology and soils; hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology and water quality; noise; population and housing; public services and recreation; utilities and service systems; wildfire; and agricultural and forestry resources. The environmental topics not warranting detailed evaluation included mineral resources and is considered under Effects Found Not to be Significant in the Draft EIR.
The Draft EIR was made available for public review on September 2, 2022 and distributed to applicable local and State agencies. Copies of the Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR (NOA) were mailed to all individuals previously requesting to be notified of the Draft EIR, in addition to those agencies and individuals who received a copy of the NOP. Copies of the Draft EIR were also distributed to appropriate state and local agencies and made available for public review at City Hall and on the City’s website.
The public comment period for the Draft EIR ended on October 17, 2022. Only three local/State agencies provided comments on the Draft EIR during the public review period.
A6
With this background in mind, the City Council of the City of Antioch (Council) makes the following findings concerning the environmental impacts of the project, the feasibility of the project alternatives, and the benefits of the project that override the significant and unavoidable impacts of the project.
B. FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS The Final EIR identifies certain potentially significant effects that could result from the Project.
The Final EIR analyzes the Project’s potential environmental impacts to land use and planning; transportation; air quality; greenhouse gas emissions; energy; cultural and tribal resources; aesthetics; biological resources; geology and soils; hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology and water quality; noise; population and housing; public services and recreation; utilities and service systems; wildfire; and agricultural and forestry resources. The Final EIR identified significant environmental effects in the areas of air quality and transportation.
These topics are discussed below. The mitigation measures described below will be imposed as conditions of approval on the Project. The City finds that the inclusion of these mitigation measures as part of project approval could reduce impacts on air quality to levels that are less than significant, but not transportation impacts.
As described in greater detail below, after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, the Project could result in the following significant and unavoidable impacts, which will be overridden by the specific considerations that are described in this document’s conclusion in Section D of this document:
Impact TRANS-1: Implementation of the Project would generate home-based VMT per resident that is greater than 85 percent of the citywide average home-based VMT per resident. (S)Construction-generated noise would create a substantial temporary increase in the noise environments at surrounding uses including public and residential uses (Impact TRANS-1).
While Impact TRANS-1 could be reduced to a less-than-significant level, the effectiveness of the above associated mitigation measures in reducing an individual project’s VMT impact to a less- than-significant level cannot be determined in this analysis. Therefore, the impact for projects which do not screen out from VMT impact analysis would conservatively remain significant and unavoidable with mitigation.
A7
1. Air Quality
a. Project-Level Construction Emissions
Impact AIR-1: Construction of residential projects with more than 114 single-family units or 240 multi-family units has the potential to result in criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions above the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD’s) recommended thresholds of significance for construction. (S)
Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Residential Construction Controls for Criteria Air Pollutants.
For construction of residential projects with more than 114 single-family units or 240 multi- family units, the project applicant shall retain a qualified air quality consultant to identify measures to reduce the project’s criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions below the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD’s) recommended thresholds of significance. Emission reduction measures may include, but are not limited to, the use of off- road equipment with engines that meet the Environmental Protection Agency’s Tier 4 emission standards or engines retrofitted with the most effective Verified Diesel Emissions Control Strategy (VDECS) certified by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Quantified emissions and identified reduction measures shall be submitted to the City (and the Air District if specifically requested) for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits and the approved criteria air pollutant reduction measures shall be implemented during construction. (LTS)
b. Project-Level Operation Emissions
Impact AIR-2: Operation of residential projects with more than 325 single-family units or 451 multi-family units has the potential to result in criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions above the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD’s) recommended thresholds of significance for operations. (S)
Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Residential Operation Controls for Criteria Air Pollutants. For operation of residential projects with more than 325 single-family units or 451 multi-family units, the project applicant shall retain a qualified air quality consultant to identify measures to reduce the project’s criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions below the BAAQMD’s recommended thresholds of significance. Emission reduction measures may include, but are not limited to, implementation of a transportation design management plan, compliance with electric vehicle requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2, or excluding natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing in the building design. Quantified emissions and identified reduction measures shall be submitted to the City (and BAAQMD if specifically requested) for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. (LTS) A8
c. Exposure to Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants during Construction
Impact AIR-3: Future residential development within the city has the potential to generate TACs and PM2.5 emissions from vehicle trips and emergency generators (if required), which could substantially contribute to the existing poor air quality in the city and expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. (S)
Mitigation Measure AIR-3a: Residential Construction Controls for Diesel Particulate Matter. For construction of residential projects with a construction duration greater than 6 months that are located in an area defined as needing “Best Practices” or “Further Study” on the BAAQMD’s Planning Healthy Places Map (https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and- climate/planning-healthy-places), the project applicant shall apply one of the following two measures:
The project applicant shall retain a qualified air quality consultant to prepare a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) in accordance with current guidance from the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment to determine the health risks to sensitive receptors exposed to diesel particulate matter (DPM) from project construction emissions. The HRA shall be submitted to the City (and BAAQMD if specifically requested) for review and approval. If the HRA concludes that the health risks are at or below acceptable levels, then DPM reduction measures are not required. If the HRA concludes that the health risks exceed acceptable levels, DPM reduction measures shall be identified to reduce the health risks to acceptable levels. Identified DPM reduction measures shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits and the approved DPM reduction measures shall be implemented during construction.
OR
All off-road diesel equipment shall be equipped with the most effective VDECS available for the engine type (Tier 4 engines automatically meet this requirement) as certified by CARB. The equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned in accordance with manufacturer specifications.
Mitigation Measure AIR-3b: Residential Emergency Generators. Require all emergency generators for new residential development projects (if required) to use best available control technology for air pollutant emissions, such as using engines that meet the Environmental Protection Agency’s Tier 4 Final emission standards or are battery powered. (LTS) A9
2. Transportation
a. VMT Analysis
Impact TRANS-1: Implementation of the Project would generate home-based VMT per resident that is greater than 85 percent of the citywide average home-based VMT per resident. (S) Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Implement VMT Reduction Measures. Individual housing project development proposals that do not screen out from VMT impact analysis shall provide a quantitative VMT analysis using the methods applied in this EIR, with modifications if appropriate based on future changes to City of Antioch practices and CCTA VMT analysis methodology guidelines. Projects which result in a significant impact shall include travel demand management measures and physical measures to reduce VMT to a less-than- significant level. Measures may include, but are not limited to, those described below, which have been identified as potentially VMT reducing in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity. 17 Potential
VMT reduction estimates are included below, but detailed requirements, calculation steps, and limitations are described in the CAPCOA Handbook. In addition, application of one or more measures is generally expected to result in a net VMT reduction of 10 percent or less for development projects in suburban settings such as Antioch. Unbundle parking costs (i.e., sell or lease parking separately from the housing unit).
Effectiveness: up to 15.7 percent reduction in GHG from VMT per the CAPCOA Handbook.
Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, or scooter sharing programs. Effectiveness: 0.15 to 0.18 percent reduction in GHG from VMT for car share, 0.02 to– 0.06 percent for bike share, and 0.07 percent for scooter share, per the CAPCOA Handbook. The higher car share and bike share values are for electric car and bike share programs. Subsidize transit passes for residents of affordable housing. Effectiveness: up to 5.5 percent reduction in GHG from VMT per the CAPCOA Handbook.
In addition to the on-site measures noted above, individual housing projects that are above the VMT threshold could potentially contribute to future VMT mitigation fee programs, banks, or exchanges. No regional VMT mitigation programs currently exist; however, the CCTA is currently evaluating different mitigation program frameworks which may lead to a Countywide or sub-regional VMT mitigation program. Should such a program be implemented, development projects could potentially pay into a fee program or purchase mitigation credits to achieve needed VMT mitigation instead of, or in addition to, on-site TDM measures. (LTS)
A10
C. ALTERNATIVES TO THIS PROJECT
For purposes of this EIR, these three actions are together considered a “Project” under CEQA regulations.
The three Project alternatives analyzed in the EIR include:
The No Project/No Build Alternative, which assumes the continuation of existing conditions within the City;
The Reduced VMT Alternative, which would eliminate moderate and above moderate sites with home-based vehicle miles traveled (VMT) above the significance threshold from the Housing Sites Inventory (Sites Inventory). All sites located in TAZs with home- based VMT below the significance threshold would be retained; and The Reduced RHNA Buffer Alternative, which would reduce the buffer to 25.0 percent, which is within the 15- to 30-percent buffer recommended by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to ensure that jurisdictions remain in compliance with the State Housing Law and the No Net Loss Requirements Law (Government Code Section 65863).
While both the Reduced VMT Alternative and Reduced RHNA Buffer Alternative would reduce the impacts under most environmental resources, there is substantial evidence that the alternatives identified in the EIR would not avoid or substantially lessen the significant unavoidable impacts of the Project and/or would not meet the Project objectives. The EIR includes detailed analysis on the potential impacts of each alternative by environmental topic.
After reviewing the EIR and other relevant information in the administrative record, the Council determines that the three alternatives are infeasible. The reasons for rejecting each alternative are discussed in this section. The reasons for rejecting each alternative are independent and each reason alone is sufficient to support a determination that the alternative is infeasible.
1. Alternative 1: No Project/No Build Alternative
a. Description
Under this alternative, the city would continue to implement the adopted 2015-2023 Housing Element and Environmental Hazards Element adopted with the 2003 General Plan, and the proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element and Environmental Hazards Element would not be adopted. In addition, the proposed Environmental Justice Policies would not be adopted.
A11
b. Comparison to Project
This alternative would partially achieve the other goals of the Project, but not to the same degree, including the following:
Conserve and improve the existing housing supply to provide adequate, safe, and decent housing for existing Antioch residents.
Facilitate the development of special purpose housing to meet the needs of the elderly, persons with disabilities, large families, and the unhoused. Remove governmental constraints inhibiting the development of housing required to meet identified needs in Antioch.
Provide equal housing opportunities for all existing and future Antioch residents. c. Findings
Implementation of the No Project alternative would require that future housing development would be developed in accordance with the 2015-2023 Housing Element and would continue to have a development potential of 1,448 units. This alternative would result in a total net reduction in development potential by 3,433 units when compared to the Project and a 1,568-unit shortfall of the City’s RHNA obligation.
Based on the foregoing findings, and even though the No Project/No Build alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, the Council rejects Alternative 1.
2. Alternative 2: Reduced VMT Alternative
a. Description
Under this alternative, housing sites which are not targeted for very-low or low-income housing and located in Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) with home-based vehicle miles traveled (VMT) above the significance threshold would be eliminated from the Housing Sites Inventory (Sites Inventory). All sites located in TAZs with home-based VMT below the significance threshold would be retained.
b. Comparison to Project
The Reduced VMT Alternative would achieve many of the Project objectives, including those related to:
A12
Facilitate the development of a broad array of housing types to meet the City’s fair share o
f regional housing needs and accommodate new and current Antioch residents of diverse ages and socioeconomic backgrounds.
Conserve and improve the existing housing supply to provide adequate, safe, and decent housing for existing Antioch residents.
Facilitate the development of special purpose housing to meet the needs of the elderly, persons with disabilities, large families, and the unhoused. Remove governmental constraints inhibiting the development of housing required to meet identified needs in Antioch.
Provide equal housing opportunities for all existing and future Antioch residents.
Most importantly, this alternative would allow the city to meet its 6th-cycle RHNA obligations, though with less margin for development of some sites at lower than maximum densities. c. Findings
Based on the Sites Inventory, this alternative would result in a total net reduction in development potential by 774 units when compared to the Project and would continue to exceed the City’s RHNA obligation by 1,091 units.
Based on the foregoing findings, and even though the Reduced VMT alternative would reduce Project impacts associated with transportation, the Council rejects Alternative 2.
3. Alternative 3: Reduced RHNA Buffer Alternative
a. Description
This alternative would reduce the buffer above the City’s RHNA obligation in comparison with the Project, which provides a buffer of 1,865 units beyond the City’s RHNA obligation of 3,016 units, providing an overall buffer of 62.0 percent. Under this alternative, the overall RHNA buffer would be reduced to 25.0 percent, which is within the 15- to 30-percent buffer recommended by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to ensure that jurisdictions remain in compliance with the State Housing Law and the No Net Loss Requirements Law (Government Code Section 65863). A 25-percent buffer was applied to the number of the City’s RHNA unit obligation in each income category, as well as to the total unit count.
A13
b. Comparison to Project
The Reduced RHNA Buffer Alternative would achieve many of the Project objectives, including those related to:
Facilitate the development of a broad array of housing types to meet the City’s fair share o
f regional housing needs and accommodate new and current Antioch residents of diverse ages and socioeconomic backgrounds.
Conserve and improve the existing housing supply to provide adequate, safe, and decent housing for existing Antioch residents.
Facilitate the development of special purpose housing to meet the needs of the elderly, persons with disabilities, large families, and the unhoused. Remove governmental constraints inhibiting the development of housing required to meet identified needs in Antioch.
Provide equal housing opportunities for all existing and future Antioch residents.
Most importantly, this alternative would allow the city to meet its 6th-cycle RHNA obligations, though with less margin for development of some sites at lower than maximum densities. c. Findings
This alternative would result in 3,770 developable units in total, which would be a total net reduction in 1,111 units when compared to the Project but would continue to exceed the City’s RHNA obligation by 754 units.
Based on the foregoing findings, and even though the Reduced VMT alternative would allow the city to meet its 6th Cycle RHNA obligations, the Council rejects Alternative 3.
D. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1. Overriding Considerations
The Council has considered the Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts set forth above and measured the benefits of the Project against the unavoidable environmental impacts identified in the EIR. The Council finds that the Project’s benefits and economic, social, environmental, legal and other considerations outweigh and make acceptable the potentially unavoidable impact.
Therefore, the Council adopts this statement of overriding considerations.
A14
The Council also finds that the Project’s significant unavoidable impacts would occur from any significant increase in the amount of residential development across the city. An increase in residential VMT would inevitably occur because of residential development. The Council finds that the benefits of the Project outweigh the benefits of other examined alternatives, including those deemed infeasible in Section D above.
2. Benefits of the Project
The expected benefits of the Project are:
a. The Project will improve and conserve existing housing stock.
The Project will provide adequate, safe, and decent housing for existing Antioch residents.
Through the implementation of Housing Element programs, existing affordable housing stock will be retained, involvement in local housing assistance programs will become more accessible, displacement will be prevented, and infrastructure improvements will be made. b. The Project will facilitate housing production and provide Antioch Residents with a variety of housing options.
The Project would provide a variety of housing options for Antioch residents across all income groups. The Project accommodates for the potential future development of up to 4,881 residential units, including 882 units affordable for very low-income households, 760 for low- income, 845 for moderate-income, and 2,394 for above moderate-income. c. The Project will redevelop under-utilized and vacant sites.
Buildout of the 6th Cycle Housing Element would occur on underutilized sites. Currently, underutilized sites disrupt the area’s land use pattern and is not providing any benefit to the community or region. Rezoning underutilized sites to allow for higher density residential development will generate more variety in housing typologies throughout the City and enable small infill and missing-middle projects.
d. The Project will mitigate natural and human-caused hazards, thereby improving public safety and resiliency.
Implementation of Environmental Hazards Element project objectives will the potential for loss of life, injury, property damage, and economic and social disruption resulting from natural and human-caused hazards in the community. The City will be more equipped to deal with issues A15
bro
ught on by climate change and other hazards such as fires, floods, droughts, earthquakes, and landslides.
e. The Project will ensure that all residents have equal protection from environmental hazards.
The goals, policies, and programs advanced under the Environmental Justice Element will reduce pollution exposure and other compounding health risks; promote public facilities, food access, safe and sanitary homes, physical activity, and civic engagement; and prioritize the needs of disadvantaged communities in Antioch.
E. CUSTODIAN OF DOCUMENTS
The City Clerk is designated as the custodian of the documents and record of proceedings on which this decision is based. The City Clerk’s office is located at City Hall. The address of City Hall is 200 H St, Antioch, CA 94509.
A16
EX
HIBIT B
MITIGATION, MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
A17
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) (see Table IV-1 below) has been prepared to comply with the requirements of State law (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6).
State law requires the adoption of a mitigation monitoring program when mitigation measures are required to avoid significant impacts. The monitoring program is intended to ensure compliance during implementation of the project.
This MMRP has been formulated based upon the findings of the Project’s Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the comments received on this document and addressed herein. This MMRP identifies mitigation measures recommended in the Project’s Draft EIR to avoid or reduce identified impacts and specifies the agencies/parties responsible for implementation and monitoring of the measure.
The first column identifies the mitigation measure. The second column, entitled "Party Responsible for Ensuring Implementation," refers to the person(s) who will undertake the mitigation measures. The third column, entitled “Party Responsible for Monitoring,” refers to the person/agency responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measure has been implemented and recorded. The fourth column, entitled “Monitoring Timing,” identifies when and/or for how long the monitoring shall occur.
A18
TABLE IV-1 M ITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Mitigation Measure
Party
Responsible
for Ensuring Implementation
Party
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Timing
Compliance Verification
Initial Date
Project/
Comments
B. Transportation
TRANS-1: Implement VMT Reduction Measures. Individual housing project development proposals that do not screen out from VMT impact analysis shall provide a quantitative VMT analysis using the methods applied in this EIR, with modifications if appropriate based on future changes to City of Antioch practices and CCTA VMT analysis methodology guidelines. Projects which result in a significant impact shall include travel demand management measures and physical measures to reduce VMT to a less-than-significant level. Measures may include, but are not limited to, those described below, which have been identified as potentially VMT reducing in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity. Potential VMT reduction estimates are included below, but detailed requirements, calculation steps, and limitations are described in the CAPCOA Handbook. In addition, application of one or more measures is generally expected to result in a net VMT reduction of 10 percent or less for development projects in suburban settings such as Antioch. Unbundle parking costs (i.e., sell or lease parking separately from the housing unit). Effectiveness: up to 15.7 percent reduction in GHG from VMT per the CAPCOA Handbook.
Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, or scooter sharing programs.
Effectiveness: 0.15 to 0.18 percent reduction in GHG from VMT for car share, 0.02 to 0.06 percent for bike share, and 0.07 percent for scooter share, per the CAPCOA Handbook. The higher car share and bike share values are for electric car and bike share programs. Subsidize transit passes for residents of affordable housing.
Effectiveness: up to 5.5 percent reduction in GHG from VMT per the CAPCOA Handbook.
Project Applicant:
Select a qualified
transportation consultant
to prepare and provide a
VMT analysis per
guidelines.
If necessary, based on the
VMT assessment, prepare,
and provide a
Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Plan
for the project which
demonstrates a VMT
reduction in accordance
with requirements and
threshold.
Conduct on-going
monitoring of development
VMT in accordance with
TDM plan requirements to
verify trip reduction goals
are achieved.
City of Antioch
Community and
Development
Department, Planning
Division:
Review and approve
VMT analysis.
Review and approve
TDM plan.
Review and approve
TDM plan monitoring
and achievement of
trip reduction goals.
Prior to
Construction
C. Air Quality
AIR-1: Residential Construction Controls for Criteria Air Pollutants.
For construction of residential projects with more than 114 single- Project Applicant: City of Antioch
Community and
Prior to issuance
of building permit
A19
Mitigation Measure
Party
Responsible
for Ensuring Implementation
Party
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Timing
Compliance Verification
Initial Date
Project/
Comments
family units or 240 multi-family units, the project applicant shall retain a qualified air quality consultant to identify measures to reduce the project’s criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions below the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD’s)
recommended thresholds of significance. Emission reduction measures may include, but are not limited to, the use of off-road equipment with engines that meet the Environmental Protection Agency’s Tier 4 emission standards or engines retrofitted with the most effective Verified Diesel Emissions Control Strategy (VDECS) certified by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Quantified emissions and identified reduction measures shall be submitted to the City (and the Air District if specifically requested) for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits and the approved criteria air pollutant reduction measures shall be implemented during construction.
In addition, the project applicant shall prepare a Construction Emissions Minimization Plan (Emissions Plan) for all identified criteria air pollutant reduction measures (if any). The Emissions Plan shall be submitted to the City (and BAAQMD if specifically requested) for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The Emissions Plan shall include the following:
An equipment inventory summarizing the type of off-road equipment required for each phase of construction,
including the equipment manufacturer, equipment
identification number, engine model year, engine
certification (tier rating), horsepower, and engine serial number. For all VDECS, the equipment inventory shall also include the technology type, serial number, make, model, manufacturer, CARB verification number level, and
installation date.
A Certification Statement that the Contractor agrees to comply fully with the Emissions Plan and acknowledges that a significant violation of the Emissions Plan shall constitute a material breach of contract.
Retain a qualified air quality
consultant to identify
measures to reduce
emissions.
Prepare a Construction
Emissions Minimization
Plan (Emissions Plan).
Development
Department, Planning
Division:
Review and approve
air quality analysis and
associated reduction
measures.
Review and approve
Emissions Plan.
(if necessary) Bay Area
Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD):
Review and approve
air quality analysis and
associated reduction
measures.
Review and approve
Emissions Plan.
AIR-2: Residential Operation Controls for Criteria Air Pollutants. For operation of residential projects with more than 325 single-family Project Applicant: City of Antioch
Community and
Prior to issuance
of building permit
A20
Mitigation Measure
Party
Responsible
for Ensuring Implementation
Party
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Timing
Compliance Verification
Initial Date
Project/
Comments
units or 451 multi-family units, the project applicant shall retain a qualified air quality consultant to identify measures to reduce the project’s criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions below the BAAQMD’s recommended thresholds of significance. Emission reduction measures may include, but are not limited to, implementation of a transportation design management plan, compliance with electric vehicle requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2, or excluding natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing in the building design. Quantified emissions and identified reduction measures shall be submitted to the City (and BAAQMD if specifically requested) for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
Retain a qualified air quality
consultant to identify
measures to reduce
emissions.
Development
Department, Planning
Division:
Review and approve
air quality analysis and
associated reduction
measures.
(if necessary) Bay Area
Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD):
Review and approve
air quality analysis and
associated reduction
measures.
AIR-3a: Residential Construction Controls for Diesel Particulate Matter. For construction of residential projects with a construction duration greater than 6 months that are located in an area defined as needing “Best Practices” or “Further Study” on the BAAQMD’s Planning Healthy Places Map (https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and- climate/planning-healthy-places), the project applicant shall apply one of the following two measures:
1. The project applicant shall retain a qualified air quality consultant to prepare a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) in accordance with current guidance from the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment to determine the health risks to sensitive receptors exposed to diesel particulate matter (DPM) from project construction emissions. The HRA shall be submitted to the City (and BAAQMD if specifically requested) for review and approval. If the HRA concludes that the health risks are at or below acceptable levels, then DPM reduction measures are not required. If the HRA concludes that the health risks exceed acceptable levels, DPM reduction measures shall be identified to reduce the health risks to acceptable levels. Identified DPM reduction measures shall be submitted to the City for review and Project Applicant:
Retain a qualified air quality
consultant to prepare HRA.
OR
Ensure all construction-
related equipment is
equipped with the most
effective VDECS available as
certified by CARB.
AND
Prepare an Emissions Plan.
City of Antioch
Community and
Development
Department, Planning
Division:
Review and approve
HRA.
OR
Review and approve
construction
equipment list for
most effective VDECS.
AND
Review and approve
Emissions Plan.
(if necessary) Bay Area
Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD):
Prior to issuance
of building permit
A21
Mitigation Measure
Party
Responsible
for Ensuring Implementation
Party
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Timing
Compliance Verification
Initial Date
Project/
Comments
approval prior to the issuance of building permits and the approved DPM reduction measures shall be implemented during construction.
OR
2. All off-road diesel equipment shall be equipped with the most effective VDECS available for the engine type (Tier 4 engines automatically meet this requirement) as certified by CARB. The equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned in accordance with manufacturer specifications.
In addition, the project applicant shall prepare a Construction Emissions Minimization Plan (Emissions Plan) for all identified DPM reduction measures (if any). The Emissions Plan shall be submitted to the City (and BAAQMD if specifically requested) for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The Emissions Plan shall include the following:
An equipment inventory summarizing the type of off-road equipment required for each phase of construction,
including the equipment manufacturer, equipment
identification number, engine model year, engine
certification (tier rating), horsepower, and engine serial number. For all VDECS, the equipment inventory shall also include the technology type, serial number, make, model, manufacturer, CARB verification number level, and
installation date.
A Certification Statement that the Contractor agrees to comply fully with the Emissions Plan and acknowledges that a significant violation of the Emissions Plan shall constitute a material breach of contract.
Review and approve
HRA.
OR
Review and approve
construction
equipment list for
most effective VDECS.
AND
Review and approve
Emissions Plan.
AIR-3b: Residential Emergency Generators. Require all emergency generators for new residential development projects (if required) to use best available control technology for air pollutant emissions, such as using engines that meet the Environmental Protection Agency’s Tier 4 Final emission standards or are battery powered.
Project Applicant:
Provide list of emergency
generators planned for
usage.
City of Antioch
Community and
Development
Department, Planning
Division:
Review and approve
list of emergency
Prior to issuance
of building permit
A22
Mitigation Measure
Party
Responsible
for Ensuring Implementation
Party
Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Timing
Compliance Verification
Initial Date
Project/
Comments
generators to ensure
that engines meet EPA
Tier 4 Final emissions
standards or are
battery powered.
A23
A24
CI
TY CO
UNCIL
RESOLUTION # 2023-**
A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH TO
ADOPT A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE THE HOUSING ELEMENT TO
COMPLY WITH STATE HOUSING ELEMENT LAW
W
HEREAS, the California Government Code Section 65300 et. seq. requires every city and county in California to adopt a General Plan for its long-range development, and further, to periodically update that Plan to reflect current conditions and issues; W
HEREAS, the California legislature has found that “California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the state’s environmental and climate objectives.” (Gov. Code Section 65589.5.);
W
HEREAS, the legislature has further found that “Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination against low -income and minority households, lack of housing to support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration.” (Gov. Code Section 65589.5.); W
HEREAS, State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of Gov. Code) requires that the City Council adopt a Housing Element for the eight -year period 2023-2031 to accommodate the City of Antioch’s (City) regional housing need allocation (RHNA) of 3,016 housing units, comprised of 792 (26%) very -low income units, 456 (15%) low- income units, 493 (17%) moderate-income units, and 1,275 (42%) above moderate-income units; W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City conduct an assessment of housing needs and prepare an inventory of resources and constraints relevant to the meeting of these needs, including analysis of population and employment trends, household characteristics, inventory of land suitable and available for residential development (Gov. Code Section 65583(a)); W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City identify a zone or zones where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use with sufficient capacity to accommodate the need for emergency shelter identified in the assessment of housing needs (Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(4));
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City analyze potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including for special housing needs and persons with disabilities, land use controls, fees, and permit procedures, along with efforts to remove governmental constraints (Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(5));
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City analyze potential and actual nongovernmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the availability of financing, the price of land, the cost of construction, the requests to develop housing at densities below those i dentified in the sites
ATTACHMENT B
B1
invent
ory, along with local efforts to remove nongovernmental constraints (Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(6));
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City analyze special housing needs, such as those of the elderly; persons with disabilities, including a developmental disability, large families; farmworkers; families with female heads of households; and families and persons in need of emergency shelter (Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(7)); W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City analyze opportunities for energy conservation with respect to residential development (Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(8)); W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City analyze existing assisted housing developments that are eligible to change from low -income housing uses during the next 10 years (Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(9));
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City prepare a statement of the community’s goals, quantified objectives, and policies relative to affirmatively furthering fair housing and to the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing (Gov. Code Section 65583(b));
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City prepare a program that sets fort h a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation, to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element through the administration of land use and development controls, the provision of regulatory concessions and incentives, the utilization of appropriate federal and state financing (Gov.
Code Section 65583(c));
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City identify actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate that portion of the City’s share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory without rezoning (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(1)); W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City identify where the inventory of sites, does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the need for groups of all household income levels, rezoning of those sites, including adoption of minimum density and development standards, for jurisdictions with an eight -year housing element planning period, shall be completed no later than three years after either the date the housing element is adopted pursuant to subdivision (f)
of Gov. Code Section 65585 or the date that is 90 days after receipt of comments from the Department of Housing & Community Development, whichever is earlier , unless the deadline i
s extended;
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City i dentify programs that assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low, very low, low -, and moderate-income households (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(2)); W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City identify programs that address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental and nongovernmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including housing for all income levels and housing for persons with disabilities (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(3)); B2
WHERE
AS, State law requires that the City identify programs that conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable housing stock, which may include addressing ways to mitigate the loss of dwelling units demolished by public or private action (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(4));
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City identify programs that promote and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities and promote housing throughout the community or communities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and other protected characteristics, and any other state and federal fair housing and planning law (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(5)); W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City identify programs that preserve for lower income households the assisted housing developments that are eligible to change from low- income housing uses during the next 10 years (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(6)); W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City d evelop a plan that incentivizes and promotes the creation of accessory dwelling units that can be offered at affordable rent for very low, low-, or moderate-income households (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(7)); W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City identify the agencies and officials responsible for the implementation of the various actions and the means by which consistency will be achieved with other general plan elements and community goals (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(8));
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City make a diligent effort by the local government to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and the program shall describe this effort (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(9));
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City a ffirmatively further fair housing in accordance with Gov. Code Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 8899.50) of Division 1 of Title 2 (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(10));
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City include a summary of fair housing issues in the jurisdiction and an assessment of the jurisdiction’s fair housing enforcement and fair housing outreach capacity (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(10)(A)(i)); W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City include an analysis of available federal, state, and local data and knowledge to identify integration and segregation patterns and trends, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and affluence, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(10)(A)(ii));
W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City include an assessment of the contributing factors, including the local and regional historical origins and current policies and practices, for the fair housing issues (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(10)(A)(iii)); W
HEREAS, State law requires that the City identify the jurisdiction’s fair housing priorities and goals, giving highest priority to those factors identified that limit or deny fair housing choice or access to opportunity, or negatively impact fair housing or civil rights B3
com
pliance, and identifying the metrics and milestones for determining what fair housing results will be achieved (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(10)(A)(iv));
WHEREAS, State law requires that the City include strategies and actions to implement those priorities and goals, which may include, but are not limited to, enhancing mobility strategies and encouraging development of new affordable housing in areas of opportunity, as well as place-based strategies to encourage community revitalization, including preservation of existing affordable housing, and protecting existing residents from displacement (Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(10)(A)(v));
WHEREAS, State law allows local government to satisfy all or part of its requirement to identify a zone or zones suitable for the development of emergency shelters by adopting and implementing a multijurisdictional agreement (Gov. Code Section 65583(d));
WHEREAS, amendments to the required content of a housing element shall apply to a housing element or housing element amendment prepared pursuant to subdivision (e) of Gov.
Code Section 65588 or Section 65584.02, when a city submits a draft to the department for review pursuant to Section 65585 more than 90 days after the effective date of the amendment to this section or fails to submit the first draft to the department before the due date specified in Section 65588 or 65584.02. (Gov. Code Section 65583(e));
WHEREAS, the Housing Element must be adopted to comply with State law, accommodate the RHNA, affirmatively further fair housing, and facilitate and encourage a variety of housing types for all income levels, including multifamily housing;
WHEREAS, the City retained Urban Planning Partners to prepare the Housing Element;
WHEREAS, the preparation, adoption, and implementation of the Housing Element and companion zoning amendments requires a diligent effort to include all economic segments of the community;
WHEREAS, the City conducted extensive community outreach over 18 months including two community workshops, four Planning Commission meetings, and two City Council meetings;
WHEREAS, on July 1, 2022, the city submitted the draft Housing Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for its review;
WHEREAS, on September 29, 2022 , HCD provided the City with a number of comments regarding the draft Housing Element (Exhibit C), and based upon comments , City staff revised the draft Housing Element to include additional information and data to support the City’s position that the proposed programs and zoning changes would be adequate to accommodate the RHNA and affirmatively further fair housing, as depicted by the revised Draft Housing Element (Exhibit A) , as well as the Table of Revisions in Response to HCD’s Comments (Exhibit D), and Response to HCD Findings (Exhibit E) which both outline Element revisions and responses to HCD;
WHEREAS, the City, as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), has completed the Housing Element Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the Housing Element;
B4
WH
EREAS, on December 23, 2022, the city published the final draft Housing Element (Exhibit A) on the City website and requested public comment on the final draft;
WHEREAS, the Antioch Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January 4, 2023, considered all public comments received, the presentation by City staff, the staff report, and all other pertinent documents regarding the proposed request, and adopted Resolution 2023-02 recommending that the City Council adopt the Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, on January 12, 2023, a public hearing notice was published in the East County Times and posted in three public places pursuant to California Government Code Section 65090 for the City Council public hearing on January 24, 2023.
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing t o consider the Housing Element EIR on January 24, 2023;
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2023, the Antioch City Council adopted Resolution 2023-xx certifying the Housing Element EIR and adopting CEQA findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program;
WHEREAS, recitals and findings from the Antioch City Council adopted Resolution 2023- are incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on January 2 4, 2023 to consider the General Plan amendment to update the Housing Element, considered all public comments received, the presentation by City staff, the staff report, and all other pertinent documents regarding the proposed request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND DETERMINED that the City Council of the City of Antioch makes the following findings to adopt a General Plan Amendment to update the Housing Element:
1. The proposed project conforms to the provisions and standards of the General Plan in that the proposed amendments are internally consistent with all other provisions of the General Plan and do not conflict with any of the previously adopted goals, policies or programs of the General Plan.
2. The proposed amendments are necessary to implement the goals and objectives of the General Plan, including the Land Use Element. The Housing Element (Exhibit A) will accommodate higher density multifamily housing to expand housing options and affordability, and to ensure consistency between the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed General Plan Amendment complies with, and is required by, applicable State law.
3. The proposed a mendments will not be detrimental to the public interest, convenience, and general welfare of the City .
The amendments will result in a logical
placement of land uses consistent with the overall intent of the General Plan and facilitate housing development opportunities at a range of income levels and household types. The proposed General Plan Amendment will facilitate the development, maintenance, and improvement of adequate and affordable housing for new and existing residents, which will be a benefit to the public.
B5
4. The prop
osed amendment will not cause environmental damage in that potential effects were analyzed in the EIR prepared for the Housing Element, Environmental Hazards and Environmental Justice Elements and the associated Specific Plan and Zoning amendments and are either found to be less than significant with mitigations or acceptable pursuant to a Statement of Overriding Conditions.
5. The proposed a mendment will not require changes to or modifications of any other plans that the City Council adopted before the date of this resolution.
6. The Zoning Administrator is hereby authorized to make non-substantive changes to the Housing Element to address comments received from the Department of Housing and Community Development.
7. The Housing Element substantially complies with Housing Element Law, as provided in Government Code 65580 et seq. and contains all provisions required by State Housing Element Law, as shown in Exhibit B to this resolution, which is incorporated by reference.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Antioch City Council adopts the General Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference, to update the Housing Element.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Antioch at a regular meeting thereof held on the 2 4th day of January 2023, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_____________________________________________
ELIZABETH HOUSEHOLDER,
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH
B6
EXHIBIT A
6th Cycle 2023-2031 Housing Element
B7
Prepared for:
City of Antioch
Local Adoption Draft
December 2022
City of
/gid00002/gid00041/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00030/gid00035 2023-2031 Housing Element Update
B8
B9
How to Use this Document
How to Use this Document
If you are a Community Member
For community members who are interested in learning about the City of Antioch’s blueprint for addressing the housing needs of the community, Chapter 7, Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs will help you understand the goals and key strategies the City will be undertaking between 2023 to 2031. Additionally, Chapters 2, 4, and 5 have detailed information about the City’s housing needs, relevant constraints to housing production and preservation, and available resources to assist in this production and preservation. Chapter 3, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH), contains a summary of fair housing related issues identified throughout the community, while a full comprehensive analysis is contained within Appendix B.
If you are a Property Owner or
Developer
Property owners and developers who are interested in developing housing in the City of Antioch should become familiar with the Plan’s overall policy framework, as described in Chapter 7, Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs, as well as the Housing Sites Inventory included within Chapter 6, Adequate Sites and Appendix C.
If you work for the City
If you are an elected City official or City staff, you are responsible for guiding property owners and developers in their development decisions and applications and implementing the Goals, Policies, Programs, and Actions in this Housing Element. The City will use this plan to guide its work over the 2023-2031 planning period.
B10
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 1-1 A. Purpose and Content ............................................................................................................................. 1-1 B. Setting ......................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 C. Housing Element Update Process ....................................................................................................... 1-3 D. State Law and Local Planning ................................................................................................................ 1-3 E. Housing Element Organization ............................................................................................................ 1-6 2 HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................ 2-1 A. Regional Housing Needs Allocation ................................................................................................... 2-1 B. Community Profile .................................................................................................................................. 2-2 3 AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING .................................................................................. 3-1 A. Assessment of Fair Housing.................................................................................................................. 3-2 B. Sites Inventory ........................................................................................................................................ 3-14 C. Outreach ................................................................................................................................................. 3-21 D. Meaningful Actions ................................................................................................................................ 3-22 4 CONSTRAINTS ................................................................................................................................................. 4-1 A. Governmental Constraints ................................................................................................................... 4-1 B. Non-Governmental Constraints ....................................................................................................... 4-22 5 RESOURCES ....................................................................................................................................................... 5-1 A. Institutional Resources ........................................................................................................................... 5-1 B. Funding Resources .................................................................................................................................. 5-3 C. Local Non-Profit Resources ................................................................................................................. 5-8 D. Regulatory Resources ............................................................................................................................ 5-8 E. Energy Conservation Opportunities ................................................................................................ 5-16 6 ADEQUATE SITES ............................................................................................................................................ 6-1 A. Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) .................................................................................. 6-1 B. Credits Toward the RHNA .................................................................................................................. 6-3 C. Sites Inventory Methodology................................................................................................................ 6-6 D. Adequate Sites........................................................................................................................................ 6-10 7 HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS ............................................................................... 7-1 A. Goals, Policies, and Implementing Programs .................................................................................... 7-2 B. Implementing Programs ......................................................................................................................... 7-2 C. Implementing Programs ......................................................................................................................... 7-9 D. Implementing Programs ....................................................................................................................... 7-17 E. Implementing Programs ....................................................................................................................... 7-23 F. Implementing Programs ....................................................................................................................... 7-29 G. Quantified Objectives........................................................................................................................... 7-36 B11
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ii
8 PARTICIPATION ............................................................................................................................................... 8-1 A. Development of the Draft Housing Element ....................................................................................8-1 B. Phase 1 – Introduce Project ..................................................................................................................8-2 C. Phase 2 – Understand Existing Conditions........................................................................................8-2 D. Phase 3 – Explore and Refine Solutions .............................................................................................8-3 E. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) ..................................................................................8-3 F. Summary of Outreach Activities ..........................................................................................................8-4
APPENDICES
Appendix A Housing Needs Data Report: Antioch
Appendix B Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Report Appendix C Sites Inventory
Appendix D Review of Housing Element Past Performance Program Accomplishments Appendix E Public Engagement Input
B12
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1 City Location .......................................................................................................................................... 1-2 Figure 2-1 Population Growth Trends................................................................................................................. 2-3 Figure 2-2 Population by Race, 2000-2019 ......................................................................................................... 2-4 Figure 2-3 Population by Race ............................................................................................................................... 2-5 Figure 2-4 Population by Age, 2000-2019 ........................................................................................................... 2-6 Figure 2-5 Senior and Youth Population by Race ............................................................................................. 2-6 Figure 2-6 Workers by Earnings, by Jurisdiction as Place of Work and Place of Residence ................. 2-7 Figure 2-7 Households by Household Income Level........................................................................................ 2-8 Figure 2-8 Housing Tenure ..................................................................................................................................... 2-9 Figure 2-9 Household Income Level by Tenure ................................................................................................ 2-9 Figure 2-10 Cost Burden by Income Level ......................................................................................................... 2-11 Figure 2-11 Cost Burden by Tenure ..................................................................................................................... 2-12 Figure 2-12 Housing Type Trends ......................................................................................................................... 2-13 Figure 2-13 Housing Units by Year Structure Built .......................................................................................... 2-15 Figure 2-14 Senior Households by Income and Tenure .................................................................................. 2-18 Figure 2-15 Households by Household Income Level...................................................................................... 2-21 Figure 2-16 Poverty Status by Race ...................................................................................................................... 2-22 Figure 2-17 Homelessness by Household Type and Shelter Status, Contra Costa County .................. 2-23 Figure 3-1 Diversity Index Score, 2018 ............................................................................................................... 3-4 Figure 3-2 Median Income per Block Group, 2019 .......................................................................................... 3-5 Figure 3-3 Percent of Households in Poverty per Block Group, 2019 ....................................................... 3-5 Figure 3-4 Percent of Persons with a Disability per Block Group, 2019 .................................................... 3-6 Figure 3-5 R/ECAPs, 2009-2013 ............................................................................................................................ 3-8 Figure 3-6 Racial Dot Map of Antioch, 2020 ...................................................................................................... 3-8 Figure 3-7 Displacement Risk, 2022 ................................................................................................................... 3-11 Figure 3-8 TCAC Opportunity Map by Census Tract, 2022 ....................................................................... 3-13 Figure 3-9 RHNA Distribution and EJ, R/ECAP, and Low-Income Areas ................................................ 3-16 Figure 3-10 RHNA Distribution and Access to Opportunity ........................................................................ 3-17 Figure 3-11 Sites Inventory and Median Income per Block Group, 2019 ................................................... 3-19 Figure 3-12 Sites Inventory and Percent of Households in Poverty per Block Group, 2019 ................ 3-20 Figure 3-13 Sites Inventory and Displacement Typology ................................................................................ 3-21 Figure 4-1 U.S. Average Interest Rates: January 2019 – January 2022 ...................................................... 4-24 Figure 6-1 ADU Permit Trends ............................................................................................................................. 6-5 Figure 6-2 Consolidated Sites .............................................................................................................................. 6-12 Figure 6-3 Adequate Sites ..................................................................................................................................... 6-13 Figure 6-4 Rezoned Sites ....................................................................................................................................... 6-16
B13
TABLE OF CONTENTS
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Antioch Regional Housing Needs Allocation from Draft Methodology .................................. 2-2 Table 2-2 City and county Population Trends, 1990-2021 ............................................................................ 2-3 Table 2-3 Assisted Units Inventory ................................................................................................................... 2-16 Table 2-4 Number of Unsheltered Individuals by Contra Costa County Cities ................................... 2-24 Table 3-1 Number of FHEO Filed Cases by Protected Class in Contra Costa County (2015–2020) ............................................................................................................................................ 3-2 Table 3-2 ECHO Fair Housing Antioch Audit Results .................................................................................... 3-3 Table 3-3 Lower Income Sites Distribution .................................................................................................... 3-18 Table 3-4 Fair Housing Action Plan ................................................................................................................... 3-22 Table 4-1 General Plan – Residential Use Land Categories .......................................................................... 4-3 Table 4-2 Primary Uses – Residential Zones ..................................................................................................... 4-4 Table 4-3 Residential Development Standards ................................................................................................. 4-6 Table 4-4 Residential Parking Requirements .................................................................................................. 4-10 Table 4-5 Typical Development Fees – City of Antioch.............................................................................. 4-16 Table 4-6 Contra Costa County Fee Comparison ....................................................................................... 4-18 Table 4-7 Processing Time for Residential Project Approval ..................................................................... 4-20 Table 4-8 Length of Time Between Application Approval and Building Permit Application, Examples................................................................................................................................................ 4-21 Table 4-9 Construction Cost Estimates .......................................................................................................... 4-23 Table 4-10 Disposition of Applications by Income, Race, and Ethnicity of Applicant, 2020................. 4-24 Table 5-1 Federal and State Funding Programs ................................................................................................. 5-5 Table 5-2 Antioch ADU Requirements ............................................................................................................ 5-10 Table 6-1 City of Antioch Regional Housing Needs Allocation, 2023-2031 ............................................. 6-3 Table 6-2 Approved Units Under Construction .............................................................................................. 6-4 Table 6-3 Approved Units Under Construction .............................................................................................. 6-4 Table 6-4 Estimated Affordability of Projected ADUs .................................................................................... 6-6 Table 6-5 RHNA Credits ........................................................................................................................................ 6-6 Table 6-6 Recent Multi-Family Projects .............................................................................................................. 6-7 Table 6-7 Residential Zoning Districts and Density Requirements ............................................................. 6-8 Table 6-8 Summary of Residential Sites Inventory ........................................................................................ 6-14 Table 6-9 Residential Capacity by Zoning ....................................................................................................... 6-14 Table 6-10 Rezoning ................................................................................................................................................ 6-17 Table 6-11 Reused Sites and Rezoning ............................................................................................................... 6-21 Table 6-12 By-Right Sites ....................................................................................................................................... 6-22 Table 6-13 Vacant and Non-Vacant Sites Breakdown .................................................................................... 6-23 Table 7-1 Quantified Objectives: 2023-2031 ............................................................................................... 7-37 Table 8-1 Stakeholder Interviews and Focus Groups ..................................................................................... 8-5
B14
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 1-1
INTRODUCTION
A. PURPOSE AND CONTENT
The City of Antioch’s Housing Element is the component of the City’s General Plan that addresses housing needs and opportunities for present and future Antioch residents through 2031. It provides the primary policy guidance for local decision-making related to housing. The Housing Element of the General Plan is the only General Plan Element that requires review and certification by the State of California.
The Housing Element provides a detailed analysis of Antioch’s demographic, economic, and housing characteristics as required by State Law. The Element also provides a comprehensive evaluation of the City’s progress in implementing the past policy and action programs related to housing production, preservation, conservation, and rehabilitation. Based on the community’s housing needs, available resources, constraints, opportunities and past performance, the Housing Element identifies goals, policies, actions, and objectives that address the housing needs of present and future Antioch residents.
B. SETTING
The City of Antioch was incorporated in 1872 as a general law city operating under the City Council/City Manager form of government. Antioch is the Gateway to the Delta, located on the banks of the San Joaquin River in Northern California, accessible from Highway 4, in eastern Contra Costa County. The city is adjacent to Oakley to the east, Brentwood to the south and east, unincorporated Contra Costa County to the south, Pittsburg to the west, and the southern shore of the San Joaquin River to the north (see Figure 1-1). Antioch is the second largest city in Contra Costa County and covers 30 square miles.
The city is served by e-BART (Hillcrest Station) with rail transit service to San Francisco. Antioch is a suburban city and provides public services including police, water, streets, parks, engineering, planning, and administrative services.
B15
City Boundary
City of Antioch Housing Element Update
Figure 1-1
Project Location
Source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, NGA, EPA, USDA, NPS, 2022.
N 0 8 4 12
Miles
B16
1. INTRODUCTION
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 1-3 C. HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE PROCESS
The California State Legislature has identified the attainment of a decent home and suitable living environment for every Californian as the State’s main housing goal. Recognizing the important part that local planning programs play in pursuit of this goal, the Legislature has mandated that all cities and counties prepare a Housing Element as part of their comprehensive General Plans (California Government Code Section 65580 et al.).
It is intended that this Housing Element be reviewed annually and updated and modified not less than every eight years in order to remain relevant and useful and reflect the community’s changing housing needs. The City will annually review its progress implementing the Housing Element through Annual Progress Reports required to be submitted to the State. The City is updating its Housing Element at this time to comply with the update required of all jurisdictions in the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) region, as well as to respond to the issues that Antioch currently faces. This Housing Element update covers the planning period from January 31, 2023 through January 31, 2031.
Community engagement was an integral part of the update process. Antioch’s diverse community was consulted throughout the update process and diligent efforts were made to reach those in protected classes and communities who have historically been left out of planning processes. The community engagement process and results are described in Chapter 8, Participation.
D. STATE LAW AND LOCAL PLANNING
1. CONSISTENCY WITH STATE LAW
The Housing Element is one of the seven General Plan
elements mandated by the State of California, as
prescribed in Sections 65580 to 65589.8 of the California Government Code. Per State law, the Housing Element
has two main purposes:
1. To provide an assessment of both current and
future housing needs and constraints in meeting
those needs; and
2. To provide a strategy that establishes housing goals, policies, and programs.
CHANGES IN STATE LEGISLATION SINCE PREVIOUS UPDATE
There were substantive changes to State law since the
City’s last Housing Element in 2015. Some of the most
notable changes in housing legislation are described
below.
Assembly Bill (AB) 68, AB 587, AB 671,
AB 881, and Senate Bill (SB) 13. Further
incentivizes the development of accessory dwelling
units (ADUs) through streamlined permits, reduced
HOUSING ELEMENT REQUIREMENTS
Analysis of existing and projected housing
needs.
Inventory of land suitable for housing.
Analysis of potential constraints on the
maintenance, improvement, and
development of housing.
Fair housing analysis.
Analysis of any special housing needs.
Identification of zone(s) where emergency
shelters are allowed by-right.
Evaluation of the previous housing element
and progress implementing past policies and
programs.
Opportunities for residential energy
conservation.
Identification of assisted housing
developments that are at risk of converting
to non-assisted housing developments.
Goals, policies, and implementation
programs for the preservation,
improvement, and development of housing.
Quantified objectives that estimate the
number of units, by income level, to be
constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved
over the planning period of the Housing
Element.
B17
1. INTRODUCTION
1-4
setback requirements, increased allowable square footage, reduced parking requirements, and reduced fees.
AB 1763. Requires jurisdictions to provide a larger density bonus and enhanced concessions to development projects that restrict 100 percent of their units as affordable to lower- and moderate- income households and provides greater bonuses for such projects when they are within 0.5 miles of a major transit stop.
AB 101. Requires jurisdictions to allow low barrier navigation centers by-right in areas zoned for mixed uses and in nonresidential zones permitting multi-family uses if the center meets specified requirements.
AB 686. Requires public agencies in California to affirmatively further fair housing, which is defined as taking meaningful actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity by replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns; transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity; and foster and maintain compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. AB 1255 and AB 1486. Identify and prioritize State and local surplus lands available for housing development affordable to lower-income households.
AB 2162. Requires that supportive housing be a permitted use without discretionary review in zones where multi-family and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multi-family uses.
SB 330. Enacts changes to local development policies, permitting, and processes. These changes include establishing new criteria on application requirements and processing times for housing developments; preventing localities from decreasing the housing capacity of any site, such as through downzoning or increasing open space requirements; preventing localities from establishing non- objective standards; and requiring that any proposed demolition of housing units be accompanied by a project that would replace or exceed the total number of units demolished.
2. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The Housing Element is one component of the City’s overall long-range planning strategy. The California Government Code requires that the General Plan contain an integrated and consistent set of goals and policies. The Housing Element is affected by policies contained in other elements of the General Plan. For example, the Land Use Element designates land for residential development and indicates the type, location and density of the residential development permitted in the city. Working within this framework, the Housing Element identifies goals, policies, actions, and objectives for the planning period that directly addresses the housing needs of Antioch’s existing and future residents. The policies contained within other elements of the General Plan affect many aspects of life that residents enjoy—the amount and variety of open space, the preservation of natural, historic, and cultural resources, the permitted noise levels in residential areas and the safety of the residents in the event of a natural or man-made disaster.
Notably, other elements of Antioch’s General Plan have been triggered to be updated or created at the time of the Housing Element adoption. Consistent with Government Code Section 65302, the Environmental Hazards Element is being updated concurrently with the Housing Element to identify and mitigate risk for environmental hazards, including flood hazard and management, fire hazard, and climate adaptation. In addition, pursuant to Government Code Section 65302(h), the City is evaluating environmental justice (EJ) issues and integrating EJ goals, policies, and objectives into the EJ Element of the General Plan. These Environmental Hazard and EJ components Elements of the General Plan are being updated concurrently to the Housing Element and the policies in each will be consistent with the Housing Element update.
B18
1. INTRODUCTION
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 1-5 The Housing Element policies must be consistent with policies identified in other elements of the General Plan. The Housing Element has been reviewed for consistency with the City’s other General Plan Elements. The policies and programs in this Housing Element reflect the policy direction contained in other parts of the General Plan. As portions of the General Plan are amended in the future, this Housing Element will be reviewed to ensure that internal consistency is maintained.
3. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS AND PROGRAMS
The Housing Element identifies goals, objectives, policies, and action programs for the 2015-2023 planning period that directly address the housing needs of Antioch. There are a number of City plans and programs which work to implement the goals and policies of the Housing Element. These include the City’s Municipal Code and various Specific Plans.
ANTIOCH MUNICIPAL CODE
The Antioch Municipal Code contains regulatory and penal ordinances and certain administrative ordinances, codified pursuant to Sections 50022.1 through 50022.8 and 50022.10 of the Government Code. The Antioch Municipal Code includes the City’s Subdivision and Zoning regulations.
The Subdivision Chapter of the Municipal Code regulates the design, development, and implementation of land division. It applies when a parcel is divided into two or more parcels, a parcel is consolidated with one or more other parcels, or the boundaries of two or more parcels are adjusted to change the size and/or configuration of the parcels.
The Zoning Chapter of the Municipal Code is the primary tool for implementing the General Plan and is designed to protect and promote the health, safety, and welfare of the people. The Zoning Chapter designates various districts and outlines the permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses for each zone district. Finally, the Zoning Chapter provides property development standards for each zone district and overall administrative and legislative procedures.
Programs in the Housing Element would amend the Municipal Code, including amendments to bring the City into compliance with recent State legislation, rezone land for higher density residential development, and remove governmental constraints to housing.
SPECIFIC PLANS
Specific Plans are customized regulatory documents that provide focused guidance and regulations for a particular area to address the specific characteristics or needs for that area. They generally include a land use plan, circulation plan, infrastructure plan, zoning classifications, development standards, design guidelines, and implementation plan. The City has four approved Specific Plans, as listed below.
1. East Lone Tree Specific Plan (1996)
2. East Eighteenth Street Specific Plan (2001)
3. Hillcrest Station Area Specific Plan (2009)
4. Downtown Specific Plan (2018)
This Housing Element proposes amendments to the East Lone Tree Specific Plan given zoning changes proposed to three parcels within the East Lone Tree Specific Plan Area. This is discussed in Chapter 6, Adequate Sites.
B19
1. INTRODUCTION
1-6
E. HOUSING ELEMENT ORGANIZATION
Consistent with State law, this Housing Element consists of the following major components:
1. Introduction [Chapter 1]. Explains the purpose, process, and contents of the Housing Element.
2. Housing Needs Assessment [Chapter 2]. The Housing Needs Assessment chapter includesPresents an analysis of population and employment trends, the City’s fair share of regional housing needs, household characteristics, and the condition of the housing stock.
3. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing [Chapter 3]. Summarizes the Assessment of Fair Housing and explains how affirmatively furthering fair housing (AFFH) considerations shaped the Housing Sites Inventory and the community engagement process.
4. Constraints [Chapter 4]. The Constraints chapter reviewsReviews governmental constraints, including land use controls, fees, and processing requirements, as well as non-governmental constraints, such as construction costs, availability of land and financing, physical environmental conditions, and units at risk of conversion, that may impede the development, preservation, and maintenance of housing.
5. Resources [Chapter 5]. The Resources chapter identifiesIdentifies resources available for the production and maintenance of housing, including an inventory of land suitable for residential development and discussion of federal, State, and local financial resources and programs available to address the City’s housing goals.
6. Adequate Sites [Chapter 6]. This chapter describesDescribes and maps the land suitable for residential development to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).
7. Housing Goals, Policies, and Implementing Programs [Chapter 7]. This chapter identifiesIdentifies the City’s housing goals and provides policies and programs to address the City’s Antioch’s housing needs.
8. Participation [Chapter 8]. The Participation chapter describesDescribes how the City engaged the public, including residents and interested parties, such as housing and special needs advocates.
Given the detail and lengthy analysis in developing the Housing Element, supporting background material is included in the following appendices:
Appendix A: Housing Needs Report
Appendix B: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Report Appendix C: Housing Sites Inventory
Appendix D: Review of Housing Element Past Performance Program Accomplishments Appendix E: Public Engagement Input
WHAT IS A GOAL, POLICY, AND PROGRAM?
Goal: Desired results
Policy: Guidance for future programs, activities, and decisions Program: Ongoing efforts to achieve our goals and implement policies
B20
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-1
HOUSING NEEDS
ASSESSMENT
To successfully plan for housing needs, the demographic and socioeconomic variables of the community must be assessed. This chapter was prepared in accordance with Government Code Section 65538 (a) which requires “an assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints relevant to the meeting of these needs.” The Government Code specifically requires thean analysis of housing needs, whichto include population characteristics, household characteristics, and employment and housing stock conditions. Unless otherwise specified, the data in this chapter is specific to Antioch. This chapter summarizes the Housing Needs Assessment. Additional information and graphs can be found in Appendix A, Housing Needs Data Report: Antioch. For the Assessment of Fair Housing required under California’s Assembly Bill 686 of 2018, please see Appendix B, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.
Unless otherwise specified, the data in this chapter is specific to the city of Antioch. This chapter summarizes the Housing Needs Assessment. Additional information and graphs can be found in Appendix A.
This chapter begins with an overview of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation assigned to Antioch.
These are the quantified housing needs assigned by the State and region for which the City must plan. The chapter then moves on to discuss population and housing trends in Antioch, including identifying at-risk housing units and housing needs for special needs populations.
A. REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION
The Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process is mandated by California law and requires local jurisdictions to plan for their ‘fair share’ of housing units at all affordability levels. The Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) assigns housing need allocations to cities and towns within the nine-county region .
The RHNP is part of the Association of Bay Area Governments’ (ABAG) 6 th Cycle RHNA, sometimes referred to as the “Draft Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area,” and covers the 2023 to 2031 planning period and assigning housing need allocations to cities and towns within B21
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-2
the nine-county region. The nine counties are Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma.
State Housing Element Law requires ABAG to develop a methodology that calculates the number of housing units assigned to each city and county and distributes each jurisdiction’s housing unit allocation among four affordability levels.
In December 2021, ABAG approved their Final RHNA Plan. For Antioch, the proposed RHNA obligation to be planned for this cycle is 3,016 units, a slated increase from the last cycle. The allocation is broken down by income category is shown in Table 2-1.
TABLE 2-1 A NTIOCH REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION FROM DRAFT
METHODOLOGY
Income Group Units Percent
Very Low-Income (0-50% of AMI) 792 26.3%
Low-Income (51-80% of AMI) 456 15.1%
Moderate-Income (81-120% of AMI) 493 16.3%
Above Moderate-Income (More than 120% of AMI) 1,275 42.3% Total 3,016 100.0%
Source: Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031.
As shown in the site inventory section of the Housing Element,As discussed in Chapter 6, Adequate Sites, Antioch will provide a mix of sites to accommodate a variety of housing opportunities at various densities, including multi-family, as well as and accessory dwelling units, along with programs to accommodate the RHNA allocation obligation for all income levels.
B. COMMUNITY PROFILE
Housing needs are generally influenced by population and employment trends. This section provides a summary of the changes to the population size, age, and racial composition of the city. For a more detailed analysis of housing needs, see Appendix A, Housing Needs and Data Report: Antioch.
1. POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS AND TRENDS
POPULATION GROWTH
As Table 2-2 and Figure 2-1 highlight, Antioch experienced a significant population increase at more than double the overall growth rate of Contra Costa County dating back to the early 1990s. Since 2000, the growth rate has slowed substantially to 13.1 percent between 2000 and 2010 and 10.2 percent between 2010 and 2021, which more closely aligns with county-wide trends. The population of Antioch makes up
9.8 percent of Contra Costa County.
B22
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-3
Figure 2-1 Population Growth Trends
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series.
TABLE 2-2 C ITY AND COUNTY POPULATION TRENDS, 1990-2021 Jurisdiction 1990 2000
Percent
Increase
1990-2000 2010
Percent
Increase
2000-2010 2020
Percent
Increase
2010-2020
Contra Costa County 803,732 948,816 18.1% 1,049,025 10.6% 1,153,854 9.9% Antioch 62,195 90,532 45.6% 102,372 13.1% 112,520 9.9%
Source: Department of Finance, Report E-5, 2021.
RACE AND ETHNICITY
It is important to understand Understanding the racial makeup of a city and region is important to identify housing trends, needs, and preferences, and to design and implement effective housing policies and programs. Different ethnic groups may have varying housing needs that affect their housing preferences.
Understanding current trends provides a basis for addressing housing needs.
Since 2000, the percentage of residents in Antioch identifying as White has decreased while the percentage of residents of all other races and ethnicities has increased – by 30.6 percentage points.
As of 2019, the White population stands at 30,883, or 27.8 percent of overall population (see Figure 2-2). In absolute terms, the Hispanic or Latinx population increased the most while the White, Non-Hispanic population decreased the most.
B23
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-4
Figure 2-2 Population by Race, 2000-2019
Notes:
Data for 2019 represents 2015-2019 ACS estimates.
The Census Bureau defines Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity separate from racial categories. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B03002.
As seen in Figure 2-3, no one racial group comprises a majority population (over half of the total) in Antioch. Hispanic or Latinx residents make up the largest percentage (33 percent), which is larger than the Hispanic/Latinx population of both Contra Costa County and the larger Bay Area. White residents (approximately 28 percent of Antioch’s population) make up a significantly smaller proportion compared to the county and region, while Black or African American residents make up a much larger proportion (21 percent).
B24
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-5
Figure 2-3 Population by Race
Notes:
Data for 2019 represents 2015-2019 ACS estimates.
The Census Bureau defines Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity separate from racial categories. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B03002.
AGE COMPOSITION
Since 2000, the median age in Antioch has increased but remains relatively young. The median age in 2000 was just over 31; by 2019, this figure had increased to 36 years old. During this same timeframe, the youth population declined while the 55+ population increased (see Figure 2-4).
An increase in the 55+ population may indicate that there is a developing need for more senior housing options. There has also been a move by many 55+ population often desires to age-in-place or downsize to stay within their communities, which can mean more multi-family and ADA accessible units are also needed. Families and seniors of color are even more likely to experience challenges finding affordable housing. People of color make up 41.2 percent of seniors in Antioch and 69.9 percent of youth under 18 (see Figure 2-5).
B25
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-6
Figure 2-4 Population by Age, 2000-2019
Universe: Total population
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001.
Figure 2-5 Senior and Youth Population by Race
Universe: Total population
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-G).
7.8k
16.8k
12.0k
12.7k
16.6k
11.8k
6.1k
3.7k
2.3k
0.7k
7.3k
16.1k
16.0k
13.3k
14.2k
15.7k
10.8k
5.2k
2.7k
1.1k
6.8k
15.1k
16.5k
15.7k
14.1k
15.1k
14.3k
8.3k
3.5k
1.8k
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
Age 0-4 Age 5-14 Age 15-24 Age 25-34 Age 35-44 Age 45-54 Age 55-64 Age 65-74 Age 75-84 Age 85+ Population
2000 2010 2019
B26
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-7
2. EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME TRENDS
A city with more workers than jobs “exports” workers to other areas, whereas a city with a surplus of jobs must “import” them. With 49,236 employed residents and 21,541 jobs, Antioch is an exporter city, one which struggles with the opposite problem as manyof other cities in the Bay Area: there are more housing units than there are jobs in the city. And this occurs at both ends of the income spectrum: There are more low-wage residents making less than $25,000 annually than there are low-wage jobs, and more high-wage residents making more than $75,000 than high-wage jobs (see Figure 2-6). Most of the residents and jobs in Antioch are in the $25,000 to $49,999 wage group. The largest employment sector in Antioch is Health & Educational Services.
Figure 2-6 Workers by Earnings, by Jurisdiction as Place of Work and Place of Residence
Universe: Workers 16 years and over with earnings
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data 2015-2019, B08119, B08519.
Economic activity in Antioch is increasing though—from January 2010 to January 2021 the unemployment rate in Antioch decreased by 5.1 percentage points. Since 2010, the number of jobs located in the city increased by 3,450 (17.9 percent).
5.8k
10.0k
14.3k
9.1k
10.1k
3.2k
4.6k
5.4k
3.9k
4.5k
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
Less than
$9,999
$10,000 to
$24,999
$25,000 to
$49,999
$50,000 to
$74,999
$75,000 or
more
Worker Population
Antioch Residents Antioch Jobs
B27
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-8
Despite the economic and job growth experienced
throughout the region since 1990, the income gap has
continued to widen. In Antioch, 41.5 percent of households make earn more than the Area Median Income (AMI), 1
compared to 18.5 percent making less than 30 percent of AMI, which is considered extremely low-income (see Figure 2-7). In Contra Costa County, 30 percent of the AMI is the equivalent to the annual income of $34,850 for a family of four. There are 6,233 existing extremely low-income
households in Antioch (i.e., households that earn below 30 percent of AMI). In general, Antioch has a lower share of above moderate-income households and a higher share of
lower-income households than the Bay Area region and
Contra Costa County.
Figure 2-7 Households by Household Income Level
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release.
Throughout the region, there are also disparities between the incomes of homeowners and renters.
Typically, the number of low-income renters greatly outpaces the amount of housing available that is affordable for these households. In Antioch, a majority of households are owner- occupied as depicted below in Figure 2-8. Similar to the County and Bay Area region, 60.3 percent of households are owner occupied, whereas 39.7 percent are renter occupied. In Antioch, the largest proportion of renters falls in
1 Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine-county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the Oakland-Fremont Metro Area.
The Area Median Income for a household of
four in the Oakland-Fremont metro area is
$125,600. AMI is used to define household
income levels as follows
Moderate-income households make
between 80 and 120 percent of the AMI.
Low-income households make 50 to 80
percent of AMI.
Very-low-income households make 30 to
50 percent of AMI.
Extremely low-income households make
less than 30 percent of AMI.
B28
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-9 the 0 percent to 30 percent of AMI income group, while the largest proportion of homeowners are found in the Greater than 100 percent of AMI group (see Figure 2-9).
Figure 2-8 Housing Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003.
Figure 2-9 Household Income Level by Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013.
B29
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-10
3. HOUSING STOCK CHARACTERISTICS AND TRENDS
HOUSING GROWTH
The number of new homes built throughout the greater Bay Area has not kept pace with the demand, resulting in longer commutes, increasing prices, and exacerbating issues of displacement and homelessness. A diversity of homes at all income levels is important to create opportunities for all Antioch residents to live and thrive in the community. However, the number of homes in Antioch only increased 3.7 percent from 2010 to 2020, which is below the growth rate for both Contra Costa County and the Bay Area during this time period.
HOUSING COSTS AND COST BURDEN
Relative to other jurisdictions, Antioch remains one of the more affordable cities in the Bay Area, although prices have increased in recent years. In December 2019, Zillow reported that homes were sold at a median price of around $455,100, up from $419,700 two years earlier. In December 2020, there was an even starkeranother dramatic increase to $524,890. By comparison, the typical home value is $772,410 in Contra Costa County and $1,077,230 in the entire Bay Area region. Like home values, rents throughout the Bay Area have also increased dramatically, causing many renters, particularly low-income renters of color, to be priced out, evicted, or displaced, especially from high-cost areas closer to more job opportunities. It is a widespread phenomenon in the Bay Area that residents in this situation have hadmust to choose between commuting long distances to their jobs and schools or moving out of the region or even the state.
Ownership – The largest proportion of homes had a value in the range of $250k-$500k in 2019.
Home prices increased by 122.4 percent from 2010 to 2020. Rental Prices –The typical contract rent for an apartment in Antioch was $1,610 in 2019 , representing a . Rental prices increased by 50.8 percent increase from 2009. to 2019. To rent a typical apartment without cost burden, a household in Antioch would need to make $64,560 per year..2 It is important to note that contract rents may differ significantly from market rents based on housing market conditions. According to Zillow rental data, the median market rent in the city of Antioch was $2,850 as of fall 2022, reflecting a 26% percent annual increase from 2021. 3.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) considers housing to be affordable for a household if the household spends less than 30 percent of its income on housing costs. A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30 percent of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50 percent of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” In Antioch, 20.3 percent of households spend 30-50 percent of their income on housing and are considered cost burdened; while 20.8% percent of households are severely cost burdened and spend over 50 percent of their income on housing.
Throughout the city, the level of cost burden experienced by households varies by income level as demonstrated in Figure 2-10 below. As also discussed in Chapter 2, due to renters’ disproportionate experiencing of cost burden, renters also disproportionately experience overcrowding in the City.
Overcrowding is also more prevalent in rental households.
2 Note that contract rents may differ significantly from, and often being lower than, current listing prices. 3 Per Zillow Rental Manager, https://www.zillow.com/rental-manager/market-trends/antioch-ca/,. accessed November 23, 2022,
B30
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-11 sthe cost burdenpercent As part of the hHousing eElement update, the City of Antioch includes a number of programs within Chapter 7, Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs. of the element whichThe programs seek encourage the development of rental housing options affordable to lower income households. These programs, includinge those Program 2.1.6. Housing for Extremely Low-Income Households, Program 2.1.7.
Support Non-Profit Housing Sponsors, Program 2.1.9. Housing for Unhoused Populations, and Program 3.1.4.
Coordination with Agencies Serving the Unhoused Population . These programs relate to ongoing outreach and coordination with non-profit housing developers and service providers to provide housing and services for ELI and, VLI households. Chapter 7 also includes additional programs related to special needs housing whichthat are intended to encourage the development of emergency, transitional, and supportive housing options which typically serve ELI, and VLI households.
Figure 2-10: Cost Burden by Income Level
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs,” which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release.
In the city costCost burden also varies by housing tenure. As previously discussed, in Antioch 60.3 percent of households are owner occupied, whereas 39.7 percent are renter occupied in Antioch.
However, as shown in Figure 2-11, 58.8 percent of renter occupied households experience some level of cost burden. Conversely, only 33.1 percent of owner occupied households experience some level of cost burden. This indicates thatd renters in the City of Antioch disproportionatly experience cost burden in hosuinghousing cost burdens.
B31
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-12
Figure 2-11: Cost Burden by Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25070, B25091.
HOUSING TYPE AND TENURE
It is important to have a variety of housing types to meet the needs of a community today and in the future. In 2020, 77.7 percent of homes in Antioch were single-family detached, 4.7 percent were single- family attached, 4.1 percent were small multi-family (2-4 units), and 12.4 percent were medium or large multi-family (5+ units). Between 2010 and 2020, the number of single-family units increased more than multi-family units (see Figure 2-12). Generally, in Antioch, the share of housing stock that is detached single-family homes is above that of other jurisdictions in the region. Most of the future development opportunitiesy areis on sites designated for multi-family and mixed use , which will lead to an increase the availability of multi-family units in Antioch.
B32
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-13
Figure 2-12 Housing Type Trends
Universe: Housing units
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series.
Vacant units make up 3.8 percent of the overall housing stock in Antioch. The rental vacancy stands at
4.2 percent, while the ownership vacancy rate is 1.2 percent. A vacancy rate of 5 percent for rental housing and 2 percent for ownership housing is generally considered a healthy balance between supply and demand. A low vacancy rate may lead to result in an increased competition of units, resulting in increased prices on rents and ownership units and can lead to overcrowding and/or overpayment.
The number of residents who own their homes compared to those who rent their homes can help identify the level of housing insecurity, or – ability for individuals to stay in their homes, – in a city and region. Generally, renters may be displaced more quicklyquicker if prices increase, and are more likely to experience overcrowding. Homeownership rates often vary considerably across race/ethnicity in the Bay Area and throughout the country. These disparities not only reflect differences in income and wealth but also stem from federal, State, and local policies that limited access to homeownership for communities of color while facilitating homebuying for White residents. While many of these policies, such as redlining, have been formally disbanded, the impacts of race-based policy are still evident across Bay Area communities.4 Notably, recent changes to State law require local jurisdictions to examine these dynamics and other fair housing issues when updating their Housing Elements. This analysis can be found in Appendix B, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.
In Antioch, there are a total of 34,028 housing units., and f Fewer residents rent rather than own their homes: 39.7 percent rent versus 60.3 percent, respectively ownership. By comparison, 34.1 percent of households in Contra Costa County are renters, while 44 percent of Bay Area households rent their homes. In Antioch, 2.3 percent of households that rent are severely overcrowded (more than 1.5 occupants per room), compared to 0.8 percent of households that are owner occupied. If a city’s rental housing stock does not include larger apartments, large households who rent could end up living in
4 See, for example, Rothstein, R. (2017). The color Color of lawLaw: a A Fforgotten Hhistory of hHow oOur gGovernment sSegregated America. New York, NY & London, UK: Liveright Publishing.
B33
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-14
overcrowded conditions. In Antioch, for large households with 5 or more persons, most units (54.3 percent%) are owner occupied.
No neighborhoods in Antioch are identified as “Highest Resource” or “High Resource” areas by State- commissioned research, while 89.6 percent of residents live in areas identified by this research as “Low Resource” or “High Segregation and Poverty” areas. These neighborhood designations are based on a range of indicators, including education, poverty, proximity to jobs and economic opportunities, low pollution levels, and other factors. 5 According to research from The University of California, Berkeley,
31.3 percent of households in Antioch live in neighborhoods that are susceptible to or experiencing displacement, and 19.2 percent live in areas at risk of or undergoing gentrification. In Antioch, 6.8 percent of households in Antioch live are in neighborhoods where low-income households are likely excluded due to prohibitive housing costs. Displacement can be addressed by There are various ways to address displacement including ensuringbuilding new housing at all income levels is built..
HOUSING CONDITION
Generally, there is limited data on the extent of substandard housing issues in a community. However, The U.S. Census Bureau data gives a sense of some of the substandard conditions that may be present in Antioch. In Antioch, 1.6 percent of renters in Antioch reported lacking a kitchen and 0.7 percent of renters lack plumbing, compared to 0.3 percent of owners who lack a kitchen and 0.3 percent of owners who lack plumbing. In addition, the City’s Code Enforcement Division estimates that approximately 10-15 percent of the housing stock needs rehabilitation, while another 15 percent likely needs to be replaced all together. .
The age of a community’s housing stock can provide another indicator of overall housing conditions.
Typically, housing over 30 years in age is likely to have rehabilitation needs that may include new plumbing, roof repairs, and foundation work, and other repairs. In Antioch, the largest proportion of the housing stock was built 1980 to 1999, with 15,182 units constructed during this period (see Figure 2- 1023). With the majority of the City’s city’s housing stock built prior to or approaching the 30-year benchmark, it is a priority of the Citycity to ensure that housing units are maintained and in compliance with health and safety codes. Based on community outreach related to the Housing Element Update it is known that a majority of the city’s substandard housing stock is primarily located in northwestern parts of the city, including within the city’s environmental justice neighborhoods. Programs are included within Chapter 7 of the Element to ensure the City routinely monitor housing conditions throughout environmental justice neighborhoods and advertise home improvement, and tenant rights resources available to residents and landlords in these areas.
5 For more information on the “opportunity area” categories developed by HCD and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, see this website: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp. The degree to which different jurisdictions and neighborhoods have access to opportunity will likely need to be analyzed as part of new Housing Element requirements related to affirmatively furthering fair housing. ABAG/MTC will be providing jurisdictions with technical assistance on this topic this summer, following the release of additional guidance from HCD.
B34
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-15 Figure 2-13 Housing Units by Year Structure Built
Universe: Housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25034.
ANALYSIS OF AT-RISK HOUSING
While there is an immense immediate need to produce new affordable housing units, ensuring that the existing affordable housing stock remains affordable is equally important. Additionally, itIt is typically faster and less expensive to preserve currently affordable units that are at risk of converting to market-rate than it is to build new affordable housing.
California Housing Element lawLaw Section 65583(a)(D)(9) requires the analysis of government-assisted housing units that are eligible to convert from low-income housing to market-rate housing during the next 10 years due to expiring subsidies, mortgage prepayments, or expiration of affordability restrictions ; and the development of programs aimed at their preservation. An inventory of assisted units in the City city of Antioch was compiled based on information gathered from the California Housing Partnership Corporation (Table 2-3). According to the California Housing Partnership Corporation, there are 1,691 subsidized affordable units in Antioch. Of these units, none are at High Risk or Very High Risk of conversion. There are no properties at risk of opting out of programs that keep them affordable to very low- and low-income households over the Housing Element period (2023-2031). However, the 4 units at Hope Solutions and the 50 at Antioch Rivertown Senior are at moderate or low risk of conversion, respectively, within 10 years.
B35
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-16
TABLE 2-3 A SSISTED UNITS INVENTORY
Projects
Type of
Units
Total
Units
Assisted
Units
Funding
Source
Earliest
Date of
Conversion Risk Level
Hope Solutions
1601 Francisco Ct. Supportive 4 4 CalHFA 02/01/32 Moderate Antioch Rivertown Senior
1400 A St Senior 50 50 HUD 08/30/32 Low
Hillcrest Terrace
3420 Deer Valley Rd Senior 65 64 HUD 03/31/40 Low
Casa Del Rio Senior
Housing
615 West 7th St
Senior 82 82 LIHTC; CalHFA;
HCD 06/05/54 Low
West Rivertown
Apartments
811 West 4th St
Family 57 56 LIHTC 2057 Low
Rivertown Place
7121 I Street Family 40 39 LIHTC 2062 Low
Riverstone Apartments
2200 Sycamore Dr Family 136 134 LIHTC 2062 Low
Hudson Townhouse Manor
3421 Hudson Ct Family 122 121 LIHTC; HUD 2066 Low
Delta View Apartments
3915 Delta Fair Blvd. Family 205 203 LIHTC 2069 Low
Tabora Gardens Senior
Apartments
3701 Tabora Dr
Senior 85 84 LIHTC; HCD 2070 Low
Delta Pines Apartments
2301 Sycamore Dr Family 186 185 LIHTC 2070 Low
Casa Blanca Apartments
1000 Claudia Ct Family 115 114 LIHTC 2070 Low
Antioch Scattered Site
Renovation
(Site A- Pinecrest
Apartments)
1945 Cavallo Rd
Family 56 54 LIHTC 2072 Low
Villa Medanos
2811 Cadiz Ln Family 112 111 LIHTC 2073 Low
Antioch Senior and Family
Apartments
3560 East 18th St.
Senior/
Family 394 390 LIHTC; CalHFA 2074 Low
Source: California Housing Partnership Corporation 2022 Database, Ccommunication with City Sstaff and Hope Solutions.
Hope Solutions and the 50 at Antioch Rivertown Senior are at moderate or low risk of conversion, respectively, within 10 years.
The Hope Solutions is a four-bedroom house. – eEach resident has their own bedroom, and they share common space. These units are under the auspices of Behavioral Health and eligible residents may be homeless or at risk of homelessness. Hope Solutions mission is to provide permanent housing solutions and vital support services to highly vulnerable families and individuals. Given their mission and values this project is very unlikely to turnover after 2032. If necessary, a purchasing a replacement home of a similar size would be approximately $630,000 to $700,000 based on recent listings in Antioch.
B36
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-17 Antioch Rivertown is affordable to very low-income seniors, owned by a stable nonprofit developer, with almost no risk of turnover after 2032. If necessary, tThe construction of new below market rate housing is a way to replace the at-risk units. Using data produced by BAE Economics for Antioch, new multi-family units cost approximately $450,000 per unit to construct. The cost the cost to replace 50 units would be approximately $22,500,000.
Based on an evaluation of LoopNet commercial real estate listings, the per unit cost of acquiring and preserving assisted affordable units at-risk of turnover averages approximately $279,89680,000 per unit (for small multi-family properties for sale in the City of Antioch which were developed between the years 1965 and 1980), the per unit cost of acquiring and preserving assisted affordable units at-risk of turnover averages approximately $279,896 per unit.
Funding sources for housing preservation, including the preservation of at-risk units, include the Golden State Acquisition Fund, Multi-Family Housing Program, and Predevelopment Loan Program. There are several qualified entities that acquire and manage affordable housing in Contra Costa County. These organizations include:
BRIDGE Housing Corporation
Christian Church Homes
Eden Housing Inc.
Mercy Housing Corporation
USA Properties Fund
Pacific Housing and Resources for Community Development (RDC) Housing resources, including resources for preservation, are more thoroughly discussed in Chapter 5, Resources.
4. SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS
Finally, some populationPopulation groups may have special housing needs that require specific program responses, and these groups may experience barriers to accessing stable housing due to their specific housing circumstances. For resources available for these special needs populations, see Chapter 5, Resources.
SENIOR HOUSEHOLDS
Senior households often experience a combination of factors that can make accessing or keeping affordable housing a challenge. SeniorsThey often live on fixed incomes and are more likely to have disabilities, chronic health conditions, and/or reduced mobility.
Understanding how seniors might be cost -burdened is of particular importance due to their special housing needs, particularly for low-income seniors. Approximately 44 percent of seniors making less than 30 percent of AMI are spending the majority of their income on housing. For seniors making more than 100 percent of AMI, 91 percent are not cost-burdened and spend less than 30 percent of their income on housing.
Seniors who rent may be at even greater risk for housing challenges than those who own , due to income differences between these groups. The largest proportion of senior households who rent make earn 0 percent to 30 percent of AMI, while the largest proportion of senior households who are homeowners falls in the income group Greater than 100 percent of AMI (see Figure 2-14).
B37
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-18
Figure 2-14 Senior Households by Income and Tenure
Universe: Senior households
Notes: For the purposes of this graph, senior households are those with a householder who is aged 62 or older.
Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release.
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
Persons with disabilities, defined as those living with a variety of physical, cognitive, and/or sensory impairments, face additional housing challenges. Encompassing a broad group of individuals living with a variety of physical, cognitive, and sensory impairments, many peoplePersons with disabilities often live on fixed incomes and need are in need of specialized care, yet often rely on family members for assistance due to the high cost of care. In Antioch, 15.2 percent of residents have a disability of any kind and of any kind that may require accessible housing, which is a higher percentage than the County county (11.1 percent) and the region (9.6 percent). The American Community Survey (ACS) documents the presence of the following types of disabilities among Antioch’s residents:
Ambulatory – 7.3 percent
Cognitive – 6.7 percent
Independent Living Difficulty – 5.7 percent
Hearing – 3.2 percent
Vision – 2.9 percent
In Antioch, of the population with a developmental disability, children under the age of 18 make up
41.4 percent of the population with a developmental disability, while adults account for 58.6 percent. The most common living arrangement for individuals with developmental disabilities in Antioch is the home of a parent, family member, or guardian.
B38
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-19
DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
Affordable and accessible housing is a crucial need for Pp ersons with disabilities but the demand typically outweighs what is available are not only in need of affordable housing but accessibly designed housing, which . offers greater mobility and opportunity for independence. Unfortunately, the need typically outweighs what is available, particularly in a housing market with such high demand. People with disabilities are at a high risk for housing insecurity, homelessness , and institutionalization, particularly when they lose aging caregivers. Figure 40, in Appendix A, Housing Needs Data Report: Antioch shows the rates at which different disabilities are present among residents of Antioch. Overall, 15.2 percent of people in Antioch have a disability of any kind.
State law Government Section 65583 (a)(D)(7) also requires Housing Elements to examine the housing needs of people with developmental disabilities. Developmental disabilities are defined as severe, chronic, and/or attributed to a mental or physical impairment that begins before a person turns 18 years old. This can include Down Syndrome, autism, epilepsy, cerebral palsy, and mild to severe mental impediment.
Some people with developmental disabilities are unable to work, rely on Supplemental Security Income, and live with family members. In addition to their specific housing needs, they are at increased risk of housing insecurity after an aging parent or family member is no longer able to care for them.
In Antioch, there are 576 children under the age of 18 (41.4 % percent) and 816 adults (58.6 percent) with a developmental disability, and 816 adults (58.6%). . The most common living arrangement for individuals with disabilities in Antioch is the home of parent , /family member, or /guardian. Table 6, in Appendix A, Housing Needs Data Report: Antioch shows the population with developmental disabilities by residence .
LARGE HOUSEHOLDS
Large family households often have special housing needs due to a lack of available and adequately sized affordable housing available. The higher costs required for homes with multiple bedrooms can result in larger families experiencing a disproportionate cost burden than the rest of the population and can increase the risk of housing insecurity. In Antioch, 17.5 percent of large family households experience a cost burden of 30 percent to 50 percent , while 18.4 percent of households spend more than half of their income on housing. Some 20.9 percent of all other households have a cost burden of 30 percent to 50 percent, with 21.3 percent of households spending more than 50 percent of their income on housing.
FEMALE-HEADED FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS
Households headed by one person are often at greater risk of housing insecurity, particularly female- headed households, who may be supporting children or a family with only one income. In Antioch, the largest proportion of households is Married-couple Family Households at 49.1 percent of total, while Female- Headed Households make up 20.4 percent of all households. The portion of female-headed households in Antioch (20.4 percent) is greater than the portion in the Country country (12.2 percent) or larger Bay Area region (10.4 percent). Moreover, the female-headed households tend to be concentrated in census tracts in northwestern Antioch, as discussed more thoroughly in Appendix B, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.
Female-headed households with children may face particular housing challenges, with pervasive gender inequality resulting in lower wages for women. Moreover, the added need for childcare can make finding a home that is affordable more challenging. In Antioch, 32.7 percent of female-headed households with B39
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-20
children fall below the Federal Poverty Line, while 8.1 percent of female-headed households without children live in povertyfall below the Federal Poverty Level .
FARMWORKERS
Across the state, housing for farmworkers has been recognized as an important and unique concern.
Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned through seasonal agricultural work. Farmworkers have special housing needs because they earn lower incomes than many other workers and move throughout the season from one harvest to the next. Farmers and farmworkers are the keystone of the larger food sector, which includes the industries that provide farmers with fertilizer and equipment; farms to produce crops and livestock; and the industries that process, transport, and distribute food to consumers.
While overall the Bay Area has shifted away from our historical agricultural economic base, Bay Area counties still preserve strong agricultural roots. And yet, the responsibility for farmworker housing is not just with these counties. In many Bay Area counties, farmworkers choose to live within incorporated cities due to the diversity and availability of housing, proximity to schools and other employment opportunities for other family members, and overall affordability.
Many fFarmworker households tend to have difficulties securing safe, decent, and affordable housing. Far too often, farmworkers are forced to occupy substandard homes or live in overcrowded situations.
In the Bay Area, about 3.7 percent of farmworkers, including both seasonal and permanent residents, are in Contra Costa County. However, per the USDA, today’s farmworkers can commute up to 75 miles to the workplace. Based on this, the need for housing for agricultural workers is not just the responsibility of Bay Area counties with a robust agricultural economy. In Antioch, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), there are approximately 206 residents employed in the agriculture, forestry, and fishing industries.
EXTREMELY LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
In Antioch, 6,233 households (or 18.5 percent of total households) makeing less than 30 percent of AMI and are considered extremely low income. 6, This is a higher percentage than that of the region or Contra Costa County (see Figure 2-15).
HCD’s guidance notes that instead of using use U.S. Census data to calculate the percentage of the very low-income RHNA obligation that qualifies for extremely low-income households, local jurisdictions can presume that 50 percent of their RHNA obligation for very low-income households qualifies for extremely low-income households. In Antioch, the RHNA obligation for very low-income households is 792, which means that half, or 396 units, roughly half, are represent the number of housing units required to serve the needs of, will qualify for extremely low-income households persons.
6 Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located. Households making between 80 and 120 percent of the AMI are moderate-income, those making 50 to 80 percent are low-income, those making 30 to 50 percent are very low-income, and those making less than 30 percent are extremely low-income (adjusted for household size).
B40
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-21 The Housing is Element includes programs intended to facilitate the development of housing units in the city which serve extremely low-income households earning less than 30 percent of AMI. This includes Program 3.1.1. Housing for Special Needs Groups, which proposes to gives persons with disabilities the opportunity to request reasonable accommodation from zoning laws when they are a barrier to equal housing access pursuant to State and federal law.
Figure 2-15 Households by Household Income Level
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located. The data that is reported for the Bay Area is not based on a regional AMI but instead refers to the regional total of households in an income group relative to the AMI for the county where that household is located. Local jurisdictions are required to provide an estimate for their projected extremely low-income households (0-30% AMI) in their Housing Elements. HCD’s official Housing Element guidance notes that jurisdictions can use their RHNA for very low-income households (those making 0-50% AMI) to calculate their projected extremely low-income households. As Bay Area jurisdictions have not yet received their final RHNA numbers, this document does not contain the required data point of projected extremely low-income households. The report portion of the housing data needs packet contains more specific guidance for how local staff can calculate an estimate for projected extremely low-income households once jurisdictions receive their 6th cycle Cycle RHNA numbers.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release.
Currently, people of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result ofbecause of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to Wwhite residents.7 These economic disparities also leave communities of color at higher risk for housing insecurity, displacement, or homelessness. In Antioch, Black or African
7 Moore, E., Montojo, N. and Mauri, N., 2019. Roots, Race & Place: A History of Racially Exclusionary Housing the San Francisco Bay Area. Hass Institute.
B41
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-22
American (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents experience the highest rates of poverty, followed by Other Race or Multiple Races (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents (see Figure 2-16).
Figure 2-16 Poverty Status by Race
Universe: Population for whom poverty status is determined Notes: The Census Bureau uses a federally defined poverty threshold that remains constant throughout the country and does not correspond to Area Median Income. For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and non-Hispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive. Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the population for whom poverty status is determined for this jurisdiction. However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the population for whom poverty status is determined.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B17001(A-I).
PERSONS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
Persons experiencing homelessness remains an urgent challenge throughout the region, reflecting a range of social, economic, and psychological factors. Addressing the specific housing needs for the unhoused population remains a priority for the City of Antioch, particularly since homelessness is disproportionately experienced by people of color, persons with disabilities, those struggling with addiction , and those dealing with traumatic life circumstances. In Contra Costa County, the most common type of household experiencing homelessness is those without children in their care. Among households experiencing homelessness that do not have children, 75.9 percent are unsheltered. Of homeless households with children, most are sheltered in emergency shelter (see Figure 2-1 467).
Crucially, there remain an estimated 238 individuals in Antioch who are experiencing unsheltered homelessness who have a need for supportive housing, which is a higher number than almost all other jurisdictions in Contra Costa County (see Table 2-4Figure 2-158).
More information on each of these population groups can be found in Appendix A, Housing Needs Data Report: Antioch.
B42
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 2-23
Figure 2-17 Homelessness by Household Type and Shelter Status, Contra Costa County
Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019).
Figure 2-18 Number of Unsheltered Individuals by Contra Costa County Cities Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Source: Contra Costa County: Annual Point in Time Count Report.
B43
2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2-24
TABLE 2-4 N UMBER OF UNSHELTERED INDIVIDUALS BY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CITIES West County Central County East County
Location # Location # Location #
Crockett 35 Alamo 2 Antioch 238
El Cerrito 24 Blackhawk 6 Bay Point 49
El Sobrante 9 Clayton 2 Bayview 2
Hercules 7 Concord 160 Bethel Island 2
North Richmond 22 Danville 7 Brentwood 80
Pinole 7 Lafayette 3 Discovery Bay 2
Richmond 280 Martinez 127 Oakley 50
Rodeo 62 Moraga 4 Pittsburg 102
San Pablo 67 Orinda 1
Pacheco 26
Pleasant Hill 90
San Ramon 6
Walnut Creek 80
Source: Contra Costa County: Annual Point in Time Count Report.
B44
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-1
AFFIRMATIVELY
FURTHERING FAIR
HOUSING
Assembly Bill (AB) 686, signed in 2018 and codified in Government Code Section 65583, establishes new requirements for cities Cities and counties Counties to take deliberate action to relieve patterns of segregation and to foster inclusive communities, a process referred to as affirmatively furthering fair housing. With these new requirements, housing Housing elements Elements are now required to include the following:
A sSummary of fair housing issues in the jurisdiction and an assessment of the jurisdiction’s fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity;
An analysis of available federal, State, and local data and knowledge to identify integration and segregation patterns and trends, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs within the jurisdiction, including displacement risk;
An assessment of the contributing factors for the fair housing issues identified in the analysis; The iIdentification of the jurisdiction’s fair housing priorities and goals, giving highest priority to the greatest contributing factors that limit or deny fair housing choice or access to opportunity, or negatively impact fair housing or civil rights compliance; Concrete strategies and actions to implement the fair housing priorities and goals in the form of programs to affirmatively further fair housing; and
Meaningful, frequent, and ongoing public participation to reach a broad audience.
The purpose of these requirements is to identify segregated living patterns and replace them with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, to transform R/ECAPs into areas of opportunities, and to foster and maintain compliance with the Civil Rights and Fair Housing Law.
B45
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-2
This chapter begins with a summary of the Assessment of Fair Housing found in Appendix B and calls outoutlines the most important findings and contributing factors of fair housing issues in Antioch from the analysis found in Appendix B, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing . It then describes how the Housing sites Sites Iinventory relates and is responsive to the City’s duty to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH).
Finally, this chapter describes how outreach was done in a manner consistent with HCD’s AFFH guidance.
Appendix B, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, includes this same analysis in more detail.
A. ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
The Assessment of Fair Housing covers the following topics: fair housing enforcement and capacity, segregation and integration, R/ECAPs, access to opportunity, disproportionate housing needs and displacement risk, and identification of contributing factors.
1. ENFORCEMENT AND CAPACITY
Antioch residents are afforded fair housing protections under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Ralph Civil Rights Act, and Unruh Civil Rights Act. There has been a downward trend from 2016 to 2020 in the number of Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) complaints in the Countycounty, but the number of cases filed with the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (HUD FHEO) has been more volatile. As shown in Table 3-1, these cases peaked in 2019 before drastically falling in 2020. A total of 148 cases were filed in the County county between 2015 and 2020, with disability being the top allegation of basis of discrimination, followed by familial status and race.
TABLE 3-1 N UMBER OF FHEO FILED CASES BY PROTECTED CLASS IN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY (2015–2020)
Year
Number of
Filed Cases Disability Race National Origin Sex Familial Status 2015 28 17 4 2 2 4
2016 30 14 8 7 5 6
2017 20 12 3 5 1 5
2018 31 20 6 3 4 9
2019 32 27 4 4 4 1
2020 7 4 1 0 2 1
Total 148 94 26 21 18 26
Percentage of Total Filed Cases
*Note that cases may be filed on more
than one basis.
63.5% 17.5% 14.2% 12.2% 17.6%
Source: Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) Filed Cases, 2021.
The City of Antioch contracts with its nonprofit partners, Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity (ECHO) Housing and Bay Area Legal Aid, to provide fair housing services. After receiving a complaint, the ECHO will provide clients with counseling and send testers for investigation. The most common actions taken or services provided by ECHO after receiving a complaint are providing clients with counseling, followed by sending testers for investigation. Regardless of actions taken or services provided, almost 45 B46
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-3 percent of cases are found to have insufficient evidence, and only about 12 percent of all cases resulted in successful mediation. Testing data from ECHO Housing is shown in Table 3-2 and indicates that housing discrimination may be increasing in Antioch. Differential treatment was not detected between 2017 and 2019 but in fiscal years 2019-2020, 8 percent of cases indicated differential treatment based on racial voice identification, and in fiscal years 2020-2021, 17 percent of cases indicated discrimination based on potential tenants’ use of Housing Choice Vouchers. Antioch had more source of income discrimination identified in this housing testing than the other three jurisdictions tested during this same period (0 percent in Concord and Walnut Creek and 5 percent of cases in Contra Costa County).
TABLE 3-2 ECHO FAIR HOUSING ANTIOCH AUDIT RESULTS
Fiscal Year
2017-2018
Fiscal Year
2018-2019
Fiscal Year
2019-2020
Fiscal Year
2020-2021
Differential Treatment 0 0 1 2
No Differential Treatment 13 13 11 10
Differential Treatment (Percentage of Total) 0% 0% 8% 17% Source: ECHO Fair Housing Fair Housing Audit Reports.
The City does not provide direct mediation or legal services, but it does provide resources on the City website and directs residents to ECHO Housing and Bay Area Legal Aid for fair housing assistance. While these organizations provide valuable assistance, the capacity and funding that they have is generally insufficient. Greater resources would enable stronger outreach efforts, including populations that may be less aware of their fair housing rights, such as limited English proficiency and LGBTQ residents. The city of has made recent efforts to partner with nonprofits to engage in greater outreach to the Hispanic community in order to encourage greater participation in government service programs—generally resulting in increased outreach efforts, but “with declining success.” 1 Additionally, while Antioch reported significant new outreach programming for people experiencing homelessness, it also faces a severe continuing lack of available funding and services to support this population. Local knowledge from service providers indicated that seniors are another population that could benefit from targeted outreach on fair housing and that Antioch and East County at large would benefit from increased coordination between service providers.
2. SEGREGATION AND INTEGRATION
The racial and ethnic composition of Antioch diverges significantly from those of the County county and the Region region and has changed significantly over time. In particular, Antioch has much higher Black and Hispanic population concentrations than both the County and the Region and lower non-Hispanic White and Asian or Pacific Islander population concentrations than both the county and region. The growth in the Black population stands in stark contrast to a the County county with a plateauingflat Black population and a region with a declining Black population.
Antioch also has higher concentrations of persons with disabilities across all categories than both the County county and the Regionregion, particularly for persons with cognitive disabilities. The City’sAntioch’s comparatively low-cost housing market and fast pace of growth likely contribute to the continued differences between the City city and County county in terms of the composition of the population. While Antioch provides a more affordable option for lower-income households seeking for- sale and ownership housing, the high cost of housing in surrounding areas in the Bay Area continues to
1 City of Antioch 2017-18 CAPER, available at https://www.antiochca.gov/fc/cdbg/FY-2017-18-CAPER.pdf.
B47
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-4
serve as a barrier for many low- and moderate-income households. Additionally, as discussed within Chapter 8, Participation, as part of the study session public hearings held for the hHousing eElement update, residents throughout Antioch are experiencing skyrocketing rents, sometimes equating to several hundred dollar increases.
Antioch is one of the most diverse jurisdictions in the region (see Figure 3-1). Segregation is primarily a regional and inter-municipal phenomenon (e.g., Black residents in particular are segregated in Antioch, but the areas from which they are disproportionately excluded are other parts of the County county and Regionregion, not other neighborhoods within Antioch). However, there are concentrations of low- income households, people with disabilities, and people experiencing poverty in certain parts of the city.
In particular, the northwest portion of the city on either side of California State Route 4 is an area of the city with concentrations of lower-income households, poverty, and persons with disabilities, as shown below in Figures 3-2 through 3-4.
Figure 3-1 Diversity Index Score, 2018
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) AFFH Data Viewer.
B48
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-5
Figure 3-2 Median Income per Block Group, 2019
Source: ACS 2019 5-year estimates, Table B19013.
Figure 3-3 Percent of Households in Poverty per Block Group, 2019 Source: ACS 2019 5-year estimates, Table B17001.
B49
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-6
Figure 3-4 Percent of Persons with a Disability per Block Group, 2019 Source: ACS 2019 5-year estimates, Table B18101.
B50
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-7
3. R/ECAPS
In Contra Costa County, the only area that
meets the official HUD definition of a R/ECAP is
in Concord. There are no R/ECAP areas within
the City of Antioch.
However, according to the 2020-2025 Contra
Costa County Analysis of Impediments to Fair
Housing Choice (2020 AI), when a more
localized definition is used that considers the
Bay Area’s high cost of living, 12 additional
census tracts qualify as R/ECAPs. In Antioch, the
census tract known as the Sycamore
neighborhood is considered a R/ECAP when
utilizing this expanded definition. Antioch’s
R/ECAP is the navy bluenavy-blue rectangle just
north of State Route 4 in Figure 3-3 above and
the red triangle in Figure 3-5 below. When
comparing this area to the racial dot map in
Figure 3-56, it becomes evident that this
neighborhood has higher portions
concentrations of Latino and Black residents
than other areas of the city.
According to data from the Urban Institute, 2 the
Sycamore neighborhood (i.e., census tract
3072.02) has 680 extremely low-income renters
and is in the 96th percentile statewide for
housing instability risk.3 It is in 97th percentile on the Urban Institute’s Equity Subindex, which is based on the shares of people of color, extremely low-income renter households, households receiving public assistance, and people born outside the U.S. According to City staff, the renters in this neighborhood are predominantly Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) women with children. 4 Local organizations sited the age and condition of housing stock in this area as a contributing factor; the homes near Highway State Route 4 are older, smaller, and less expensive in this area, and therefore more affordable to lower-income households, and those living on fixed-incomes. and Similarly, neighborhoods with concentrations of newer housing stock are often resistant to welcoming residents with lower incomes living on fixed incomes (e.g., voucher holders). These patterns have led to a concentration of extremely- and very low-income Latino and Black households in northwestern Antioch.
2 Where to Prioritize Emergency Rental Assistance to Keep Renters in Their Homes – Antioch. 2021. Available at https://www.urban.org/features/where-prioritize-emergency-rental-assistance-keep-renters-their-homes. Urban Institute, 2021.Where to Prioritize Emergency Rental Assistance to Keep Renters in Their Homes, May 14. 3 Calculated based on shared of people living in poverty, renter-occupied housing units, severely cost-burdened low- income renters, severely overcrowded households, and unemployed people. 4 House, Teri, CDBG & Housing Consultant, City of Antioch. 2021. WrittenPersonal communication with to Urban Planning Partners., July 15.
RACIALLY AND ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF
POVERTY (R/ECAP)
HUD developed a definition of R/ECAPs based on the
racial/ethnic makeup of an area as well as its poverty
rate. For a metropolitan area to be considered a
R/ECAP under HUD’s definition, it must:
1) Have a non-White population of 5o percent or
more, and
2) Have extreme levels of poverty, meaning either:
a. At least 40 percent of the population lives at
or below the federal poverty line, or
b. The poverty rate is three times the average
census tract level poverty rate in the region,
whichever is less.
Because the federal poverty rate is utilized in this
definition, the Bay Area’s high cost of living is not
reflected. The Bay Area’s cost of living far exceeds the national average, and so a broader definition of
R/ECAP is utilized in this Housing Element, consistent
with the County Costa County Consortium Analysis of
Impediments to Fair Housing (June 2019). This refined
definition includes census tracts that
1) Have a non-White population of 5o percent or
more, and
2) Have poverty rates of 25 percent or more.
B51
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-8
Figure 3-5 R/ECAPs’S, (2009-2013)
Universe: Population.
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) AFFH Data Viewer. Decennial census (2010); American Community Survey (ACS), 2006-2010; Brown Longitudinal Tract Database (LTDB) based on decennial census data, 2000 & 1990.
Figure 3-6 Racial Dot Map of Antioch , (2020)
Universe: Population.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002.
Note: The plot shows the racial distribution at the census block level for City of Antioch and vicinity. Dots in each census block are randomly placed and should not be construed as actual placement of people.
B52
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-9
4. DISPROPORTIONATE HOUSING NEEDS
COST BURDEN
As discussed in Chapter 2, Housing Needs, housing needs are experienced disproportionately throughout the City of Antioch based on housing tenure and household income. As previously discussed, 60.3 percent of households in Antioch are owner occupied, whereas 39.7 percent are renter occupied. However, as shown in Figure 2-11, within Chapter 2, Housing Needs , 58.8 percent of renter occupied households experience some level of cost burden. Conversely, only 33.1 percent of owner-occupied households experience some level of cost burden.
Additionally, tThroughout the city, the level of cost burden is disproportionately experienced based on income level as demonstrated in Figure 2-10, within Chapter 2, Housing Needs. Whereas households earning between 31-50, 51 to 80, and 81 to 100 percent of AMI comprise approximately 13.4, 15.9, and
10.7 percent of the city’s overall population, 30.2, 42.0, and 33.4 percent of these households respectively are cost burdened and spend between 30 to 50 percent of their incomes on housing.
Additionally, households earning less than 50 percent of AMI (i.e., very low and extremely low-income households) disproportionately experience severe cost burdens in housing. Households earning between 0 to 30 percent of AMI are considered extremely low income (ELI) and comprise approximately 18.5 percent of the city’s overall population according to Figure 2-7 in Chapter 2, Housing Needsabove.
Households earning between 31 to 50 percent of AMI are considered very low income (VLI) and comprise approximately 13.4 percent of the city’s overall population according to Figure 2-7 in Chapter 2, Housing Needsabove. However, despite the small percentages of the city’s overall population comprised of these income groups, approximately 77 percent of ELI households and 39.4 percent% of VLI households are severely cost burdened and spend greater than 50 percent of their income on housing. Several variables may compound to further exacerbate the level of cost burden experienced by ELI and VLI households., tThese variables include reliance on single-source and/or fixed incomes,, and childcare costs, and transportation costs among others..
As part public hearings related to the updating of the hHousing eElement uupdate, residents and members of community benefit organizations (CBOs), including but not limited to First 5 Contra Costa’s East County Regional Group, ACCE, and Monument Impact, provided feedback that residents residing within older multi-family buildings, including those within the Sycamore neighborhood, experienced threats of eviction, skyrocketing rents, and neglect of work orders and property maintenance. In response to these accounts, and the disproportionate experiencing of cost burden byof lower-income renters within the city, including within the Sycamore neighborhood, Program 5.1.8. Tenant Protections, within Chapter 7, Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs, was amended to include additional details regarding proposed tenant protections to be developed and considered for adoption by the City Council. These protections include but are not limited to Rent Stabilization, Just Cause Eviction, and Anti-Harassment Ordinances. In September 2022, the City of Antioch adopted a Rent Stabilization Ordinance which has been codified within Section 11-1 of the City’s Municipal Code.
OOVERCROWDING
As discussed in Chapter 2, Housing Needs, As also discussed in Chapter 2, ifif a city’s rental housing stock does not include larger apartments, large households who rent could end up living in overcrowded conditions. In Antioch, for large households with 5 or more persons, most units (54.3 percent%) are B53
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-10
owner occupied. Additionally, as discussed above within the R/ECAP section, the age and condition of housing stock in the Sycamore neighborhood, near and north of State Route 4 are older, smaller, and less expensive relative to other parts of the city, and therefore more affordable to lower-income households, and those living on fixed-incomes. Accordingly, lower income renters, many of which may live on fixed incomes, also disproportionately experience overcrowding in the city.
HOUSING CONDITIONS
As discussed in Chapter 2, Housing Needs, a significant portion of the City of Antioch’s housing stock was constructed prior to 1999, with a majority being built between 1980 and 1999. Additionally, as discussed with local organizations and the city, Aa majority of the city’s older housing stock is located north of State Road 4, including the Sycamore neighborhood (i.e., census tract 3072.02) which is classified as a R/ECAP.
As part public hearings related to the updating of the hHousing eElement update, residents and members of community benefit organizations (CBOs), provided feedback that residents residing within multi-family buildings within the Sycamore neighborhood experienced substandard housing conditions, threats of eviction, and neglect of work orders and property maintenance. In response to these accounts, and the disproportionate experiencing of substandard housing conditions experienced by lower-income households, and renters within the city, including within the Sycamore neighborhood, Chapter 7, Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs, of the housing element contains Program 1.1.76. Community Education Regarding the Availability of Antioch Housing Programs, Fair Housing, and Tenant/Landlord Services , and Program 1.1.98.
Safe Housing Outreach. These programs regardingrelate to community education related toon available fair housing programs and services for tenants and landlords in the city, as well as. Program 1.1.87. Code Enforcement, which continues the city’s enforcement of relevant local and state building codes.
Chapter 7, Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs, also includes Program 5.1.65. Home Repairs which seeks to prioritizes advertising and implementation of the cCity’s existing Housing Rehabilitation Program, intended for lower-income household home repairs, in lower-income neighborhoods including the Sycamore neighborhood.
DISPLACEMENT
As lower-income residents have been displaced from more expensive parts of the Bay Area,, Antioch has become one of thea comparatively more affordable places in the Bay Areato live for lower-income households. Accordingly, the concentration of lower-income households, and rates of poverty in Eastern Contra Costa County has increased dramatically. However, with the Bay Area’s competitive housing market, many lower-income renters within Antioch reported steep rental increases, threats of eviction, and landlord neglect as part of outreach efforts related to the hHousing eElement update. Many reported fears of displacement and a lack of availability of affordable housing options elsewhere in the city.
According to the University of California, Berkeley’s Urban Displacement Project, 5 31.3 percent of households in the City of Antioch live in neighborhoods that are susceptible to or experiencing displacement and 19.2 percent live in neighborhoods at risk of or undergoing gentrification. These neighborhoods are located inare in the northwest portion of the city, including the R/ECAP Sycamore neighborhood which as discussed is a R/ECAP. See Figure 3-67 below for the displacement risk levels in Antioch. In response to households within the northwest portion of the city disproportionately experiencing risk of displacement, Program 5.1.8. Tenant Protections, within Chapter 7, Housing Goals, Policies,
5 More information about this gentrification and displacement data is available at the Urban Displacement Project’s webpage: https://www.urbandisplacement.org/.
B54
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-11 and Programs, was amended to include additional details regarding proposed tenant protections to be developed and considered for adoption by the City Council. These protections include but are not limited to Rent Stabilization, Just Cause Eviction, and Anti-Harassment Ordinances. In September 2022, the City of Antioch adopted a Rent Stabilization Ordinance which has been codified within Section 11-1 of the City’s Municipal Code.
Figure 3-7 Displacement Risk, (2022)
Source: Urban Displacement Project, 2022. California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) AFFH Data Viewer.
B55
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-12
4.5. ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY
The California Tax Credit Allocation
Committee (TCAC) identifies high resource
census tracts using metrics related to
environmental health, economic mobility, and
educational attainment. Neighborhoods with
the highest TCAC scores (i.e., high resource
neighborhoods) are considered by TCAC to be
those that offer low-income residents the best
chance of a high quality of life. Low resource
areas are characterized as having fewer
opportunities for employment and education,
or a lower index for other economic,
environmental, and educational indicators.
As shown in Figure 3-68, most census tracts
within Antioch are identified as being Low
Resource, with a few in the southeast
bordering with Brentwood and Oakley as
Moderate Resource. One neighborhood within
the city, just north of State Road 4, known as
the Sycamore neighborhoodThe Sycamore
neighborhood (i.e., census tract 3072.02) is
classified as an area of “High Segregation and
Poverty” and shown in light yellow in Figure
3-8.. See Figure 3-7 below. Per the TCAC
mapping methodology, areas classified as high
segregation and poverty are census tracts
where at least 30 percent of residents live
below the federal poverty line and a higher
concentration of residents are persons of color. This census tract is also considered a R/ECAP, as discussed above. According to data from the Urban Institute, 6 [SW1]the Sycamore neighborhood (i.e., census tract 3072.02) has 680 extremely low-income renters and is in the 96 th percentile statewide for housing instability risk.7 It is in 97th percentile on the Urban Institute’s Equity Subindex, which is based on the shares of people of color, extremely low-income renter households, households receiving public assistance, and people born outside the U.S. According to City staff, the renters in this neighborhood are predominantly Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) women with children. 8
6 Where to Prioritize Emergency Rental Assistance to Keep Renters in Their Homes – Antioch. 2021. Available at https://www.urban.org/features/where-prioritize-emergency-rental-assistance-keep-renters-their-homes?cm_ven= ExactTarget&cm_cat=LAB_Prioritizing+Rental+Assistance_CoC+%26+HUD+grantees&cm_pla=All+Subscribers& cm_ite=new+tool+developed+by+a+team+of+Urban+Institute+researchers&cm_ainfo=&&utm_source=urban_EA&& utm_medium=email&&utm_campaign=prioritizing_rental_assistance&&utm_term=lab&&utm_content=coc_ hudgrantees. Urban Institute, 2021.Where to Prioritize Emergency Rental Assistance to Keep Renters in Their Homes, May 14.Urban Institute, op. cit.
7 Calculated based on shared of people living in poverty, renter-occupied housing units, severely cost-burdened low- income renters, severely overcrowded households, and unemployed people. 8 House, Teri, CDBG & Housing Consultant, City of Antioch. 2021. Personal communication with Urban Planning Partners, July 15.op. cit.
CALIFORNIA TAX CREDIT ALLOCATION COMMITTEE (TCAC)
INDICATORS OF OPPORTUNITY
TCAC utilizes indicators related to educational attainment, environmental health, and economic mobility to measure
access to opportunity. The indicators consulted are listed below.
Economic
Percent of population with income above 200
percent% of the federal poverty line
Percent of adults with a bachelor’s degree or above
Percent of adults aged 20-64 who are employed in the
civilian labor force or in the armed forces
Number of jobs filled by workers with less than a
bachelor’s degree that fall within a given radius of each census tract population-weighted centroid
Environmental
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Pollution indicators
Education
Percentage of 4th fourth graders who meet or exceed
math proficiency standards
Percentage of 4th fourth graders who meet or exceed
literacy standards
Percentage of high school cohort that graduated on
time
Percent of students not receiving free or reduced-price lunch
For more information, visit: https://www.
treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp
B56
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-13 Compared Relative to the rest of the County county and Regionregion, the TCAC scores shows that Antioch has lower opportunity areas and lower access to resources for its residents. This is related due to several factors, includingfactors such as the relative lack of high-quality transit, vehicle dependency, and associated reliance on costly cars and long commutes, the lack of jobs, poor air quality from past and present industrial uses in the north, and lower educational outcomes.
Figure 3-78 2021 2022 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map by Census Tract, Antioch2022
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) AFFH Data Viewer.
5.6. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Based on local knowledge obtained through community outreach and the findings of the 2020 AI, the following items have been identified as factors which have contributedcontributing factors to the fair housing issues summarized above. Prioritized contributing factors are included alongsidein Table 3-4 of Section D, Meaningful Actions, later in this Chapter within Table 3-4.:
Regional Housing Crisis and Displacement. Historic underproduction of housing means that private new construction goes on the market at a very high price point that is most oftentimes unaffordable to Black and Hispanic households. Low-income communities of color in the Bay Area are being displaced and relocated to Antioch and other cities in East County as those with higher incomes compete with them for limited housing stock.
Lack of Community Revitalization Strategies. A lack of jobs (partially driven by the closing of factories) and slow recovery from the foreclosure crisis has contributed to the increased concentration of poverty in Antioch. The decline of Redevelopment Agencies has eliminated key funding for investing in neighborhood in need of revitalization.
B57
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-14
Lack of Investment in Specific Neighborhoods. Northwestern Antioch suffers from a lack of both private and public investment, which contributes to lower access to opportunity and the status of the Sycamore neighborhood as a R/ECAP.
Community Opposition to Housing. The Not Inin My Backyard (NIMBY) movement is a significant contributing factor to housing underproduction and racial segregation in the Bay Area. The NIMBY movement is not as active in Antioch, but it is more active in Western and Central County and contributes to the regional segregation that excludes Black and Hispanic residents in Antioch from more affluent cities in central County. It can also create disproportionate housing needs as residents are forced into substandard and/or overcrowded conditions when there is not adequate housing supply that is affordable.
Lack of Regional Cooperation. Many high opportunity areas with predominantly Non-Hispanic White populations in Contra Costa County have opposed efforts to bring more affordable housing development into their cities. This phenomenon contributes to segregation and the creation of R/ECAPs when cities do not permit their “fair share” of housing because it puts results in greater housing pressure on other jurisdictions that are more likely to permit housing and reduces housing options and mobility..
Land Use and Zoning Laws. TIn general, throughout the Bay Area, people of color disproportionately occupy high-density housing, which can generally be built only in areas zoned for multi-family homes, multiple dwellings, or single-family homes on small lots. This tends to segregate people of color into the municipal areas zoned for high-density housing, which has implications on access to opportunity and the perpetuation of R/ECAPs.
Private Discrimination. Fair housing testing has revealed differential treatment in Antioch and lending discrimination is also present with loan applications submitted by Blacks and Latinos uniformly denied at higher rates than those of Whites or Asians. This private discrimination contributes to limited access to opportunity for people of color and perpetuates patterns of segregation and R/ECAPs.
Historic Discrimination in Land Use and Zoning. Historically, racial segregation stemmed from explicit discrimination against people of color, such as restrictive covenants, redlining, and discrimination in mortgage lending. This history includes many overtly discriminatory policies made by federal, state, and local governments. A generational lack of access for many communities, particularly people of color and lower income residents, precipitates many fair housing issues experienced today.
B. SITES INVENTORY
The section describes how the sites inventoryHousing Sites Inventory is consistent with the City’s obligation and goal to AFFH. It discusses how the inventory improves and avoids exacerbating fair housing issues in the city, avoids isolating or concentrating the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) by income group in certain areas of the community, and relates to local knowledge and other relevant factors. This section also discusses the distribution of sites relative to patterns of segregation and integration, R/ECAPs, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, and , including displacement risk.
B58
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-15
1. UNIT DISTRIBUTION – ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE (EJ) NEIGHBORHOODS,
R/ECAPS, AND ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY
As mentioned above, Antioch does not have any high-opportunity areas; the vast majority of the city is considered Low Resource by TCAC except for neighborhoods on the easternmost edge of the city.
Additionally, while there are no R/ECAPs using HCD’s definition, Antioch does include one census tract known as the Sycamore neighborhood (census tract 3072 .02) that is considered a R/ECAP when using a more localized definition that considers the Bay Area’s high cost of living.
Antioch also has neighborhoods that are considered “disadvantaged communities” under State law. “Disadvantaged communities” are areas within the city where a combination of social, economic, and environmental factors disproportionately affect health outcomes. They are identified as census tracts that are at or below the statewide median income and experience disproportionate environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative health outcomes. For purposes of this Housing Element, these neighborhoods are referred to as EJ neighborhoods given that “disadvantaged communities” is not a preferred term for residents of these neighborhoods.
There are 12 census tracts in Antioch that are considered low-income areas, comprising 7,905 acres of the city, or approximately 41 percent of the city by area of the entire city. Of these 12 census tracts, there are 5 that are disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative health effects, exposure, or environmental degradation. These 5 census tracts are Antioch’s EJ neighborhoods, and they make up 3,460 acres of the city, or approximatelyor 18 percent of the total city area.
In addition to generally spreading the RHNA housing sites equally across the city, special attention was madeconsideration was given to avoid placing sites for low-income units in the EJ and low-income neighborhoods, as well as distributing sites to accommodate moderate and above moderate-income units evenly throughout the city. These effortsAvoiding placement of additional units in these areas helps are intended to address historical patterns of racial segregation in housing throughout the country which disproportionately affecteds persons of color.. Figure 3-79 shows the distribution of sites on top of the EJ neighborhoods (in purple) and low-income areas (in light blue). The R/ECAP Sycamore neighborhood is shown in a darker blue and is included in the area of land that is consideredin an EJ neighborhood. Sites that would include affordable units (referred to as affordable housing sites) are shown in hatching. 9 As shown in Figure 3-79, affordable housing sites are not identified in the Sycamore neighborhood and are sparingly identified in the EJ neighborhoods. Similarly, moderateModerate, and above-moderate income housing sites (i.e., non-affordable housing sites) are located throughout the city. , inclusive of low-income areas, colored light blue in Figure B-38, and a small number of sites located within environmental justice areas, shown as purple in the Figure.so as to avoid concentrating low-income persons in one part of town and exacerbating economic segregation.
Figure 3-810 shows the distribution of sites on top of the TCAC access to opportunity index. Although Antioch does not have high opportunity areas, local knowledge indicates that areas in the south have new housing stock and higher median incomes and are not as impacted by environmental hazards. For these reasons, sites in the southern and eastern portions of the city were sought for locating affordable housing.
Accordingly, sSix affordable housing sites are located in the City’s city’s two moderate resource census tracts in order to provide affordable housing sites near newer housing stock, serving higher median incomes, toand promote economic integration. Similarly, mModerate, and above moderate-income sites (,
9 All sites with affordable units are anticipated to be mixed-income projects with units ranging from very low-income to above moderate-income, but the term “affordable housing site” is used for clarity.
B59
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-16
shown asin green in the Figure,Figure 3-9) are evenly distributed throughout the city as well, to discourage the concentrationng of income levels. in any one part of the city.
Figure 3-79 RHNA Distribution and EJ, R/ECAP , and Low-Income Areas Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) AFFH Data Viewer.
B60
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-17
Figure 3-910 RHNA Distribution and Access to Opportunity Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) AFFH Data Viewer.
Table 3-3 shows the distribution of sites and units across these neighborhoods compared to the city at large. As shown in the table, only 10 percent of affordable sites are located in EJ neighborhoods and only 4 percent of units identified to satisfy the lower-income RHNA are identified in EJ neighborhoods.
Looking citywide,EJ neighborhoods comprise 18 percent of the city by areais located in an EJ neighborhood. This confirms that sites are not concentrated in EJ areas and in fact the opposite is true; affordable units are underrepresented in EJ neighborhoods compared to the citywide conditions.
Furthermore, aAlthough only 14 percent of the city’s land area is a moderate resource area (and much of this area is undeveloped), 16 percent of the affordable housing units are sited in these two 2 census tracts.
A larger portion of the city is considered below the statewide median income than considered an EJ neighborhood; 41 percent of the entire city is considered a low-income neighborhood. As shown in Table 3-3, 58 percent of affordable sites and 55 percent of affordable units are identified in these census tracts. Therefore, there are more affordable housing sites and units in low-income census tracts than the city baseline of 41 percent of all land area. However, this does not indicate that sites are disproportionately located in these areas. As shown in Figure 3- 789, affordable housing sites are dispersed throughout the city. Moreover, approximately 3,400 acres on the City’s city’s southern edge areis undeveloped and given the City of Antioch’s goals to encourage infill development and limit sprawl, this area of the city was not considered a suitable area to encourage housing development. The decision to focus on infill development limited the availability of land by approximately 18 percent. Excluding the roughly 3,400 acres of undeveloped land in the south, the census tracts that are below the median income then make up half of the available land for the sites Housing Sites inventoryInventory. The dispersion rate of 55 percent of affordable units being located in a low-income census tract is then on par with 50 percent of the whole city’s available land area that is in a low-income census tract. The 55 percent of B61
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-18
affordable units that are in the low-income neighborhoods is a reasonable dispersion , given the availability of limited availability of land, and the wide expanse of low-income neighborhoods, in the city and that the proximity of the low-income census tracts are often nearand transportation and services. The City will utilize strategies to encourage housing mobility, and to protect existing residents, with the intent toand avoid creating disproportionate impacts for residents in lower-income neighborhoods. In addition, all projects in the EJ and low-income neighborhoods are anticipated to be mixed-income projects bringing investment and economically diverse residents to these parts of the city.
TABLE 3-3 L OWER INCOME SITES DISTRIBUTION
Percentage
of Land Area
Number of
Affordable
RHNA Sites
Percentage of
Affordable
RHNA Sites
Number of
Affordable
RHNA Units
Percentage of
Affordable
RHNA Units
In low-income
neighborhoods 41% 24 58% 829602 55%
In EJ neighborhoods 18% 4 10% 62 46 4%
Outside low-income and
EJ neighborhoods* 45% 11 27% 445 332
29%
In Moderate Resource
Neighborhoods 14% 6 15% 241 186 16%
Citywide 100% 41 100% 1,515166 100%
Notes: Rows do not total the citywide number given that all EJ neighborhoods are also low-income neighborhoods. Consolidated sites with common ownership (i.e., consolidated sites B and G at Windsor Drive and Jessica Court, respectively) are counted as one site each. *Sites in this category are still in TCAC Low Resource census tracts but are outside of the lower-income census tracts and EJ areas shown in purple and blue in Figure 3-7.
Source: City of Antioch and Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
2. POTENTIAL EFFECTS ON ECONOMIC AND RACIAL SEGREGATION As discussed above, the primary racial segregation Antioch exhibits is a regional and inter-city phenomenon, meaning that BIPOC residents in Antioch (especially Black residents) are excluded from other parts of the Region region but are not concentrated in neighborhoods within Antioch. The city does exhibit patterns of economic segregation, though with concentrations of lower incomes and people experiencing poverty in the northwest portion of the city.
The sHousing Sites Iinventory is not anticipated to exacerbate or create patterns of racial segregation. See Appendix B, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing for visualizations of the sSites iInventory by income level on top of racial data by census tract. Figures 3-9101 and 3-10112 illustrate the Sites iInventory on top of data showingalongside the median income and poverty rates of each census block. As illustrated in these figures and discussed in Appendix B, theThe distribution of sites is unlikely to exacerbate existing patterns of economic segregation or to create racial segregation, as demonstrated by the following facts:
The one census tract with the highest median income includes one site and it is an affordable housing site.
The census tracts with the lowest median incomes have a mix of affordable and market-rate sites .
This to brings a balanced approach of adding investment in these communities , while also providing anchors against displacement risk where it is highest inI northwestern Antioch. The R/ECAP Sycamore Neighborhood experiences the highest rates of poverty and contains one site, which is market-rate. The sites inventory identifies only one site in the census tract experiencing the greatest rates of poverty, which is Antioch’s R/ECAP (the Sycamore neighborhood). The sites B62
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-19 inventory includes one market-rate site here. The Sites Inventory It does not site low-income units in areas with a greater concentration of low-income households. Sites in the northwest with higher rates of poverty do not include affordable housing sites in order to avoid concentrations of low-income residents in one area of Antioch. Antioch’s racial and ethnic diversity is spread throughout the city and the sSites iInventory does not disproportionately place sites in areas with greater populations of people of color. The areas of Antioch that do have higher rates of White residents are identified to accommodate affordable housing units.
Sites with 100 percent market rate units (i.e., units that are identified for moderate- and above- moderate incomes) are spread throughout the city but they are not located in the census tract with the highest median income.
Figure 3-011 Sites Inventory and Median Income per Block Group, 2019 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) AFFH Data Viewer.
B63
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-20
Figure 3-1112 Sites Inventory and Percent of Households in Poverty per Block Group, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) AFFH Data Viewer. Sites in the northwest with higher rates of poverty do not include affordable housing sites in order to avoid concentrations of low-income residents in one area of Antioch. Antioch’s racial and ethnic diversity is spread throughout the city and the sites inventory does not disproportionately place sites in areas with greater populations of people of color. The areas of Antioch that do have higher rates of White residents are identified to accommodate affordable housing units.
Sites with 100 percent market rate units (i.e., units that are identified for moderate- and above- moderate incomes) are spread throughout the city but they are not located in the census tract with the highest median income.
3. DISPROPORTIONATE HOUSING NEEDS AND DISPLACEMENT RISK As previously discussed, renters are disproportionately affected by housing needs including overpayment, overcrowding, and displacement risk. With implementation of the Housing Element, there is some potential to ease overcrowding and cost burden as there will be more housing options available for a variety of income levels in all areas of the city.
Figure 3-11123 shows the inventory of sites on top of gentrification and displacement typology, as mapped by the Urban Displacement Project. As shown in Figure 3- 1113, the southern half of Antioch is categorized as stable moderate/mixed income. This is the area where mixed-income projects that include affordable units are identified, which can help ensure the stability and economic diversity of this area.
Northwestern Antioch, on the other hand, is at risk of gentrification while the central portions of Antioch in the north and west are low-income/susceptible to displacement. Given the EJ issues also concentrated B64
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-21 in this area, many of the census tracts with displacement vulnerability and gentrification risk were expressly avoided as areas to place new housing. As a result, little development is anticipated in as a part of the Housing Element in northwest Antioch and sites that are identified in these areas are primarily market-rate development so as to not concentrate lower-income populations in the northwest. The addition of some market-rate development in this area has the potential to add to the intensity of the displacement and gentrification risk. However, the City has included programs to protect vulnerable residents from displacement, including implementation of tenant protections consistent with AB 1482 .
Additionally, the sites identified in the low-income/susceptible to displacement neighborhoods include affordable housing sites. The development of affordable units in these neighborhoods would help protect Antioch residents from displacement.
Finally, the displacement map shows two census tracts in northeastern Antioch at risk of becoming exclusive. The sites identified in this part of Antioch are primarily sites for missing middle housing around Viera Avenue and mixed-income projects with affordable units along 18 th Street and Hillcrest Avenue. By increasing the diversity of housing types and facilitating the development of multi-family housing, including potentially affordable units, the sites inventory would counteract current trends of potential exclusion in this area.
Figure 3-1213 Sites Inventory and Displacement Typology Notes: Consolidated site G at Jessica Court is not visible on the map given discrepancies with APNs. These sites are in eastern Antioch in the stable moderate/mixed income category.
Source: Housing Element Site Selection (HESS) Tool and Urban Displacement Project.
B65
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-22
C. OUTREACH
In addition to requirements around certain analysis and data, HCD guidance on AFFH stipulates that community participation is another area where the Citycity can demonstrate its commitment to AFFH.
Throughout the Housing Element update, best practices from the HCD guidance on AFFH were used, including using a variety of meeting types and locations, ample time for public review, translating key materials, conducting meetings and focus group fully in Spanish to create a safe space for residents to provide feedback in their native language, avoiding overly technical language, and consulting key stakeholders who can assist with engaging low-income households and protected classes. Overall, the goals for this outreach were to reach and include the voices of those in protected classes and increase resident participation overall. Chapter 8, Participation, of this Housing Element describes all community engagement activities undertaken during the update process and how community feedback was incorporated into the Housing Element. Appendix B, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, describes outreach findings specifically to fair housing.
D. MEANINGFUL ACTIONS
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583 (c)(10)(A)(v), the Housing Element includes several policies and programs to proactively address fair housing issues. Table 1-23-45 below summarizes the fair housing issues, contributing factors, and implementation programs included in the Housing Element to affirmatively further fair housing in Antioch. Contributing Factors are replicated from earlier in this chapter and prioritized alongside meaningful actions for addressing fair housing issues in the city.
TABLE 3-4 F AIR HOUSING ACTION PLAN
Fair Housing Issues
Prioritized
Contributing
Factors
Actions Implementation
Action Area 1. Enhancing housing mobility strategies
Persons with
disabilities, Latinx and
Hispanic and Black
households are
concentrated in census
tracts with low median
incomes and older
housing stock.
Regional
Housing Crisis
and
Displacement
Community
Opposition to
Housing
Land Use and
Zoning Laws
Lack of high
opportunity
areas; lack of
affordable
housing; lack of
accessible
affordable
units.
Action 1.1: Consistent with the sites
inventory, rezone sites throughout
the cityAmend the city’s Zoning
Ordinance to permit multi-family
units in areas where it was not
previously allowed, including areas
with relatively higher median
incomes and relatively newer
housing stock.:
To allow “supportive housing” as
defined by AB 2162 (2018) within
all zoning districts which allow for
multi-family development.
To rezone 46 parcels to the city’s
R-35 zoning district which allows
for the by-right development of
multi-family uses between 25 and
35 dwelling units per acre.
Adoption of Multi-family Objective
Design Standards to facilitate multi-
family development
Objectives: Remove barriers to
housing in areas of opportunity
and strategically enhancing
accessencourage the
development of multi-family
uses, and supportive housing
throughout the city.
Quantified Objectives: Rezoning
six sites in the City’s Moderate
Resource census tractsAdoption
of Zoning Amendments that
increase multi-family
development potential
throughout the city.
Responsible Party: City of
Antioch Community
Development Department.
Timeline: January 31, 2023.
B66
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-23 Fair Housing Issues
Prioritized
Contributing
Factors
Actions Implementation
Lower-Income
households and renters
are disproportionately
costdisproportionately
cost burdened in the
City of Antioch.
Lack of high
opportunity
areas; lack of
affordable
rental housing;
lack of
accessible
affordable
units.
Regional
Housing Crisis
and
Displacement
Private
Discrimination
Community
Opposition to
Housing
Action 1.2: Incentivize the creation
of ADUs to provide housing that is
affordable in higher opportunity
areas. In partnership with Habitat
for Humanity (or other similar
providers), create an ADU/JADU
loan product to assist homeowners
in constructing ADUs/JADUs for
rental housing. The program design
could provide loans to homeowners
to construct ADUs or JADUs with
public money that would be repaid
with the rental income from the
completed ADU/JADU. Loan
recipients would be required to
affirmatively market their ADU to
populations with disproportionate
housing needs, including persons
with disabilities, Hispanic Latinx
households, Black households, and
female-headed households. This
would include translation of
materials into Spanish and sharing
information with community
organizations that serve these
populations, such as legal service or
public health providers.
Objectives: Increase housing
mobility by generating wealth for
low-income homeowners and by
facilitating the development of
ADUs that are affordable to
lower-income households in
areas with relatively higher
incomes.
Quantified Objectives:
Subsidized development of 25
ADUs by the end of the Planning
planning Periodperiod.
Responsible Party: City
Partnership with Habitat for
Humanity, ECHO Housing.
Timeline: Program design
completed by June 2025.
Funding and approvals granted
for 5 ADUs by Dec 2026 and then
5 ADUs annually thereafter.
Action Area 2. Encouraging new housing choices and affordability in high resource areas and outside of areas of concentrated poverty.
Persons with
disabilities, Latinx, and
Hispanic and Black
households are
concentrated in census
tracts with low median
incomes and older
housing stock.
Regional
Housing Crisis
and
Displacement
Community
Opposition to
Housing
Land Use and
Zoning Laws
Lack of high
opportunity
areas; Lack of
affordable
housing and
especially
affordable
housing in high
opportunity
areas; Lack of
accessible
affordable
units.
Action 2.1: Require affordable
housing developments be
affirmatively marketed to
households with disproportionate
housing needs, including persons
with disabilities, Hispanic Latinx
households, Black households, and
female-headed households. This
would include translation of
materials into Spanish and Tagalog
and sharing information with
community organizations that serve
these populations, such as legal
service or public health providers. All
marketing plans would include
strategies to reach groups with
disproportionate housing needs.
Objectives: Encouraging
Encourage new housing choices
and affordability.
Quantified Objectives:
Affordable housing projects and
available affordable units are
advertised to at least 3
community organizations.
Responsible Party: City of
Antioch Community
Development Department
Timeline: Ongoing. Marketing
plans are submitted at time of
building inspection.
B67
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-24
Fair Housing Issues
Prioritized
Contributing
Factors
Actions Implementation
Antioch has a higher
concentration of
unhoused residents
than other parts of the
county.Persons with
disabilities have
disproportionate
housing needs and
persons with
disabilities are most
likely to file fair
housing complaints.
Regional
Housing Crisis
and
Displacement
Lack of
Regional
Cooperation
Private
Discrimination
Action 2.2: Encourage the provision
of housing opportunities and
resources for unhoused individuals,
through a variety of actions,
including:
Amend Zoning Ordinance to
allow for “low barrier navigation
centers” as defined by AB 101
(2019) within mixed use and non-
residential zoning districts
Amend Zoning Ordinance to
allow “supportive housing” as
defined by AB 2162 (2018) within
all zoning districts which allow for
multi-family development
Continue to collaborate with
Contra Costa County on the
provision of shelter and services
for unsheltered individuals,
including development of a 5-
acre site within City’s emergency
shelter overlay district.
Objectives: Encouraging
Encourage new housing choices
and affordability for populations
with special needs housing.
Quantified Objectives:
Reduce unsheltered unhoused
population by 40% by the
2030 PIT count.
Construction of 30-50 units of
housing for extremely low-
income individuals during the
planning period.
Responsible Party: City of
Antioch, Planning Dept
Community Development
Department, Planning Division.
Timeline:
Amend Zoning Ordinance by
January 31, 2023.
Meet with County Continuum of
Care staff by June 2023.
Persons with
disabilities have
disproportionate
housing needs and
persons with
disabilities are most
likely to file fair
housing complaints.
Antioch has higher
numbers of unhoused
residents and disabled
residents than other
cities in the county.are
primarily concentrated
in the northwestern
portions of the city.
Lack of
accessible
affordable
units; Lack of
access to
economic
opportunity;
Concentration
in low income
and low
opportunity
census tracts.
Community
Opposition to
Housing
Land Use and
Zoning Laws
Private
Discrimination
Action 2.3: Encourage new housing
choices and affordability for
populations with special needs
housing, by:
Developing a program to
prioritize City funding proposals
for City-funded affordable
housing that are committed to
supporting serves special needs
hard to serve residents (e.g.,
unhoused populations, extremely
low income, special needspersons
with disabilities)
Amending the Zoning Ordinance
by September 30, 2023, to allow
for residential care facilities and
group homes for 7 or more
persons within zoning districts
that permit residential
development.
Considering incentives to
subsidized affordable
developments to provide
accessible units beyond the
federal requirement of 5% for
subsidized affordable
developments
Objectives: Encouraging
Encourage new housing choices
and affordability for populations
with special needs housing.
Quantified Objectives:
Two projects that go beyond
the federal minimum of 5%
accessible units for subsidized
projects.
Responsible Party: City of
Antioch, Housing Community
Development Department,
Planning Division.
Timeline:
Priority Program designed
completed by April 30, 2024.
Zoning Ordinance amended
by September 30, 2023.
Menu of potential incentives
created by January 2024.
Outreach to non-profit
developers by June 2024.
Reasonable accommodation
information added to City
website by January 2024.
B68
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-25 Fair Housing Issues
Prioritized
Contributing
Factors
Actions Implementation
Ensure that all multi-family
residential developments contain
signage to explain the right to
request reasonable
accommodations for persons
with disabilities as a condition of
business license approval.
Make reasonable accommodation
information available and clearly
transparent on the City's website in
English, Spanish, and Tagalog
Action Area 3. Improving place-based strategies to encourage community conservation and revitalization including preservation of existing affordable housing.
Hispanic Latinx
households are
concentrated in EJ
neighborhoods.
Hispanic households
are concentrated in EJ
neighborhoods.
Lack of high
opportunity
areas; Lack of
affordable
housing in high
opportunity
areas; Lack of
accessible
affordable
units;
Concentration
of NOAH (i.e.,
older housing
stock) in EJ
neighborhoods.
Lack of
Investment in
Specific
Neighborhoods
Private
Discrimination
Regional
Housing Crisis
and
Displacement
.
Action 3.1: Develop and adopt EJ
Element and implement EJ policies
to improve quality of life in EJ
neighborhoods.
Objectives: Alleviate disparate
impacts experienced by
households living in EJ
neighborhoods, especially
related to environmental
outcomes.
Quantified Objectives: Improve
CalEnviroScreen composite score
in EJ area by 10%.
Responsible Party: City of
Antioch, various
departmentsCommunity
Development Department.
Timeline: Adoption of EJ
Element and policies by February
March 2023.
Action 3.2: Continue to fund minor
home repairs through the City’s
Home Rehabilitation Program and
implement a preference for projects
in the following order:
1) Projects in the Sycamore
neighborhood (i.e., Antioch's
ethnically concentrated area of
poverty)
2) Projects in EJ neighborhoods
3) Projects in census tracts with
lower median incomes
The City will affirmatively market
the home repair program to
residents in these areas, such as
through a targeted mailings and
posting of flyers in to the subject
census tracts in English, Spanish,
and Tagalog.
Objectives: Conserve and
improve assets in areas of lower
opportunity and concentrated
poverty.
Quantified Objectives:
Rehabilitation of 40 homes in
target neighborhoods.
Responsible Party: City of
Antioch Housing
DeptCommunity Development
Department.
Timeline: Conduct publicity
campaign for the program once
annually in addition to hosting
information on City website.
LatinxHispanic and
Black households and
Historic
discrimination
Action 3.3: Monitor affordable
housing projects that are at risk of
Objectives: Preserve existing
affordable housing.
B69
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-26
Fair Housing Issues
Prioritized
Contributing
Factors
Actions Implementation
persons with
disabilities have
disproportionate
housing needs.
and continued
mortgage
denials;
Concentration
in low
opportunity
census tracts;
High housing
costs and low
wages
Lack of
Investment in
Specific
Neighborhoods
Private
Discrimination
Regional
Housing Crisis
and
Displacement
conversion to market rate. Support
regional and local efforts to examine
displacement of affordable housing
and lower income households.
Assist with the retention of special
needs housing that is at risk of
expiring affordability requirements.
Quantified Objectives:
Preservation of 54 units before
2032.
Responsible Party: City of
Antioch, Housing Community
Development Department.
Timeline: Preservation strategies
established and outreach to non-
profit partners by January 2031.
Persons with
disabilities and
Hispanic Latinx, and
Black households are
concentrated in census
tracts with low median
incomes and older
housing stock.
Lack of high
opportunity
areas; Lack of
access to
economic
opportunity;
Concentration
of NOAH (i.e.,
older housing
stock) in EJ
neighborhoods.
Lack of
Investment in
Specific
Neighborhoods
Private
Discrimination
Regional
Housing Crisis
and
Displacement
Action 3.4: Promote economic
development in the EJ
neighborhoods and the Sycamore
neighborhood in
particularneighborhood, including:.
The City will
prioritize Prioritizing economic
development and infrastructure
expenditures in and around
lower-income and environmental
justice neighborhoods, to
enhance business and housing
opportunities.
Providing of This could include
facade improvements and small
business grants recipients.
Through Iimplementation of the
Downtown Specific Plan, which
includes policies and programs to
reduce or eliminate regulatory
obstacles to development in the
Downtown, andand to facilitate
the development of high-quality
market-rate and affordable
housing, the City will encourage
investment in one of the City’s
lowest income areas, and the
Specific Plan will bring new
homes, stores, amenities, and
services. Through the
redevelopment of the
Downtown, and the Rivertown
Objectives: Place-based
strategies to encourage
community conservation and
revitalization.
Responsible Party: City of
Antioch Community
Development Department,
Economic Development
Department, Public Works
Department., Economic
Development, Public Works, and
Planning
Timeline: Ongoing. Adoption of
EJ policies by February March
2023.
B70
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 3-27 Fair Housing Issues
Prioritized
Contributing
Factors
Actions Implementation
Area in particular, the additional
high-density housing could also
provide a variety of housing
types, including affordable
housing. The City will explore
Exploring methods for providing
low-interest loans and below-
market leases for tax-foreclosed
commercial properties to low-
income residents seeking to start
businesses within the EJ
neighborhoods.
Action Area 4. Protecting existing residents from displacement Lower-Income
households and renters
are disproportionately
cost burdened in the
City of Antioch and
vulnerable to
displacement.Persons
with disabilities and
Black and Hispanic
households have
disproportionate
housing needs and
persons with
disabilities are most
likely to file fair
housing complaints.
Lack of Private
Discrimination
Regional
Housing Crisis
and
Displacement
accessible
affordable
units;
Concentration
in low income
and low
opportunity
census tracts;
Historic
discrimination
and continued
mortgage
denials; High
housing costs
and low wages
Action 4.1: Establish tenant
protections that further the intent of
AB 1482 with potential measures
related to rent control, anti-
harassment, just cause and right-to-
counsel ordinances; as well as
relocation, documentation, and
right to return policies in eviction
cases.
Objectives: Protect residents
from displacement and preserve
housing affordability.
Responsible Party: City of
Antioch, Housing Dept.
Community Development
Department.
Timeline: Staffing plan and
program design established by
April 2024.
Rent Stabilization Ordinance
adopted Fall 2022.
Persons with
disabilities and Black
and Hispanic
households have
disproportionate
housing needs and
persons with
disabilities are most
likely to file fair
housing
complaints.Households
located in
northwestern portions
of the city, including EJ
areas, are more
vulnerable to
displacement than
other areas.
Lack of
accessible
affordable
units; Lack of
understanding
of reasonable
accommodation
requirements
by landlords
and property
owners.
Private
Discrimination
Regional
Housing Crisis
Action 4.2: Partner Continue to
promote fair housing practices
throughout the city by:
Partnering with ECHO Housing
and/or Bay Area Legal Aid to
provide fair housing and legal
services to residents.
Requiring perform fair housing
training for landlords and
tenants. Attendance at a fair
housing training will become a
condition for approval of
landlords' business licenses.
Advertising available fair housing
services on the city’s website and
social media, at bi-annual
community tabling events, and
Objectives: Protect existing
residents from displacement and
enforce Fair Housing laws.
Quantified Objectives:
Conduct 2-3 workshops per
year on fair housing rights and
resources.
Increase participants in fair
housing programs by 5%.
Responsible Party: ECHO
Housing and/or Bay Area Legal
Aid in partnership with the City.
Timeline:
Ongoing advertising of fair
housing services.
B71
3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
3-28
Fair Housing Issues
Prioritized
Contributing
Factors
Actions Implementation
and
Displacement
communications with non-profit
partners. The training would include
information on reasonable
accommodation and source of
income discrimination, as well as
other fair housing information with
emphasis on certain topics driven by
housing complaint data and
information from stakeholders.
Training Program design to
track attendance and
conditionfor business license
approval completed by
January 2024.
Program launch by March
2024.
Private
Discrimination
Regional
Housing Crisis
and
Displacement
Lack of
accessible
affordable
units; Lack of
understanding
of reasonable
accommodation
requirements
by landlords
and property
owners.
Action 4.3: Continue to maintain a
webpage specific to fair housing
including resources for residents
who feel they have experienced
discrimination, information about
filing fair housing complaints with
HCD or HUD, and information about
protected classes under the Fair
Housing Act.enforce planning and
building codes to protect Antioch’s
housing stock and ensure health and
safety to residents. Periodically
survey multi-family developments in
environmental justice
neighborhoods for potential code
violations by landlords.
Objectives: Enforce Fair Housing
laws.Promote healthy and safe
housing throughout the city.
Quantified Objectives: Citywide
compliance with planning and
building code. Increased
maintenance of multi-family
developments in EJ
neighborhoods. participants in
fair housing programs by 5%.
Responsible Party: City of
Antioch in partnership with
ECHO Housing and/or Bay Area
Legal Aid.
Timeline: Ongoing.
Ongoing routine enforcement
survey activities and
complaint basis, with staff
responding to public inquiries
as needed.
Annually survey multi-family
developments in the
environmental justice
neighborhoods for life safety
and public health violations.
B72
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-1
CONSTRAINTS
New housing development can be constrained by economic forces in the private market as well as regulations and policies imposed by public agencies. These constraints can limit the production of housing and/or increase its cost and can also affect the maintenance and/or improvement of existing housing.
Governmental and non-governmental constraints that can affect the housing market and stock in Antioch are discussed below. Chapter 65, Adequate SitesResources will identify ways, where feasible, to reduce or overcome constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing for all income levels.
A. GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Governmental regulations, while intentionally regulating the quality and safety of development in the community, can also unintentionally increase the cost of development and housing or make it difficult to meet the demand, especially for affordable housing. Governmental constraints typically include policies, standards, requirements, or actions imposed by the various levels of government upon land use and development such as zoning and subdivision regulations, growth management measures, building codes, fees, processing and permit procedures, and other exactions that developers must satisfy.
The City has limited influence over state State and federal requirements that may constrain housing, but the State affords local agencies considerable flexibility in establishing land use policies and regulations.
Therefore, the discussion in this section is generally limited to the policies, standards, requirements, and actions at the local level.
Land use controls may limit the amount of density of development, thus increasing the cost per unit.
Required improvements and/ or off-site mitigation also increase the cost of development. Processing procedures and permitting requirements, including review by multiple agencies and permitting requirements, may delay the approval process and increase the cost of development.
B73
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-2
1. FEDERAL AND STATE
Federal and State programs and agencies play a role in the imposition of non-local governmental constraints. Federal and State requirements are generally beyond the influence of local government and therefore cannot be effectively addressed in this document.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was developed to protect the quality of the environment and the health and safety of persons from adverse environmental effects. Discretionary projects are required to be reviewed for consistentconsistency with the requirements of CEQA to determine if there is potential for the project to cause a significant adverse effect on the environment.
Depending on the type of project and its potential effects, technical traffic, noise, air quality, biological resources and geotechnical reports may be needed. If potential adverse effects can be mitigated, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is required. If potentially adverse effects cannot be mitigated, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. These documents have mandated content requirements and public review times. Preparation of CEQA documents can be costly , and despite maximum time limits set forth in the Public Resources Code, can extend the processing time of a project by a year or longer.
LABOR COSTS
Labor costs are not a governmental constraint; however, they do influence production costs associated with housing. Additionally, public works projects and affordable housing financed through the use of public funds are required to pay prevailing wages, which create a significant cost impact on the construction or rehabilitation of affordable housing units for low- or moderate-income persons and the infrastructure to support such housing. Labor costs have risen since the Great Recession in 2008, especially in expensive , metropolitan areas like the Bay Area. During the Recession and the recovery period that followed, many individuals in the construction industry left the field. This continues to impact the availability of workers today. Labor costs continue to rise given the shortage of skilled labor.
2. LOCAL
LAND USE CONTROLS
Land use controls are minimum standards included in the General Plan and implemented through the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. General Plan land use designations are a means of ensuring that the land uses in the community are properly situated in relation to one another and providing adequate space for each type of development. Zoning regulations are designed to implement the intentions of the General Plan land use designations. They also control such features such as the height and bulk of buildings, lot area, yard setbacks, population density and building use. If zoning standards are significantly more rigid than private sector design standards and do not follow sufficient land use flexibility, development costs could increase, and housing production may decrease.
General Plan
Each city City and county County is required by State law to have a General Plan, which establishes policy guidelines for development. The General Plan is the foundation of all land use controls in a jurisdiction.
The Land Use Element of the General Plan identifies the location, distribution, intensity, and density of the land uses within the city. General Plan residential densities are expressed as dwelling units per acre B74
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-3 (du/acre). The Antioch General Plan identifies five residential land use designations, as shown in Table 4-1.
Densities range from as low as 1 unit per acre in the Estate Residential designation to 35 units per acre du/acre in the High-Density Residential designation. In addition, there are also some mixed-use designations such as Transit Oriented Development (TOD) and certain Planned Development Districts that allow residential uses as well.
TABLE 4-1 G ENERAL PLAN – RESIDENTIAL USE LAND CATEGORIES Designation Description Density Range
Estate Residential Primarily single-family detached units 1-2 du/ac Low-Density Residential Primarily single-family detached units 4 du/ac maximum Medium Low-Density
Residential
Single-family detached; small lot single-family
detached; duplex 6 du/ac maximum
Medium-Density
Residential
Single-family detached; small lot single-family
detached; multi-family attached; mobile homes;
townhouses; garden apartments
10 du/ac maximum
High-Density Residential Multi-family attached; group residential; Residential Care Facilities
Up to 35 du/ac; Density bonus
for senior housing projects
Residential TOD
Mixed-use classification is intended to create a
primarily residential neighborhood within walking
distance to the BART station with complementary
retail, service, and office uses
Between 20 and 40 du/acre
Source: City of Antioch, General Plan, Land Use Element, 2003.
To make a housing project economically feasible based on land costs and economies of scale, certain densities are necessary. Housing elements Elements are required to demonstrate how adopted densities accommodate the regional housing need for lower-income households. To do this, local governments are given the option of utilizing the “default” density standard that is deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for lower-income households. The default density option was adopted by the CityCcity in 2003 by consensus with local government representatives, builders, planners, and advocates. For metropolitan jurisdictions such as Antioch, a minimum density of 30 units tper acredu/acre has been established for the very-low- and low-income categories. As a result of amendments to the General Plan that the City Council approved in June 2014, densities up to 35 units per acredu/acre are now allowed in areas designated high-density residential. This change made it possible for the City Council to also establish a new high-density residential district as discussed below.
Zoning Code
The Zoning zoning Code code is the primary tool for implementing the General Plan. It is designed to protect and promote public health, safety, and welfare. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65940.1(a)(1)(B) the City of Antioch’s Zoning Code and related development regulations are publicly available online via the cCity’s website.
Table 4-2 summarizes the requirements for establishing residential uses in residential and mixed-use zones in Antioch. Single-family residential zones include RE, RR, R-4, R-6, R-10, R-20, R-25, R-35, and MCR.
Single-family dwelling units are permitted by-right in all ofall the single-family residential zones, except for R-10 and MCR where a use Use permit Permit is required. In order toTo preserve land resources for higher-density development, in R-20, R-25, and R-35, no new single-family development is permitted but existing single-family dwellings are permitted to remain and may be replaced. The multi-family residential zones are R-10, R-20, R-25, R-35, and MCR, and CIH.
B75
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-4
As a result of revisions to the Zoning Ordinance enacted in June 2014, the maximum density for multi- family development was increased through the creation of a new R-35 High-Density Residential District.
The ordinance was also amended to allow multi-family residential development at 20 units per acredu/acre permitted by-right in the R-35 zone as well as in the new R-25 zone. Multi-family development continues to be subject to a use permit in the R-10, R-20, MCR and RTR-20 zones. The ordinance also requires required a use permit to allow multi-family projects with more than 20 units per acredu/acre in the Medium-Density, High-Density, and Mixed-Use districts.
In April 2022, the City of Antioch adopted amendments to their General Plan and Zzoning Ccode to create a new Commercial Infill Housing (Commercial Infill Housing (CIH)) Overlay District. This district, which requires a rezone, allows for the development of mixed-use multi-family housing at a minimum of 12 dwelling units per acredu/acre. Additionally, the CIH overlay allows for the by-right, streamlined review and permitting of multi-family uses up to 35 dwelling units per acredu/acre, and 45 feet in height, when consistent with the cCity’s CIH Objective Design Standards (ODS). Development between 35 and 50 du/acre and greater than 45 feet in height is permitted with approval of a Uuse Ppermit.
As part of the 6th cCycle update, various updates are proposed to the cCity’s procedural requirements related to multi-family development. These revisions include the removal of the uUse -pPermit requirement for multi-family housing developments in the R-10, R-20, R-25, R-35, and MCR zoning districts. Multi-family residential uses will therefore be a permitted use within these zoning districts.
The design for new multi-family developments and additions to existing multi-family developments will be subject to the City’s design review process. Accordingly, asAs part of the 6 th cCycle update, the cCity’s TABLE 4-2 P RIMARY USES – RESIDENTIAL ZONES
Zone
Single-
Family
Multiple-
Family
Two-Family
(Duplex)
Residential
Care Facility
RE – Rural Estate Residential District P -- -- --
RR – Rural Residential District P -- -- --
R-4 – Single-Family Low-Density Residential District P -- -- -- R-6 – Single-Family Low-Density Residential District P -- -- -- R-10 – Medium-Density Residential District U UP P U
R-20 – Medium-Density Residential District Pa UP P U
R-25 – High-Density Residential District Pa P, Ub P U
R-35 – High-Density Residential District Pa P, Ub P U
CIH – Commercial Infill Housing Overlay District -- P c.,d -- -- MCR – Mixed Commercial/Residential District U U U U
Notes: P = Permitted by Right U = Use Permit Required
a Single-family dwellings existing prior to the effective date of the Zoning zoning Code code or Amendment amendment to the Zoning zoning Code code are permitted uses, conforming to the R-20, R-25, and R-35 zones. However, development of new single-family dwelling units, other than replacement of existing single-family dwellings, are prohibited within the R-20, R-25, and R-35 zones.
b Up to 20 units/acre pPermitted by-right subject to compliance with all other applicable standards and Design Review pursuant to Article 26 and 27.
c Up to 35 units/acre and building height of four stories or 45 feet permitted by right subject to compliance with all other applicable standards.
d 35 to 50 units/acre and building height above 45 feet permitted with approval of a use permit.
Source: City of Antioch, Zoning Code.
B76
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-5 Zzoning Ccode, including Articles 26 and 27 related to the design review process, will be amended to reference new mMulti-Ffamily Objective Design Standards (ODS) which are towill be adopted alongside the updated hHousing eElement, and associated rezonings prior to January 31, 2023. Accordingly, design review of multi-family housing sites in these zoning districts will consist of staff and planning commission review of development applications for consistency with the new multi-family ODS. These ODS will expedite staff and planning commission review of multi-family housing developments and consolidate design standards related to multi-family housing development throughout the city.
Revisions also include:
Amending the City’s R-35 zoning district to allow between 25 and 35 dwelling units per acre as shown in Table 4-3 below; and
Minor clean-up items related to the City’s procedural requirements; this includes a There is a discrepancy in the R-35 Zoning District that needs to be addressedwhich permits development at 20 du/acre by-right. Due to the The R-35 District’s established a minimum allowable density of 30 25 du/acre,1 units per acredu/acre, and the cCity not permitting projects below the densities allowed by the district, but also allows multi-family projects with 20 units per acre by-right. The City has not allowed projects less than 30 units per acre and the Housing Element includes a program is included to amend the code and remove this provision . See pProgram 4-1-104.1.10. R- 35 Zone in Chapter 7, Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs in the R-35 District.
1 The City’s R-35 Zoning District is being amended as part of zoning amendments associated with the hHousing eElement update to allow between 25 and 35 du/acre whereas prior to the 6 th cCycle update it allowed between 30 and 35 du/acre.
B77
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-6
TABLE 4-3 R ESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Zone
Maximum
Height
(ft)a
Minimum
Building Site
(ft2)
Minimum Lot Width
(ft)
Maximum
Lot
Coverage
Minimum-
Density
Requiredb
Maximum-
Density
Allowedc
Front
Yard
Minimum^
Minimum
Side Yard Required
(ft)d
Minimum
Rear Yard
Required
(ft) Corner Interior Corner Interior
RE To be determined by City Council through planned development process RR To be determined by City Council through planned development process R-4 35 6,000 65 60 40% n/a 4 du/acre * * 5 20
R-6 35 6,000 65 60 40% n/a 6 du/acre * * 5 20
R-10 45 6,000 65 60 40% n/a 10 du/acre * * 5 10
R-20 45 20,000 70 70 40% n/a 20 du/acre * * 5 10
R-25 45 20,000 70 70 50% 20 du/acre 25 du/acre * * 5 10 ^ R-35 45 20,000 70 70 50% 30 25 du/acre 35 du/acre * * 5 10 ^ PD To be determined by City Council through planned development process HPD To be determined by City Council through planned development process MCR 45 6,500 65 60 50% n/a 20 du/acre * * 5 10
TOD To be determined by City Council through planned development process a Height shall be the vertical distance from the average level of the highest and lowest point of that portion of the lot covered by the structure, excluding below ground basements, to the topmost point of the roof. Some Exceptions to exceptions to the specified height limitations shall include the spires, belfries, cupolas and domes of churches, monuments, water towers, fire and hose towers, observation towers, distribution and transmission towers, lines and poles, chimneys, smokestacks, flag poles, radio towers, excluding wireless communications facilities subject to Sec. 9-5.3846, equipment penthouses encompassing less than 20% of total roof area and less than eight feet in height, and parapets less than 30 inches in height, unless otherwise governed by this chapter. are detailed in the Zoning Ordinance. b In units per gross developable acre.
c In units per gross developable acre; See see Zoning Ordinance for definition of maximum developable gross acreage. d For at least 25% of the lots in a given subdivision, one side yard of an interior lot shall be 10 feet in width and the other side yard can be five feet. The 10-foot side yard area shall remain as unrestricted open area. This shall also apply to all two-story single-family residential lots. On any parcel of land of an average width of less than 50 feet, which parcel was under one ownership or is shown as a lot on any subdivision map filed in the office of the County Recorder prior to April 11, 1950, when the owner thereof owns no adjoining land, the width of each side yard may be reduced to 10% of the width of such parcel, but in no case to less than 3 feet.
* Front yard and street side setbacks shall be reserved for landscaping only, excluding access and egress driveways and shall be determined on a graduated scale based upon type of street and land use as follows:
Non-residential uses:
Arterial street: Minimum 30-foot setback with 30-foot landscaping on all frontages Collector street: Minimum 25-foot setback with 25-foot landscaping Local street: Minimum 20-foot setback with 20-foot landscaping Single-family detached and two-family dwelling uses:
Arterial street: Minimum 30-foot setback with 30-foot landscaping on all frontages Collector street: Minimum 25-foot setback and landscaping for front yard and 10-foot street side yard setback with landscaping Local street: Minimum 20-foot front yard setback with 20-foot of landscaping and 10-foot street side yard with landscaping Multi-family dwelling uses:
Arterial street: Minimum 15-foot setback with 15-foot landscaping on all frontages Collector street: Minimum 15-foot setback with 15-foot landscaping Local street: Minimum 10-foot setback with 10-foot landscaping ^ Where a multi-family dwelling abuts a lot that is zoned RR, RE, R4 or R6, a minimum rear yard of 20 feet shall be provided.
Source: City of Antioch, Zoning Code.
B78
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-7 In addition to amending the Zoning Ordinance to increase the maximum residential density from 20 to 35 units per du/acre, the City also established new multi-family residential standards. The standards, which comprise Chapter 5, Article 7 of the Antioch Municipal Code, are intended to facilitate the approval of multi-family projects by establishing clear requirements for a variety of issues such as setbacks from adjacent single-family homes and building articulation that were previously addressed during design review. Article 7 also establishes a procedure for modifying the new dimensional requirements without approving a variance. The approval of reduced setbacks for multi-family development on arterials will reduce another obstacle to residential development. As part of the 6th cCycle update, text amendments to the Ccity’s Zoning Ordinance are being adopted alongside the Hhousing eElement to repeal the previously established multi-family residential standards and reference the new Mmulti-Ffamily Objective Design StandardsODS which are being developed and adopted alongside the hHousing eElement update.
In all districts the maximum density may, of course, be exceeded if a project is entitled to a Density Bonus under the State Density Bonus law Law (Government Code Section 65915). Article 35 of Antioch’s Municipal Code details the provisions for the CcCity’s Density Bonus Program. Since Tt he densities are permitted by-right and do not require zoning approval or review under CEQA ;, the establishment of the R-25 zone also removes another constraint to housing production due to the time and cost associated with the environmental review process.
In addition to the residential and mixed-use base districts listed in Table 4-2, the City of Antioch also has residential zones that accommodate various types of development. Table 4-3 shows the development standards for each of these zones. These residential zones are as follows:
Planned Development District (P-D)
The Planned Development District (P-D) is a floating district that can be established on parcels containing at least 3 acres. This district is intended to encourage flexibility in the design and development of land so as to promote its most appropriate and compatible developmentuse as proposed. This district also A P- D provides greater flexibility when needed to accommodate a variety of types of development, such as neighborhood and district shopping centers, multiple-family housing developments, single-family residential developments, commercial service centers, industrial parks, or any other use or combination of uses.
All site and building requirements, including yard, building height, lot coverage, and landscaping are determined by the City Council during the planned development process. As mentioned above, the minimum area required for the establishment of a P-D District is three3 contiguous acres of land except for areas covered by a Specific Plan. There are specific types of P-Ds dependent on a site’s location in the city. See below.
Hillside Planned Development District (HPD)
This isThe Hillside Planned Development District (HPD) is an overlay district applicable to hillside areas where slopes of 10 percent or more predominatewith slopes primarily 10 percent or more that that are are not covered by an approved tentative map or final development plan. The purpose of this zone is to assure the preservation of the predominant hillsides, ridges, ridgelines, and other natural features and land formslandforms by promoting a more harmonious visual and functional relationship between the existing natural environment and the needs of a growing community.
B79
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-8
Transit-Oriented Development District (TOD)
This The Transit-Oriented Development District (TOD) is a type of Planned Development District intended to provide for a mix of high-density uses that are oriented toward rail or bus transit stations within and adjacent to the city. This district thus accommodates development of an integrated mix of residential, commercial, and employment-generating uses as appropriate in both horizontal mixed-use and vertical mixed-use.
Table 4-3 shows the development standards for each zone designed for residential uses within Antioch.
Specific Plans for Future Residential Growth
Downtown Antioch Specific Plan
The Planning Area boundaries of Downtown Antioch are generally the San Joaquin River to the north, Fulton Shipyard Road to the east, 10 th Street to the south, and Auto Center Drive to the west. This area is approximately 1.5 miles wide and 0.5-mile deep, with a total area of 0.75 square miles. The Planning Area boundaries generally reflect the traditional grid that was developed during the 19 th and early 20th centuries.
The Downtown Area contains a variety of Land Use Districts with unique histories, building forms, land use compositions, and influences. Land use designations incorporating residential uses include the : Mixed-Use District (MU), Neighborhood Commercial District (C-N), and the Downtown Residential Districts (MDR & HDR).
Base densities for residential range from 12-28 unitsdu/acre. Each of the districts have their own standards for building height, floor area ratio , and setbacks.
Heights for residential uses range from 2 two to four 4 stories, depending on location and incentive standards. Parking is required only for new construction/additions or by Use Permit. Existing buildings are exempt.
East 18th Street Specific Plan
The Antioch General Plan identifies the area on the north side of East 18 th Street, and westerly of Drive-In Way as the East 18 th Street Specific Plan. Since 1999, this plan gave gives direction to work withfor collaboration between area landowners and business interests to resolve the current circulation, utility service, and related development constraints; maximizes opportunities for development of employment and revenue producing uses in a clean, attractive business park setting; incorporate s sufficient incentives and flexibility to stimulate economic development; and provide s a program-level set of entitlements to address all major policy issues and further incentivize development in the area.
East Lone Tree
The East Lone Tree Area is comprised of roughly 800 acres bounded by Lone Tree Way on the south ; , Empire Ave and the SP railroad on the east; , the Contra Costa Canal on the north; , and existing residential subdivisions to the west. Land use is almost entirely agricultural , with a few with several farm residences. Lands to the west and north are within the Antioch city limits. The western border is abutted by residential subdivisions, consisting of detached homes on lots averaging 5 du/units per acre. Lands to the south and east are unincorporated and subject to the County General Plan. The remaining segment of the eastern border adjoins lands designated for low (1.0-2.9 du/units per acre) to high (5.0-7.2 units per du/acre) density single-family residences.
B80
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-9 Hillcrest Station Area
The Hillcrest Station area is a unique 375-acre site in East County , offering large land acreage with freeway visibility at a strategic location—the juncture of State Route 4 (SR 4) and State Route 160. This area is also (SR 160) and nearby the Antioch Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station that which opened in 2018. The areaIt is a major opportunity site for transit-oriented development , presenting —an opportunity to take advantage of the major public investment in transit infrastructure and to create a compact area with both jobs and housing.
Parking Requirements
Chapter 5.17 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes parking standards for type of use in each zone, as shown in Table 4-4. Parking requirements do not constrain the development of housing directly, but compliance may result in a reduction in the number of housing units that can be developed on a given site, which can reduce a project’s economic feasibility. A review of parking requirements in nearby jurisdictions that was conducted in conjunction with 2014 zoning updates concluded that Antioch’s parking requirements compared favorably with those imposed by peer communities in Contra Costa County.
The City Council did, however, revise the process for modifying parking requirements in June 2014. to clarify the procedure. These changes approved in June 2014 allow the Zoning Administrator or the Planning Commission to reduce or modify parking requirements for Senior Housing, Shared Parking Facilities or those near public parking, residential and mixed-use projects within 0.5-mile of a major transit stop or incorporatingstop, incorporating transportation demand management measures, projects located on infill sites, or reusing historic structuresthe following types of residential projects: as described below.
The following types of residential projects may be considered for reduced parking requirements:
Senior Housing. The required parking for a senior housing development may be reduced below the normally required 0.75 space per dwelling unit for projects anticipated to generate lower parking demand due to vehicle ownership patterns of the residents and/or characteristics of the project (e.g., proximity to commercial services, proximity to public transportation systems). Transit-Supportive Development. Residential or mixed-use projects that contain no more than 50 dwelling units and are located within 0.5- miles of a major transit stop. Infill Sites. Residential or mixed-use projects that contain no more than 30 dwelling units and are located on infill sites.
Historic Structures. Projects for which allowing a reduction in the number of required spaces (and/or modifications to dimensional requirements for parking areas) will facilitate the re-use of an existing building that is a historic resource as defined by the State Public Resources Code or is a designated Historic building.
B81
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-10
TABLE 4-4 R ESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Use Classification Required Parking Spaces
Single-Family Residential
(Attached)
2 spaces per unit, one of which must be covered, plus 1 space per 5 units for guest parking
Single-Family Residential
(Detached)
2 spaces per unit in a garage, plus one guest parking space on the street within close proximity to the unit served
Multi-Family Residential
1.5 spaces per unit up to 2 bedrooms; one space to be covered 2 spaces per unit for 3 bedrooms; one space to be covered plus 1 space per 5 units for guest parking
Elderly Residential
(Senior Housing Overlay) 0.75 covered space per unit, plus guest parking as determined during project review Convalescent Facilities 1 space per 2 residents
Source: City of Antioch, Zoning Code.
Planned Development (P-D) District
Although not specifically intended to encourage housing production, the P-D approach can be used to produce residential development that is a better fit with surrounding development. The P-D allows for more economical provisions of streets and utilities, preserves the natural and scenic qualities of open space, offers greater recreational opportunities convenient to residents, enhances the appearance of neighborhoods through the preservation of natural green spaces, and counteracts the effects of urban congestion and monotony. This approach can address some of the concerns that are often raised regarding the introduction of higher density and infill development.
All site and building requirements, including yard, building height, lot coverage, and landscaping are determined by the City Council during the planned development process. As mentioned above, the minimum area required for the establishment of a P-D District is three contiguous acres of land except for areas covered by a Specific Plan.
Zoning for Diverse Housing Types
Provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and State law facilitate development of affordable housing and diverse housing types, such as Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), residential hotels, senior housing, emergency shelters, transitional housing, residential hotels, and housing for persons with disabilities. City regulations related to these housing types are consistent with State law, and where there are inconsistencies, programs have been identified in the Housing Element to bring City policies into compliance. See Chapter 5, Resources, for more information on the different housing typologies allowed under the City’s regulations.
Housing for Persons with Disabilities
Fair Housing Law prohibits local governments from making housing opportunities unavailable to people with disabilities through discriminatory land use and zoning rules or other policies and procedures.
Persons with disabilities are significantly more likely than other people to live with unrelated people in group housing, and therefore the definition of “family” can be a constraint to housing for persons with disabilities. The Antioch Zoning Ordinance (Section 9-5.203) defines a family as “one or more persons occupying a premises and living as a single housekeeping unit, as distinguished from a group occupying a hotel, club, fraternity, or sorority house. Also referred to as a household.” The City defines a dwelling unit as a room or suite of rooms used for sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation for no more than one B82
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-11 family. The Zoning Ordinance does not distinguish between related and unrelated persons and does not impose a numerical limitation on the number of people that can constitute a family. Therefore, neither the definition of family nor the definition of dwelling unit is a constraint to supportive or group housing for persons with disabilities in Antioch.
The siting of group homes is another common constraint to housing for persons with disabilities. The Antioch Zoning Ordinance defines residential care facilities as facilities licensed by the State and providing permanent living accommodations and 24-hour primarily non-medical care and supervision for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assistance sustaining the activities of daily living.
Consistent with State law, residential care facilities that provide care for up to six patients are treated as residential uses and subject only to the same requirements as other permitted residential use of the same housing type in the same district. Residential care facilities for seven are more are allowed with a use Use permit Permit in the following zones: R-10, R-20, R-25, R-35, C-0, C-1, and MCR. Programs contained within Chapter 7 of this Element proposes to establish eligible supportive and transitional housing projects as permitted by-right where multi-family and mixed uses are permitted, consistent with AB 2162. The implementation program will result in a revision to the Zoning Ordinance to bring it into consistency with State law and would remove a potential governmental constraint to housing persons with disabilities.
Reasonable Accommodation
A reasonable accommodation is a change, exception, or adjustment to a rule, policy, practice, or service.
The Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful to refuse to make reasonable accommodations to rules, policies, practices, or services when such accommodations may be necessary to afford persons with disabilities an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling and public and common use areas. In addition, the Fair Housing Act prohibits a housing provider from refusing to permit, at the expense of the person with a disability, reasonable modifications of existing premises occupied or to be occupied by such person if such modifications may be necessary to afford such person full enjoyment of the premises.
Article 39 of the CcCity’s Zoning Ordinance detailsoutlines the City of Antioch’s reasonable accommodations procedure. The City allows any person who requires reasonable accommodation, , in the application of a zoning law which may be acting as a barrier to fair housing opportunities, to request as such on a form to an adjustment of a zoning development standard to be provided by the Zoning Administrator. If the applicant’s project also requires some other planning permit or approval, then the applicant must file the request for reasonable accommodation together with the application for such a permit or approval. The City’s reasonable accommodations form requires applicants to provide the following information:
Applicant’s name, address, and telephone number;
Address of the property for which the request is being made; The current actual use of the property;
The zoning code provision, regulation, or policy from which accommodation is being requested; and The bases for the claim that the individual is considered disabled under the Fair Housing Act and why the accommodation is necessary to make the specific housing available to the individual. the formal process for requesting reasonable accommodation. Per Article 39, under Applications for reasonable accommodations are then reviewed by the City Zoning Administrator who shall provide a written determination within 30 days of receipt of a completed application. Determinations on requests must consider the following:
B83
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-12
The housing which is the subject of the request for reasonable accommodation will be used by an individual protected under the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA);
The request for reasonable accommodation is necessary to make specific housing available to an individual protected under the FHA and FEHA;
The requested reasonable accommodation will not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the cCity; and
The requested accommodation will not require fundamental alteration of the zoning or building laws, policies, and/or procedures of the cCity.
Per Article 39 (Reasonable Accommodation) of the City’s municipal code, any person The The City’s current reasonable accommodation process is to have applicants to submit a request to the City for approval by the Zoning Administrator. If the project also requires some other planning permit or approval, then the applicant must file the request for reasonable accommodation together with the application for such a permit or approval. Article 39 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance details the formal process for requesting reasonable accommodation.
Building Codes and Enforcement
Building and safety codes are adopted to preserve public health and safety and ensure the construction of safe housing. The Citycity has adopted the 2019 California Building Code. The California Building Code, adopted in 2019, has establisheds construction standards for all residential buildings, which provide minimum standards necessary to protect the health, safety , and welfare of Antioch’s residents. The City of Antioch has not adopted any local amendments to the State Building Code.
The CitycCity also requires that all new residential construction complies with Title 24 of the California Building Code, which addresses accessibility requirements for certain types of buildings. The City’s building inspectors and code enforcement officers are responsible for investigating and abating complaints of violations of building codes, zoning requirements, sign regulations , and public nuisance ordinances.
Site Improvements
Site improvements vary depending on the location and existing infrastructure of a specific site. Dedication and construction of streets, alleys, and other public easements and improvements may be required to maintain public safety and convenience. The City’s standards and requirements for streets, sidewalks, parkway trees and other site improvements are found in the Municipal Code and are available to the public on the City’s website.
The City of Antioch has adopted the following design standards for residential subdivisions:
Alleys – Alleys shall not be less than 20 feet in width. Intersections – All streets shall intersect as nearly as possible at right angles. Center lines – Streets entering upon opposite sides of any given street shall have their center lines directly opposite each other, or such center lines shall be offset by at least 200 feet. Distance between certain streets – The minimum distance between streets entering a thoroughfare shall be 800 feet where feasible.
Planting areas and parks – Where a subdivider proposes the creation of planting areas, parks, parked streets, or other parcels of land to be used for subdivision owners or for the public, the approval of B84
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-13 such areas shall be conditioned upon adequate provisions for the maintenance of such areas until such time as the maintenance is assumed by a public agency. Rights-of-way and similar facilities – If a subdivision borders on or contains a railroad right-of-way, a limited access freeway, or similar type of facility, the Planning Commission may require the street plan be considered in its relation to the probability of grade separation.
Other
The City of Antioch has a voter-approved advisory measure, Measure U, that was approved by 69 percent of voters in 1998. Measure U calls for the City to phase the rate of new development to “provide adequate schools, street improvements, and Highway 4 improvements for a sustained high quality of life, by making new growth pay its own way through maximizing fees, assessment districts, matching fund programs, and any other means effective to expedite the construction of needed infrastructure." In addition to Measure U, the CitycCity is subject to the Measure J Growth Management Program (GMP) adopted by Contra Costa County voters in 2004. Measure J (2004) is a 25-year extension of the previous GMP (Measure C) approved by voters in 1988. The GMP requires local jurisdictions to meet the following six requirements:
Adopt a development mitigation program.
Address housing options.
Participate in an ongoing cooperative, multi-jurisdictional planning process. Adopt an Urban Limit Line.
Develop a five-year capital improvement program.
Adopt a transportation systems management ordinance or resolution.
The City of Antioch General Plan’s Growth Management Element implements Measure U and Measure J.
The Growth Management Element includes rate of growth policies that set residential development allocations. The policy limits the issuance of development allocations to a maximum annual average of 600 development allocations with the ability to carry over unused allocations provided that the annual average of 600 is not exceeded during any five-year period (i.e., no more than 3,000 development allocations may be issued for any given five5-year period). To facilitate the development of special needs groups and ensure consistency with the Housing Element, the General Plan exempts income-restricted affordable housing and special needs housingg— – whether in single-family or multi-family buildings — – from counting towards the maximum development allocation. It also provides exemptions for the following scenarios: dwelling units with vested rights, construction of a single dwelling by or for the owner of the lot of records, ADUs, projects with four or fewer dwelling units, projects in the Rivertown Planning Area (now superseded by the Downtown Specific Plan), and transit-oriented development.
On October 9, 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill (SB) 330, known as the “Housing Crisis Act of 2019. SB 330 prohibits cities Cities and counties Counties from implementing certain limits on the number of residential permits issued or enforcing population caps through January 1, 2025. SB 330, and SB 8, which extended the sunset date of SB 330 to January 1, 2030, precludes the City’s ability to implement Measure U and Measure J until 2030 (unless it is extended again). Consistent with State law, the CitycCity has suspended enforcement of the development allocations system. If State law is not extended again, local growth management measures could potentially be a constraint to housing production starting in 2030. Growth management ordinances are a unique constraint given local political realities. Measure U would require Antioch citizens to eliminate the measure by a vote. Electoral policies set limitations that can not only constrain housing production but can also create inconsistencies with local policies and State and regional housing goals. State legislation has addressed this constraint for the majority of the current housing Housing element Element cycle and City staff report that the development allocation system did B85
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-14
not previously put a constraint on housing production when it was enforced. However, growth management measures could be a potential housing constraint in the future. The CitycCity can continue to exempt affordable housing, ADUs, and other housing typologies that serve low-income households and populations with disproportionate housing needs from growth management allocations in order to facilitate housing production that is the most needed in Antioch and ensure consistency across the General Plan.
Analysis of Potential Constraints
As part of the 6th cCycle update the City of Antioch analyzed residential development standards contained within the cCity’s Zoning Ordinance, and Table 4-3 belowabove, for their potential to constrain development of housing throughout the city. This analysis included an evaluation of recent housing development proposals received by the city, as discussed within Chapter 6, Sites,, of this element, as well as stakeholder interviews as discussed in Chapter 8, Participation, of this element. .
Residential developers consulted included AMCAL Multi-Housing Inc., the developers of a 394-unit multi- family housing development being constructed within the cityunder construction at 3560 East 18 th Street.
Of these 394 units, 91 will be affordable to very low-income households, 299 will be affordable to low- income households, and 4 four4 will be affordable to above moderate-income households. Developers consulted also included CityVentures, a residential developer in northern and southern California which buildsdevelops townhomes, condominiums, lofts, live- work, and single- family detached homes. The results of this analysis determined that the City’s existing residential development standards do not serve as a constraint to the development of multi-family development. These development standards are contained within Table 4-3 belowabove.
Building Height
The City’s development standards within the R-10, R-20, and R-35 zoning districts allow for the development of multi-family housing at a maximum height of 45 feet, which allows for the development of multi-family housing between 3 to 4 stories. Recent development applications for multi-family residential developments within the city, inclusive of the affordable AMCAL development, have ranged between 3three and 4four stories in height. Based on developer feedback, due to market conditions in eastern Contra Costa County related to variables such as land values, and incomes,; multi-family development above 3three to 4four stories tall is not considered financially viable from a developer perspective.
Residential development more than 4 stories (or 45 feet) in height is permitted in Antioch within the City’s Transit Oriented Development (TOD) overlay planned development zoning district , as discussed below, and the cCity’s Commercial Infill Housing (CIH) overlay district, as discussed below.:
TOD District: Intended to provide for a mix of high-density uses, between 20 and 40 du/acre, that are oriented toward rail or bus transit stations within and adjacent to the city. The TOD zoning district requires the cCity’s Planned Development (P-D) process and allows for flexibility in site design, which wouldn’t be possible through strict adherence to the cCity’s Zzoning Ccode.
Accordingly rRequests for development within a TOD district are reviewed and approved by both the Planning Commission and City Council.
CIH Overlay District: Intended to provide for the development of high-quality medium-and high- density residential mixed-use projects on infill sites in commercial areas of the city. Within the CIH overlay, multi-family development up to four 4 stories or 45 feet shall be permitted by-right, while additional height above 45 feet may be approved via a uUse pPermit.
B86
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-15 Parking
Chapter 5.17 of the cCity’s Zoning Ordinance establishes parking standards by proposed use,; these requirements for residential housing typologies are contained below in Table 4-4 above. Parking requirements do not constrain the development of housing directly, but compliance may result in a reduction in the number of housing units that can be developed on a given site, which can reduce a project’s economic feasibility.
Based on feedback received from developers, the City’s parking requirements do not serve as a constraint to development of multi-family housing. While the City of Antioch does include a Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station, this is an end of the route station which primarily serves commuters. Additionally, the frequency of bus transit service throughout the city apart from BART, primarily includes service headways at or above 30 minutes which require many residents to rely on automobiles for transportation needs.
Accordingly, many residential developments in the city choose to provide the number of parking spaces required by the Zzoning Ccode as reliable and, frequent transit service isn’tis not available throughout all parts of the city.
As discussed belowabove, the City of Antioch did amend their zoning ordinance in 2014 to allow the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission to reduce or modify parking requirements for Senior Housing; Shared Parking Facilities or those near public parking; residential and mixed-use projects located within 0.5- mile of a major transit stop, or those that incorporatinge transportation demand management measures (TDM); projects located on infill sites; or projects that rreusinge historic structures. This allows for flexibility in parking requirements for certain housing types, without request of a formal variance.
This hHousing eElement also includes Program 4.1.6.a.,. Review Residential Parking Requirements, which includes future amendments to the City’s parking requirements to includfore reductions or modifications in parking requirements for studio- and one-bedroom multi-family developments. This is intended to reduce the costs of housing production related to providing required parking, to further encourage the development of affordable by-design studio and one-bedroom units. This hHousing Eelement also includes Program 4.1.6.b. Eliminate Parking Requirements Near Major Transit which ensures the cCity’s compliance with AB 2097 (2022), which prohibits a public agency from imposing or enforcing a minimum automobile parking requirement , or enforce a minimum automobile parking requirement, on residential, commercial, or other development if the parcel is located within one-half0.5 miles of a major transit stop.
Development Fees
Various development and permit fees are charged by the City and other agencies to cover administrative processing costs and increases in public facilities and services associated with development. These fees ensure quality development and the provision of adequate public services. A list of development impact fees associated with residential and non-residential development in Antioch can be accessed online at https://www.antiochca.gov/finance-department/master-fee-schedules/. Fees are calculated based on the type, size, and potential impacts on various services and infrastructures. However, because these fees are often passed down to renters and homeowners in the rent/purchase price of the unit, they may affect the affordability of housing. One method of determining whether fees are excessive and represent barriers to affordable housing is by comparing fees to jurisdictions in the region.
Table 4-5 illustrates the total typical development fees for single-family and multi-family applications in Antioch. The County Costa County Planning Collaborative performed an analysis in April 2022 comparing entitlement fees, building fees, and impact fees across all Contra Costa County jurisdictions. Table 4-6 shows the total development fees (inclusive of planning permit/entitlement fees, building fees, and impact fees) for three development scenarios: a 3,100-square-foot single-family home, a 10-unit multi-family B87
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-16
project, and a 100-unit multi-family project. The analysis found that Antioch’s development fees are the least in the county for single-family homes and the second least after San Pablo for both small (10-unit) and large (100-unit) multi-family projects. Antioch’s total development fees for a single-family home cost approximately $2242,150 080 per unit, compared to the countywide average of approximately $59,376.27. 58,330. Antioch’s total development fees for 10-unit and 100-unit multi-family projects of are $103,950502,118.20 and $813,9103,323,782, respectively, . Compared to impact fees of other jurisdictions in the Ccounty, as depicted below in Table 4-6, Antioch’s impact fees for smaller multi-family developments is above that of many other jurisdictions, while the City’s impact fees for larger multi-family developments are similar to many other jurisdictions in the Ccounty. are well under the countywide averages of $290,880 for a 10-unit project and $2.6 million for a 100-unit project. Finally, Antioch’s fees per unit are not substantially more burdensome for multi-family projects. On a per unit basis, The the impact fees per unit for a single-family home in Antioch total approximately $ 2242,150,080.68, which is greater than the total per unit fees of a larger multi-family developments (approximately $3310,395 237.82) but less than the per unit total for a small multi-family project and ($8,14050,211.82) per unit for a large multi-family project. This indicates that it may cost developers less impact fees per unit to develop a single familysingle-family housing products than to develop a small multi-family housing development. To address this, and to encourage the development of a range of housing types throughout the city, the Housing Element includes Program 2.1.11. Missing Middle Housing, within Chapter 7, Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs, which includes consideration of financial incentives to encourage the development of a variety of housing typologies.
The Housing Element also includes Program 4.1.8. Monitor Effects of Regional Fees related to the cCity’s participation in the Eastern Contra Costa County Regional Transportation Impact Fee Program. This fee, depicted in Table 4-5 below is levied by the East Contra Costa County Regional Fee and Financing Authority (ECCCRFFA), a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) that operates through the TRANSPLAN Committee. The TRANSPLAN Committee is a regional group which coordinates the transportation interests of the County, the City of Antioch is represented on the Committee by a City Council and Planning Commission member. Accordingly, Program 4.1.8 is included within Chapter 7 of the Element to continue the City’s participation in the ECCCRFFA JPA, and monitoring of the regional transportation impact fee’s effects on housing production.
B88
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-17 TABLE 4-5 T YPICAL DEVELOPMENT FEES – CITY OF ANTIOCH
Single-Familya Single-Family Subdivisionb Multi-Family – Large Multi-Family – Small Unit S.F. 3,100 Unit SF 3,100 Unit S.F. 800 Unit S.F. 800 # of Units 1 # of Units 220 # of Units 100 # of Units 10 Site Information Valuation $372,358 Valuation $66,119,460 Valuation $11,602,641.60 Valuation $5,801,320.80 Fee Classification Multiplier Per Cost Multiplier Per Cost Multiplier Per Cost Multiplier Per Cost Entitlement Feesc
Preliminary Development Plan N/A N/A N/A $2,000 Dep $2,000 $2,000 Dep $2,000 $2,000 Dep $2,000 Use Permit / Design Review N/A N/A N/A $11,570 Set $11,570 $8,510 Set $8,510 $7,659 Set $7,659 Plan Review N/A N/A N/A $262 Set $262 $262 Set $262 $262 Set $262 Total Entitlement Fees $0 $13,832 $10,772 $9,921
Building Fees
Building Permit Fee Based on Valuation $3,049.51 Based on Valuation $561,000 Based on Valuation $48,861.57 Based on Valuation $25,656.28 Building Plan Check Fee 65% of Permit Fee $1,982.18 65% of Permit Fee $364,650 65% of Permit Fee $31,760.02 65% of Permit Fee $16,676.58 Green Building Fee 18% of Permit Fee $548.91 18% of Permit Fee $100,980 18% of Permit Fee $8,795.08 18% of Permit Fee $4,618.13 Technology Fee 6% of Permit Fee $182.97 6% of Permit Fee $33,660 6% of Permit Fee $2,931.69 6% of Permit Fee $1,539.38 Energy Inspection Fee 2% of Permit Fee $60.99 2% of Permit Fee $11,220 2% of Permit Fee $977.23 2% of Permit Fee $513.13 Fire Protection Fee $951 Unit $951 $951 Unit $209,220 $451 Unit $45,100 $451 Unit $4,510 General Plan Maintenance Fee N/A N/A Based on Permit Fee $28,050 Based on Permit Fee $12,443.08 Based on Permit Fee $11,282.81 Total Building Fees $6,775.56 $1,309,780 $150,868.67 $64,796.31 Impact Fees
School District Fee $3.79 SF $9,854 $3.79 SF $2,584,780 $3.79 SF $303,200 $3.79 SF $303,200 East Contra Costa County
Regional Transportation
Demand Impact Mitigation
(RTDIM) Feed
$26,710 Unit $26,710 $26,710 Unit $5,876,200 $26,710 Unit $2,671,000 $16,396 Unit $163,960 General Admin $460 Unit $460 $460.0 Unit $101,200 $292 Unit $29,200 $292 Unit $2,920 Public Works $445 Unit $445 $445 Unit $97,900 $282 Unit $28,200 $282 Unit $2,820 Police $1,190 Unit $1,190 $1,190 Unit $261,800 $755 Unit $75,500 $755 Unit $7,550 Parks and Recreation $3,261 Unit $3,261 $3,261 Unit $717,420 $2,065 Unit $206,500 $2,065 Unit $20,650 Administrative Fee 3% of City Impact Fees $160.68 3% of City Impact Fees $112,893 3% of City Impact Fees $10,182 3% of City Impact Fees $1,018.20 B89
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-18
TABLE 4-5 T YPICAL DEVELOPMENT FEES – CITY OF ANTIOCH
Single-Familya Single-Family Subdivisionb Multi-Family – Large Multi-Family – Small Total Impact Fees $15,370.68 42,080.68 $3,875,9939,752,193 $652,7823,323,782 $338,158.20502,118.20 Total Impact Fees Per Unit $42,080.68 $26,710.00 $33,237.82 $50,211.82 a Individual single-family residential developments do not require entitlement applications. b Entitlement and Building Permit fee data is calculated using the city of Antioch’s 2021 Master Fee Schedule as well as fee data from recent residential development projects of similar type and size. c City of Antioch entitlement applications include an initial deposit, dictated as “dep” in the above table, which is supplemented by the actual total cost of staff hours billed to review the application “set.” The staff time and therefore the fees vary depending on the complexity and completeness of each application. d Contra Costa County Public Works Department Traffic Fee Schedule as of November 12, 2022, as adopted via Chapter 9 of the City of Antioch’s Municipal Code. The East Contra Costa County Regional Transportation Demand Impact Mitigation Fee is a uniform regional development fee program established by the East Contra Costa County Regional Fee and Financing Authority, a Joint Powers Agency comprised of the cities of Antioch, Brentwood, and Pittsburg together with the County of Contra Costa.
Source: MIG, 2022; Urban Planning Partners, 2022 and City of Antioch, 2022.
B90
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-19
TABLE 4-6 C ONTRA COSTA COUNTY FEE COMPARISON
Jurisdiction
Total Development Fees
Single-Family Home Multi-Family – Small Multi-Family – Large Antioch $22,146.24
42,080.68
$103,950.44
502,118.20
$813,910.78
3,323,782.00
Danville $62,489.24 $347,075.68 $3,336,919.50
Lafayette $68,946.25 $370,969.49 $3,132,049.61
Hercules $64,064.99 $316,813.89 $2,967,385.44
Clayton $39,160.00 $249,136.00 $1,669,246.00
Pinole $56,665.77 $216,977.21 $2,277,370.79
Brentwood $113,158.84 $494,143.76 $4,766,295.73
Concord $47,248.07 $237,264.81 $1,765,845.76
El Cerrito $57,356.24 $440,729.35 $2,927,768.15
Moraga $85,109.56 $434,941.60 $4,101,720.20
Martinez $58,701.86 $271,214.92 $2,468,768.76
Oakley $70,088.22 $328,874.26 $3,572,169.38
Orinda $64,627.76 $376,137.59 $3,347,953.50
Pittsburg $60,830.46 $331,402.52 $3,198,202.86
Pleasant Hill $30,927.67 $177,477.61 $1,670,408.38
Richmond $45,694.42 $238,344.58 $2,301,117.22
San Pablo $29,498.69 $82,452.38 $674,051.76
San Ramon $100,495.59 $340,120.27 $3,318,772.28
Walnut Creek $31,004.88 $168,649.32 $1,507,627.70
Countywide Average $58,327.0
959,376.27
$290,877.67
311,833.87
$2,621,978.09
2,754,076.58
Note: Analysis assumed construction of a 3,100-square foot single-family home, a 10-unit multi-family building with 800 square feet per unit, and a 100-unit multi-family home with 800 square feet per unit.
Source: MIG, 2022.
LOCAL PROCESSING AND PERMIT PROCEDURES
Applications for entitlement review are filed with the City’s Community Development Department.
Depending on the type of entitlement required, a development application may be subject to various levels of review, such as public hearings and environmental review. Actual processing time varies according to the size and scope of the project, as well as the time taken by the developer to prepare plans and other project related documents. All residential projects are subject to review by City staff, the Planning Commission, and/or City Council. Single-family residential units, residential additions, and manufactured/modular housing are reviewed by staff and then proceed to plan check for building permit issuance. ADU ordinances have been modified to be in accordance with State law, which has led to an increase in ADU permits. ADUs are now reviewed ministerially without discretionary review or a hearing and are allowed in all single-family or multi-family districts. Other projects requiring a use Use B91
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-20
permitPermit, parcel map, tract map, and/or tentative map are subject to review by the Planning Commission and/or City Council.
Like many California jurisdictions, the City is subject to SB 35 and eligible projects that dedicate at least 50 percent of their units to be affordable to lower-income households are subject to a streamlined, ministerial review process. There have not been any SB 35 project proposed in Antioch. Program 4.1.1.
Maintain a Streamlined, Affordable Application Process of the Housing Element is included to maintain the City’s commitment to streamlined approvals for SB 35 projects.
Design Review
Development projects proposed within the city of Antioch which are consistent with relevant General Plan and zoning regulations are required to pursue design review approval consistent with Article 26 and 27 of the cCity’s zoning regulations. The purpose of the design review process is to promote orderly and harmonious development in throughout the city, consistent with the cCity’s General Plan. Accordingly, Design design review plans are requiredis required for all new development and additions to existing structures, unless the Zoning Administrator finds that the addition is non-controversial, minor, and does not involve a substantial alteration to the existing structure. Design review is not required for the construction or alteration of a single-family residence unless within a planned development which includes development standards that regulating regulate the architectural style of the dwelling.
The design review process is conducted administratively by city staff as well as by the Planning Commission, which serves as the cCity’s Design Review Board. Accordingly, it does not include required findings, per Section 9-5.2703(3) of the cCity’s zoning regulations, Typically, it takes a project 8-12 weeks from the time an application is deemed to be complete for a project to be scheduled for a hearing (sSee Table 4-7).
As part of the 6th cCycle update, the cCity’s Zzoning Ccode, including Articles 26 and 27 related to the design review process, will be amended to reference new Mmulti-Ffamily Objective Design Standards (ODS) being developed by the cCity of Antioch to be adopted alongside the updated hHousing eElement, and associated rezonings prior to January 31, 2023. Accordingly, design review of multi-family housing sites in these zoning districts will consist of staff and planning commission review of development applications for consistency with the new multi-family ODS. These ODS will expedite staff and planning commission review of multi-family housing developments and consolidate objective design standards related to multi-family housing development throughout the city.
Use Permits
Development projects in areas with which include land use classifications having which typically hav e unique site development or operating characteristics that may require special considerations to ensure compatibility with adjoining land uses; in these cases, a Use Permit is required. may require Use Permit in the city of Antioch. Use Permits are reviewed administratively by staff as well as by the Planning Commission at one public hearing. Per Section 9-5.2703 of the cCity’s zoning regulations state the require findings for approval of uUse pPermits include:
(a) tThat the granting of such use permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a use permit is authorized. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning provisions is found to B92
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-21 deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity under the identical zone classifications; and
That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan.
As part of the Housing Element Update, the city is adopting Zoning Code text amendments which will remove the Use Permit requirement for multi-family housing developments in multi-family zoning districts.
TABLE 4-7 P ROCESSING TIME FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT APPROVAL Process Permit Required Approving Body Time Frame
Design Review Design Approval Planning Commission 8-12 weeks Single-family Residential Building Permit Staff 8-12 weeks Single-family Addition Building Permit Staff 8-12 weeks Second Dwelling Unit Administrative Use Permit,
Building Permit Staff 8-12 weeks
Minor Subdivision Use Permit, Parcel Map Planning Commission 8-12 weeks Major Subdivision Use Permit, Tract Map City Council 6-12 months Multi-family Apartments Use Permit, Building Permit Planning Commission 6-10 months Multi-family Condominiums Use Permit, Tentative Map,
Building Permit Planning Commission 6-10 months
Manufactured/ Modular Housing Building Permit Staff 8-12 weeks Mobile Home Park Use Permit, Building Permit Planning Commission 6-10 months Residential Congregate Care Facility Use Permit, Building Permit Planning Commission 6-10 months Care Facilities Use Permit, Building Permit Planning Commission 6-10 months Family Care Home Use Permit, Building Permit Planning Commission 6-10 months Senior Group Home Use Permit, Building Permit Planning Commission 6-10 months Source: City of Antioch, Community Development Department. (b) that the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a use permit is authorized.;
(c) that because of special circum-stances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning provisions is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity under the identical zone classifications; and
(d) that the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan.
Typically, it takes a project 6-10 months to complete the uUse Ppermit review process (s. See Table 4-7).
Developers have suggested that the city could improve the permitting experience through the use of online applicant platforms. This could allow applicants to have a clear understanding of where they’re they are at within the permit process. Additionally, the permitting process could be improved by assigning a case manager for each project. This manager would be the primary point of contact for the applicant regarding questions about their project. This manager would also be responsible for pulling together information across departments to ensure the timely completion of the project. The city is developing an online permitting software and will launch online permitting in 2023. This is included in Program 4.1.1.
B93
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-22
Maintain a Streamlined, Affordable Application Process in Chapter 7, Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs.
Table 4-7 outlines the estimated time for development review.
Length of Time Between Application Approval and Building Permit Application Housing elements are now required to provide an evaluation of the length of time between receiving approval from the city City and applying for a building permit. Once a project is approved by the cityCity , such as the Planning Commission or City Council, it is the applicant’s responsibility to submit an applicationapply for a building permit. The time it takes can vary and is largely determined by the applicant. Factors include the time it takes to prepare thepreparation of the construction drawings and any necessary technical studies, the quality and thoroughness of the plans, the preparation and recording of subdivision maps (if necessary), retaining contractors, and securing financing. Table 4-8 provides some examples of recent projects and the time it tookduration of time between application approval and building permits or master home models. The time varies from 42 days to just over 4 years.
TABLE 4-8 L ENGTH OF TIME BETWEEN APPLICATION APPROVAL AND BUILDING PERMIT
APPLICATION, EXAMPLES
Project Length of Time
AMCAL Multi-Family 42 Days: 5-14-2019 to 6-25-2019
Almond Knolls Multi-Family 150 Days: 7-25-2017 to 12-22-2017 Oakley Knolls Single-Family 4 Years (1,491 Days): 4-10-2017 to 10-5-2021 *Submitted for site grading 4-13-2021, 1464 days after entitlement.
Quail Cove Single-Family 400 Days: 10-09-2018 to 11-13-2019 *Submitted for site grading 2-27-2019, days after entitlement.
Heidorn Village Single-Family
2 Years (734 Days): 1-26-2016 to 1-29-2018
*Submitted for site grading 5-03-2017, 463 days after entitlement. *The developer who entitled this project was not the developer who built it.
Source: City of Antioch, Community Development Department.
3. OTHER LOCAL CONSTRAINTS
The Residential Development Allocation Ordinance (Article 40 of the Antioch Zoning Ordinance) was adopted by the City Council in May 2002. The ordinance required that allocations for residential units be obtained prior to receiving residential development entitlements and building permits. This growth limitation measure was in place for a decade before the City allowed it to sunset in May 2012; it was not reenacted. The Residential Development Allocation Ordinance was replaced in March of 2014 with a new Ordinance to meter residential growth. The Ordinance that was developed has a trigger put in place at the 500th building permit at which point the City is to develop guidelines for a metering process to be put in place by the issuance of the 600 th building permit.
FUNDING
Contra Costa County and the cities Cities of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek joined together to form the CDBG and HOME Consortium for purposes of developing consistent training, application, and monitoring processes and for participation in the CDBG and HOME programs. In general, lack of funding for affordable housing is a constraint.
B94
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-23 Specifically, there is a constraint in the form of funding for affordable housing because Contra Costa County does not have an adequate vehicle for a local match, such as an affordable housing bond or other local resources that can provide a local match for each dollar of HOME funds spent on affordable housing.
Additional constraints include Antioch’s grant and loan program requires that a lien be placed on a home for two years for grants over $15,000. Antioch is the only city City in the surrounding area that requires filing a lien in order toto issue a grant for homeowner repairs. The lien requirement, and the time it takes to issue the grant, may discourage homeowners from participating.
INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRAINTS
In order to support growth, it is critical that public infrastructure is able to accommodate new development. The City of Antioch does not anticipate that the provision of public services, such as water, sewer, and storm drains, will be a constraint on the production of new housing.
Sufficient infrastructeinfrastructure is available to accommodate new housing development for the 6 th Cycle Housing Element. As part of the 6th cCycle Housing Element Uupdate process, the cCity commissioned Sherwood Engineers to conduct a wet utility analysis of the city’s water, sewer, and stormwater systems. This analysis is contained within an Infrastructure Report from Sherwood Engineers dated May 2022 which evaluated the city’s wet system utilities against the City’s 6th cCycle RHNA obligations. The Infrastructure Report determined that there is sufficient utility capacity to accommodate the City’s RHNA obligations. It was determined that any required infrastructure upgrades or improvements that may be required in specific areas of the city to allow for housing site development would include lateral and mainline extensions which are typical requirements of the development process and provided by developers.
Water
The City has sufficient water capacity to accommodate anticipated development for the 6 th Cycle Housing Element. The City of Antioch operates a water treatment, storage and distribution system serving the entire city, as well as unincorporated areas within the city’s sphere of influence. Water, diverted from the San Joaquin River and purchased from the Contra Costa Water District, is stored in a municipal reservoir and treated at the Antioch Water Treatment Plant. After treatment, water is then distributed throughout the city. The City also owns and operates 12 storage reservoirs with a combined storage capacity of 22 million gallons, six 6 treated water booster stations, and three 3 raw water pump stations. Additionally, the City has five intertie connections with neighboring water agencies (one with Contra Costa Water District, three with Diablo Water, and one with Pittsburg).
Sewer
The City has sufficient sewer capacity to accommodate anticipated development under the 6 th Cycle Housing Element. The City maintains the sewer lines within Antioch. The Citycity has approximately 300 miles of sanitary sewer system and 28,252 residential and commercial sewer lateral connections. The Delta Diablo Sanitation District (DDSD) provides sewer treatment service to the city, as well as to Pittsburg and Bay Point. The DDSD is responsible for conveyance of wastewater from city pipelines to the Bridgehead and Antioch Pump Stations. The wastewater is then treated at the DDSD Wastewater Treatment Plant, located near the border of Antioch and Pittsburg.
B95
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-24
Storm Drains
Stormwater collection and flood control within the city are predominantly operated by the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (CCCFCWCD). The city has over 110 miles of trunk lines to collect stormwater, independent from the area’s wastewater collection system. The stormwater trunk lines discharge to channels owned and maintained by both the City of Antioch and the CCCFCWCD. The City typically works with the CCCFCWCD to ensure that runoff from new development is adequately handled. In addition, the City requires that new development projects implement best management practices and provide erosion and sedimentation control measures.
B. NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
A number of market and non-governmental factors contribute to the feasibility and cost of housing, such as environmental constraints and the costs of land and construction.
1. LAND PRICES
The cost of land directly influences the cost of housing. Land prices are determined by a number of factors, most important of which are land availability and permitted development density. As land becomes scarcer, the price of land increases. In terms of development, land prices have a positive correlation with the number of units permitted on each lot.
Land costs in the San Francisco Bay Area are relatively high as compared with the rest of the nation. The cost of land in Antioch is less than most areas in the San Francisco Bay Area, though higher than property in the Central Valley. Current residential land listings in Antioch and the immediate vicinity range from around $275,000 to $400,00 per acre.
2. CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Construction costs can be strongly influenced by a variety of factors and have a direct correlation with the cost of housing. Construction costs are primarily determined by the cost of materials and labor. The cost of construction depends on the type of unit being built. Additionally, some sites have added costs, such as former industrial sites that must deal with remediation, and sites in close proximity to freeways that need to mitigate air quality impacts.
Table 4-9 provides a summary of estimated construction costs in Antioch.
TABLE 4-9 C ONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES
Development Type Cost per Square Foot
Single-Family Residential $125-150
Townhomes/Condominiums $175-190
Multi-Family $180-235
Source: BAE Economics, 2022; PlaceWorks, 2022; MIG, 2022; Urban Planning Partners, 2022 and City of Antioch, 2022.
B96
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-25
3. FINANCING
Mortgage interest rates have a large influence over the affordability of housing. Higher interest rates increase a homebuyer’s monthly payment and decrease the range of housing that a household can afford.
Lower interest rates result in a lower cost and lower payments for the homebuyer. Typically, when interest rates rise, the market compensates by decreasing housing prices. Similarly, when interest rates decrease, housing prices begin to rise. Oftentimes there is a lag in the market, so when interest rates rise housing prices continue to stay high until the market can catch up. It is this period when it is the most difficult for lower-income households to purchase a home . As shown in Table 4-10, the percentage of persons denied a home loan increased as the income decreased. Approximately 27.4 percent of very low- income households were denied a loan, which while only 7.9 percent of above moderate-income households were denied.
TABLE 4-10 D ISPOSITION OF APPLICATIONS BY INCOME, RACE, AND ETHNICITY OF APPLICANT, 2020
Income Group
Total
Applications
Loans
Originated
Applications
Denied
Percentage
Denied
<50% MFI 17,024 7,546 4,665 27.4%
50-79% MFI 36,964 23,153 5,117 13.8%
80-99% MFI 14,805 9,834 1,576 10.6%
100-119% MFI 45,461 31,503 4,087 9.0%
>120% MFI 144,802 99,527 11,384 7.9%
Total 259,056 171,563 26,829 10.4%
Note: MSA/MD: 36084 – San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA.
Source: Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council, HMDA Data, 2020.
Figure 4-1 shows the average interest rates between January 2019 and January 2022. During this time, interest rates have been at historic lows and are not likely a significant constraint on constructing or purchasing housing. However, even with the lower interest rates, lower-income households still face significant obstacles to purchasing a home due to the high home prices in the bay Bay area Area and difficulty meeting down payment requirements.
Figure 4-1 U.S. Average Interest Rates: January 2019 – January 2022 B97
4. CONSTRAINTS
4-26
Source: Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey, January 2022.
4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
The City of Antioch has identified areas where land development should be carefully controlled to ensure public health and safety. The following hazards may impact future development of residential units in Antioch.
SEISMIC HAZARDS
Antioch, like other cities in the San Francisco Bay Area, is located in a region of frequent seismic activity.
Although the City city is located in the vicinity of active faults, no active faults or Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zones are located within its General Plan planning area. Major active fault zones located in the vicinity of the city include the Hayward, Calaveras, Concord-Green Valley, and Marsh Creek-Greenville faults. The largest regional fault is the San Andreas fault, which is located 45 miles west of Antioch.
The City of Antioch may be subject to ground shaking in the event of a nearby earthquake. The amount of ground shaking would depend on the proximity of the area to the fault, the depth, the location of the epicenter, the magnitude of the earthquake and soil type in the area.
Liquefaction is caused by a shock or strain from an earthquake and involves the sudden loss of soil strength and cohesion and the temporary transformation of soil into a fluid mass. The areas directly adjacent to the San Joaquin River have a high to very high potential for liquefaction. Upland areas away from the river have a very low to moderate potential for liquefaction.
FLOODING
Portions of the city are located within the 100-year and 500-year flood hazard zones as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and are defined as “flood prone.” Areas subject to flooding are found mainly along the San Joaquin River and tributary creeks. According to USGS data presented by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, it is these same areas that are most vulnerable to potential sea level rise. FEMA defines the majority of Antioch as being subject to minimal or no flooding.
To protect the residents and property in Antioch, the City has adopted six Flood Protection Policies.
These policies, found in Chapter 11.0 (Environmental Hazards) of the General Plan, attempt to minimize the potential loss of life, physical injury, property damage, and social disruption resulting from flooding.
FIRE HAZARDS
The risk of both urban and wildland fire exists within Antioch. Fire hazards within the city may be a result of many factors, including type and amount of vegetation and groundcover, combustibility of building materials, adequacy of access for firefighting equipment and personnel, water supply and pressure, and weather conditions. The most common source of urban fires is from home heating systems and electrical appliances. Fire service in Antioch is provided by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District.
B98
4. CONSTRAINTS
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 4-27 NOISE
Residential areas are the most sensitive to noise in Antioch. Principal noise sources in the city are transportation noise sources includingrelated to transportation, such as SR State Route 4, and State RouteR 160 freeways, rail lines, and major arterial roadways. Given that the General Plan proposes additional housing Downtown, in close proximity to the rail lines, and along State RouteR 4 and State RouteR 160, noise could be an issue for future developments in these areas. Other potential noise sources include industrial development in the northern portion of the city, commercial development and construction activities.
AIR QUALITY
Exposure to emissions from freeways is becoming ofan increasing concern and will pose a constraint to the development of housing in some areas unless the city requires incorporation of measures to mitigate. One such measure, proposed in other cities, is the requirement to have that has been proposed in other cities is requiringan air filtration systems for residential developments within 500 feet of a freeway.
BIOLOGY
There are numerous special-status plant and animal specials that are either known or are likely to occur in the planning area, including in or around sites identified within the Housing Sites Inventory Sites.
However, the potential for special-status species to serve as a constraint to the development of sites within the Inventory is relatively low. While there remains a varying potential for future development of sites contained within the inventory to precipitate loss or disruption to special-status species remaining in the project area due to conversion of areas of natural habitat, removal of trees and other vegetation, increases in light and noise, and other modifications and disturbances associated with future development; the city will employ further review of development proposals for compliance with relevant State laws and the findings of the Environmental Impact report (EIR) prepared for the Housing Element Update. This review includes the implementation of adequate development controls as required by the General Plan Resource Management Element, including preparation of a Resource Management Plan (RMP) to identify and avoid impacts to biological resources. Additionally, tThe realistic capacity of sites contained within the Inventory is based on the minimum development density permitted within each site’s proposed for the zoning district;. Accordingly, capacity assumption allows for flexibility in future site design and development to implement required development controls and avoid impacts to special-status plant and animal species.
B99
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 5-1
RESOURCES
This chapter analyzes resources available for the development, rehabilitation, and preservation of housing in Antioch, including organizations and agencies, financial sources, regulatory assets, and resources for energy conservation. The inventory of land resources suitable for housing can be found in Chapter 6, Sites Inventory.
A. INSTITUTIONAL RESOURCES
1. CONTRA COSTA HOME CONSORTIUM
The cities of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg and Walnut Creek, along with the County of Contra Costa have formed the Contra Costa HOME Consortium (Consortium) to cooperatively plan for the housing and community development needs of the Countycounty. Although the City of Antioch (along with the cities Cities of Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek) receives and administers its own allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, all Consortium members pool their Home Investment Partnership Program (HOME) funds with the County Department of Conservation and Development. The County administers the HOME funds on behalf of all the Consortia cities Cities and the Urban County.1 The County also administers Urban County CDBG funds, Consortium HOME funds, County Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funds, and a share of the Alameda/Contra Costa allocation of Housing for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) funds as a sub-grantee to the City of Oakland.
The Consortium is highly collaborative and supportive. Members rotate host sites and meet quarterly or more frequently when working on specific issues. Over the 25 years of the Consortium, members have worked diligently to reduce institutional barriers and challenges for nonprofit agencies, including the creation of joint grant processes, an integrated electronic application for funding that is uniform for all Consortium members, standardized reporting, joint monitoring, and cross-training new Consortium members.
1 The Urban County includes all the unincorporated areas of the County and the communities of Brentwood, Clayton, Danville, El Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez, Moraga, Oakley, Orinda, Pinole, Pleasant Hill, San Pablo, and San Ramon.
B100
5. RESOURCES
5-2
The Consortium conducts two primary grant cycles for each five-year Consortium period. The first grant cycle is two years in duration, the second is three. Agencies applying in the first year of each cycle are eligible for renewal funding if they meet contract and other provisions. If excess program income is received or agencies are not funded again, an additional grant cycle may be held. The County conducts an annual grant cycle to solicit housing applications, and Consortium jurisdictions may join in this process to solicit applications for any needed services.
2. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA (HACCC) The City does not operate its own housing authority but is served by the Housing Authority of the County of Contra Costa (HACCC). HACCC provides rental subsidies and manages and develops affordable housing for low-income families, seniors, and persons with disabilities in Contra Costa County.
HACCC administers approximately 9,000 vouchers under the Housing Choice Voucher Program and offers rental assistance for units at 23 properties through the Project Based Voucher Program. HACCC also manages 1,168 public housing units across the county.
3. CITY OF ANTIOCH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
The City of Antioch’s Community Development Department (Community Development) includes functions related to planning, housing, code enforcement, and building. Community Development reviews all development applications, ensures implementation of City ordinances and codes as well as State and Federal requirements, ensures the maintenance of properties and buildings, and inspects structures for health and safety hazards.
Community Development also administers the City’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, explained further under Section B, Funding Resources, in this Chapter. CDBG is the primary source of funds for community development and housing programs in the City of Antioch. Community Development financially supports and partners with a number of nonprofit agencies. In partnership with these agencies, Community Development helps protect against discrimination and ensure equitable access to fair choice in housing, support both tenants and landlords in resolving disputes, reduce evictions, provide emergency financial assistance to those who have lost or are losing housing, contribute to improving the housing stock and enhance the livability of Antioch neighborhoods, and protect housing affordability for lower-income residents.
The City has partnered with agencies to provide the programs described below.
ANTIOCH HOME OWNERSHIP PROGRAM (AHOP)
Implemented in partnership with Bay Area Affordable Housing Alliance (BAAHA), AHOP aims to improve housing security by increasing housing affordability and providing education and counselling for new and future homeowners. AHOP helps people who want to buy a home by providing interest-free down payments, closing cost assistance, and other loan programs for eligible applicants. AHOP also provides educational resources and counseling to make informed homebuying decisions. Prior to applying for financial assistance, the applicant needs to participate and complete a six-hour HUD homebuyer education course. These workshops are offered periodically by BAAHA.
FAIR HOUSING SERVICES
The City contracts with its nonprofit partners, ECHO Housing and Bay Area Legal Aid, to provide services that ensure fair housing rights are upheld for all Antioch residents. These services are funded B101
5. RESOURCES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 5-3 with City of Antioch CDBG Funds. The fair housing services include investigations and enforcement in response to reports of housing discrimination complaints, as well as independent testing of rental properties for signs of discrimination in rental practices. The City disseminates fair housing information on its website, including residents should go if they have a discrimination complaint.
TENANT/LANDLORD SERVICES AND EVICTION PROTECTION
The City uses CDBG funding to contract with ECHO Housing and Bay Area Legal Aid to provide tenant/landlord services. Services include mediation, education on rental housing issues, support and counseling to tenants, and free legal advice and representation for lower-income tenants facing eviction.
The City publicizes these services in English and Spanish on its website.
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
The City of Antioch has partnered with Habitat for Humanity East Bay/Silicon Valley to provide both loans and small grants to correct housing deficiencies for lower-income homeowners in Antioch. This program is funded by City of Antioch Housing Successor funds. Issues addressed include health and safety, property maintenance, energy efficiency, and disability accommodation. Eligible repairs include but are not limited to the following:
Roofs
Stairs and porches
Mold, mildew, and/or lead paint remediation
Plumbing
Foundation work
Water heaters
Painting
Electrical
Heating and cooling
Flooring
Grab bars, ramps, and accessibility upgrades
Windows
Door locks
4. CITY OF ANTIOCH RECREATION DEPARTMENT
The City’s Recreation Department provides a variety of services that support the community’s seniors, families, and youth, including managing the Antioch Community Center and Antioch Senior Center. The Recreation Department provides information and resources in English and Spanish on food supplies, rent/utility assistance, financial assistance after a job loss, health services, and social and mental support.
B. FUNDING RESOURCES
The City’s housing programs are funded through a variety of State, and federal sources. These funds actively support fair housing choice, improving the housing stock, and protecting housing affordability in Antioch. This section offers a summary of funding sources that are currently used in Antioch, as well as additional funding sources that are potentially available to support various housing programs.
B102
5. RESOURCES
5-4
1. SUCCESSOR AGENCY FUNDS
The Antioch Development Agency (ADA) was dissolved along with all other redevelopment agencies in the state following the 2011 California Supreme Court decision in California Redevelopment Association et al. v. Ana Matosantos. As a result, the City of Antioch faced the loss of the Redevelopment Housing Set-Aside Fund, which amounted to over $1.1 million annually for affordable housing projects, elimination of blight, economic development, and infrastructure improvements. However, Successor Agencies were formed after the dissolution of Redevelopment Agencies to carry out and close the Agency's remaining functions. The City of Antioch’s Housing Successor funding is primarily used for housing and homeless activities; Housing Successor funding was pooled with CDBG funds to invest $128,000 for homeless activities in 2019-2020 in Antioch. Housing Successor funding was also used for housing rehabilitation after the County ceased providing this function for the cities of Contra Costa County and resulted in the rehabilitation of 149 rental units and 87 owner-occupied units across the county.
The City has approximately $7.3 million dollars in Housing Successor funds. The Housing Successor funds are available to subsidize units in the 0-50 percent AMI affordability level, including units for the unhoused or family housing. Senior housing, however, is not an eligible activity for the Successor funds. The City utilizes about $880,000 of this funding annually as follows: Homeless Programs ($250,000), Housing Rehab ($510,000), Home Ownership ($65,000), and Administration ($55,000, but anticipated to increase in 2023 with the hiring of a full-time Housing Analyst).
2. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS (CDBG)
The City of Antioch is an Entitlement City under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. As such, Antioch receives funding from HUD on an annual basis and is able tocan provide grants to non-profit and governmental agencies to develop viable urban communities through the provision of services to the low- and moderate-income community.
Programs and services include development of housing for persons with special needs; services to the elderly, those with disabilities, and children; expanding economic opportunities; and public improvements.
CDBG is the primary source of funds for community development and housing programs in the City of Antioch. Program funding is administered through the Community Development Department. To obtain funding, applicant projects and/or programs must meet eligibility requirements and demonstrate that they benefit very low- and low-income persons within the City. CDBG funds can be used for the following activities:
Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Home Buyer Assistance
Economic Development
Homeless Assistance
Public Services
Public Improvements
Rent Subsidies (short-term)
The City receives $800,000 and $850,000 annually from CDBG funding. The City typically funds infrastructure, economic development, and public services activities with CDBG funds. An average of 25- 30 programs are funded annually.
B103
5. RESOURCES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 5-5
3. HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM
The City also utilizes Home Investment Partnership Program (HOME) funds through the Contra Costa County HOME program. Contra Costa County and the cities Cities of Antioch, Concord, Pittsburg, and Walnut Creek joined together to form the CDBG and HOME Consortium for purposes of developing consistent training, application, and monitoring processes and for participation in the CDBG and HOME programs. This funding may be used for projects to acquire, rehabilitate, and construct housing for lower- income households. HOME funds can also be used for home buyer or rental assistance.
4. EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT (ESG) PROGRAM
Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funds are used to provide shelter and related services to the homeless.
The County Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) coordinates the allocation of ESF ESG funds with the County's Homeless Program office and the Continuum of Care (CoC) Board. The City works closely with the Contra Costa CoC in the allocation of ESG funds, developing performance standards, and evaluating outcomes. City staff consult with CoC and the Council on Homelessness Executive Board, which provides advice and input on the operations of homeless services, program operation, and program development efforts in Contra Costa County. The City sits on the Review and Ranking committee to determine allocation of funding for ESG projects.
5. OTHER FUNDING PROGRAMS
Table 5-1 identifies additional funding federal and State resources for affordable housing activities, including but not limited to new construction, acquisition, rehabilitation, and homebuyer assistance.
TABLE 5-1 F EDERAL AND STATE FUNDING PROGRAMS
Program Description
Federal Programs
Brownfields Grant Funding
Program
Resources availableProvides resources for the cleanup of eligible publicly- or privately-heldprivately held properties to facilitate the reuse/redevelopment of contaminated sites.
Choice Neighborhoods
Implementation Grant Program
Supports the implementation of comprehensive plans expected to revitalize public and/or assisted housing and facilitate neighborhood improvements.
Community Facilities Direct Loan &
Grant Program
Provides affordable funding to develop essential community facilities in rural areas.
Continuum of Care (CoC) Program Funding is availableProvides funding on an annual basis through HUD to quickly rehouse homeless individuals and families.
Farm Labor Housing Direct Loans &
Grants (Section 514)
Provides affordable financing to develop housing for domestic farm laborers.
Housing Choice Vouchers The government's major program for assistingAssists very low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled to affordin affording housing through rental subsidies that pays the differencet between the current fair market rent and what a tenant can afford to pay (i.e., 30 percent of their income).
Home Ownership for People
Everywhere (HOPE)
Provides grants to low-income people to achieve homeownership.
Housing Opportunities for Persons
with AIDS (HOPWA)
Funds are made availableProvides funds countywide for supportive social services, affordable housing development, and rental assistance to persons living with HIV/AIDS.
Housing Preservation Grants Provides gGrants to sponsoring organizations for the repair or rehabilitation of housing owned or occupied by low- and very-low-income rural citizens.
B104
5. RESOURCES
5-6
TABLE 5-1 F EDERAL AND STATE FUNDING PROGRAMS
Program Description
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
(LIHTC) Program
Issues Ttax credits for the for the acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction of rental housing for lower-income households. Project equity is raised through the sale of tax benefits to investors. 4% and 9% credits available.
Rural Rental Housing: Direct Loans Provides dDirect loans for construction or rehabilitation of affordable, rural multi-family rental housing.
Section 108 Loan Guarantee
Program
Issues Lloans to CDBG entitlement jurisdictions for capital improvement projects that benefit low- and moderate-income persons.
HUD Section 202 Supportive
Housing for the Elderly Program
Provides an iInterest-free capital advance to private, non-profit sponsors to cover the costs of construction, rehabilitation, or acquisition of very low-income senior housing.
HUD Section 221(d)(3) and
221(d)(4)
Insures loans for construction or substantial rehabilitation of multi-family rental, cooperative, and single-room occupancy housing.
USDA Section 502 Direct Loan
Program
USDA Section 502 Direct Loan Program providesProvides homeownership opportunities for low- and very low-income families living in rural areas.
Section 811 Project Rental
Assistance
Section 811 Project Rental Assistance offersOffers long-term project-based rental assistance funding from HUD. Opportunities to apply for this project- based assistance are through a Notice of Funding Availability published by CalHFA.
State Programs
Affordable Housing and
Sustainable Communities Program
(AHSC)
Funds land use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects that support infill and compact development and GHG emissions.
CalHome GProvides grants to local public agencies and non-profits to assist first-time homebuyers become or remain homeowners through deferred-payment loans.
Funds can also be used for ADU/JADU assistance (i.e., construction, repair, reconstruction, or rehabilitation).
CalHFA Residential Development
Loan Program
Provides lLoans to cities for affordable, infill, owner-occupied housing developments.
Cleanup Loans and Environmental
Assistance to Neighborhoods
(CLEAN) Program
Department of Toxic Substances Control program that provides low-interest loans to investigate, cleanup, and redevelop abandoned and underutilized urban properties.
California Emergency Solutions
and Housing (CESH)
GProvides grants for activities to assist persons experiencing or at-risk of homelessness.
California Self-Help Housing
Program
GProvides grants for sponsor organizations that provide technical assistance for low- and moderate-income families to build their homes with their own labor.
Community Development Block
Grant-Corona Virus (CDBG-CV1) –
CARES Act Funding
A subsidiary of the CDBG program that provides relief to eligible entities due to hardship caused by COVID-19.
Emergency Housing Assistance
Program (EHAP)
FProvides funds for emergency shelter, transitional housing, and related services for the homeless and those at risk of losing their housing.
Golden State Acquisition Fund
(GSAF)
SProvides short-term loans (up to five-years) to developers for affordable housing acquisition or preservation.
Homekey GIssues grants to acquire and rehabilitate a variety of housing types (e.g., hotels, motels, vacant apartment buildings) to serve people experiencing homelessness or who are also at risk of serious illness from COVID-19.
Homeless Emergency Aid Program
(HEAP)
$500 million block grant program designed to provide direct assistance to cities, counties and CoCs to address the homelessness crisis.
Homeless, Housing Assistance and
Prevention (HHAP) Program
HHAP Round 1: $650 million grant to local jurisdictions to support regional coordination and expand or develop local capacity to address immediate homelessness challenges.
Round 2: $300 million grant that provides support to continue to build on regional collaboration to develop a unified regional response to homelessness.
B105
5. RESOURCES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 5-7 TABLE 5-1 F EDERAL AND STATE FUNDING PROGRAMS
Program Description
Housing for a Healthy California
(HHC)
FProvides funding for supportive housing opportunities intended to create supportive housing for individuals who are recipients of or eligible for health provided through Medi-Cal.
Housing Navigators Program Distributes $5 million in funding to counties for the support of housing navigators to help young adults aged 18 to 21 secure and maintain housing, with priority given to young adults in the foster care system.
Housing-Related Parks Program Funds the creation of new park and recreation facilities or improvement of existing park and recreation facilities that are associated with rental and ownership projects that are affordable to very low- and low-income households.
Infill Infrastructure Grant Program
(IIG)
Provides Grant fundinggrants for infrastructure improvements for new infill housing in residential and/or mixed-use projects.
Joe Serna, Jr., Farmworker Housing
Grant (FWHG)
Provides gGrants and loans for development or rehabilitation of rental and owner-occupied housing for agricultural workers with priority for lower-income households.
Local Early Action Planning (LEAP)
Grants
Assists cities and counties to plan for housing through providing one-time, non- competitive planning grants.
Local Housing Trust Fund Program
(LHTF)
Provides loans Lending for construction of rental housing projects with units restricted for at least 55 years to households earning less than 60%AMI. State funds matches local housing trust funds as down-payment assistance to first- time homebuyers.
Mobile-home Park Rehabilitation
and Resident Ownership Program
(MPRROP)
Provides lLow-interest loans for the preservation of affordable mobile-home parks.
Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC)
Program
Issues iIncome tax credits to first-time homebuyers to buy new or existing homes.
Multi-Family Housing Program
(MHP)
Provides lLow-interest, long-term deferred-payment permanent loans for new construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of permanent and transitional rental housing for lower-income households.
No Place Like Home Invests in the development of permanent supportive housing for persons who need mental health services and are experiencing homelessness or chronic homelessness, or at risk of chronic homelessness.
Office of Migrant Services (OMS) Provides grants to local government agencies that contract with HCD to operate OMS centers throughout the state for the construction, rehabilitation, maintenance, and operation of seasonal rental housing for migrant farmworkers.
Permanent Local Housing
Allocation Program (PLHA)
Issues gGrants (competitive for non-entitlement jurisdictions) available to cities to assist in increasing the supply of affordable rental and ownership housing, facilitate housing affordability, and ensure geographic equity in the distribution of funds.
Predevelopment Loan Program
(PDLP)
Issues sShort-term loans to cities and non-profit developers for the continued preservation, construction, rehabilitation, or conversion of assisted housing primarily for low-income households.
Regional Early Action Planning
(REAP) Grants
Provides gGrant funding intended to help COGs and other regional entities collaborate on projects that have a broader regional impact on housing.
SB 2 Planning Grants Program OProvides one-time funding and technical assistance to help local governments adopt and implement plans and process improvements that streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production.
Supportive Housing Multi-Family
Housing Program (SHMHP)
LProvides low-interest loans to developers of permanent affordable rental housing that contain supportive housing units.
Transformative Climate
Communities (TCC) Program
CIssues competitive grants for planning and implementation of community-led development and infrastructure projects that achieve major environmental, health, and economic benefits in the state’s most disadvantaged communities.
Transit Oriented Development
Housing Program (TOD)
LProvides low-interest loans and grants for rental housing that includes affordable units near transit.
B106
5. RESOURCES
5-8
TABLE 5-1 F EDERAL AND STATE FUNDING PROGRAMS
Program Description
Transitional Housing Program
(THP)
Provides fFunding to counties for child welfare services agencies to help young adults aged 18 to 25 find and maintain housing, with priority given to those previously in the foster care or probation systems.
Veterans Housing and
Homelessness Prevention Program
(VHHP)
LProvides long-term loans for development or preservation of rental housing for very low- and low-income veterans and their families.
Workforce Housing Program Issues Ggovernment bonds issued to cities to acquire and convert market-rate apartments to housing affordable to moderate- and /middle-income households, generally households earning 80% to 120% of AMI.
Source: Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
C. LOCAL NON-PROFIT RESOURCES
A number ofSeveral non-profit organizations and support agencies currently work in Antioch or in Contra Costa County. These agencies serve as resources in meetinghelp to meet the housing needs of the Citycity a, and are integral in implementing activities for preservation of assisted housing and development of affordable housing, as well as creating safe and healthy places for all economic segments of the community. These organizations include but are not limited to the list below.:
ECHO Fair Housing
Bay Area Legal Aid
Contra Costa Homeless Continuum of Care
Lions Center for the Visually Impaired
Independent Living Resources (ILR)
Satellite Affordable Housing Associates (SAHA)
Mercy Housing
Contra Costa Interfaith Housing
Contra Costa Housing Authority
Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity
Contra Costa Senior Legal Services Center
Resources for Community Development (RDC)
Contra Costa Small Business Development Center
Opportunity Junction
Contra Costa County Health Services
STAND! For Families Free of Violence
Contra Costa Family Justice Alliance – Antioch Office SHELTER Inc. of Contra Costa County
Office of Reentry and Justice, CCC
BRIDGE Housing
Eden Housing Inc.
B107
5. RESOURCES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 5-9 D. REGULATORY RESOURCES
In addition to the institutional and administrative resources described earlier in this chapter, the City has policy levers that it utilizes to facilitate the construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of affordable housing. Some of the City’s existing policies and programs are described below.
1. AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES AND DENSITY BONUS
The City of Antioch has adopted a Density Bonus ordinance and developer incentives for affordable housing in 2020 which that implement State Density Bonus Law. Article 35 of the cCity’s Zoning Ordinance implements the State’s Antioch’s Density Bonus program which allows for (Article 35 of the Zoning Ordinance) grants ana density bonus between increase of 5 to 50 percent over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance for projects that include a mix of market-rate and affordable unitspercentage of affordable housing units . The magnitude of the bonus depends on the depth of affordability and the percentage of units that are affordable.
Consistent with State law, 100 percent affordable projects (which may include up to 20 percent of units for moderate-income households) are allowed a bonus of 80 percent over the otherwise allowable density, and if the project is within 0.5 miles of a major transit stop, no density controls apply.
In addition to a density bonus, pursuant to State law, projects are also eligible to receive concessions or incentives depending on the proposed level of affordability. These may include reductions or modifications in development standards, the inclusion of non-residential uses, and other regulatory incentives that will result in cost reductions that contribute to the feasibility of affordable or senior housing. Projects may also waive any standards that would preclude the physical development of the project with the density bonus units. Section 9-5.3502(H) of the cCity’s zZoning Oordinance includes a provision which automatically adopts revisions to the State Density Bonus law as adopted by State Legislature.
2. SENIOR HOUSING
Senior group housing is allowed in all residential zones. The City has established a Senior Housing Overlay (SH) District, which allows higher densities and more flexible design standards . This, reflectsing the needs of the elderly population and aims to providing provide more affordable units to the growing number of senior citizens that live on a fixed income. Consistent with State Density Bonus Law, a developer agreeing to construct a senior housing development is granted an increase of 20 percent over the number of senior housing units. The SH District may be combined with single-family, duplex, restricted multiple- family, or multiple-family residential zoning districts and applies to housing developments consisting of five or more dwelling units.
In order to further facilitate the development of Senior Housing, theThe City allows reduced parking requirements for senior housing projects. Parking for senior housing projects may be reduced during project review to less than the required 0.75 space per unit based upon residents’ ages and vehicle ownership patterns and/or characteristics of the project (e.g., proximity to services or public transportation). Pursuant to Section 9-5.1704, Parking Reductions, of the Zoning Ordinance, projects must submit a parking demand study to substantiate the reduced parking request. The proper approving body must also make findings to approve the request, such as findings that the use will be adequately served by the proposed parking and that parking demand generated by the project will not exceed the proposed capacity or have a detrimental impact on street parking in the surrounding area.
B108
5. RESOURCES
5-10
3. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADUS)
Accessory dwelling Dwelling units Units (ADUs) or Junior accessory Accessory dwelling Dwelling units Units (JADUs) provide additional opportunities to provide affordable housing, primarily intended for the elderly or family of the primary owner or as a rental unit for additional income. ADUs are permitted subject to ministerial, staff-level approval in any district where the single-family residential use is allowed provided certain size, setback, and design conditions are met. Consistent with State law, JADUs and ADUsADUs and JADUs are also allowed where single-family or multi-family dwellings already exist without any corrections to a nonconforming zoning condition. Per Section 9-5.3805 of the Zoning Ordinance, ADUs that comply with the City’s general requirements are allowed with only a building permit (i.e., they do not require a separate planning approval). Table 5-2 summarizes the City’s development standards for ADUs, including owner-occupancy and deed restrictions requirements.
B109
5. RESOURCES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 5-11 TABLE 5-2 A NTIOCH ADU REQUIREMENTS
Junior ADU Single-Family ADU Multi-Family ADU
ADU Type
Conversion JADU
(interior conversion
meeting all JADU
requirements)
Conversion ADUb
(interior conversion of
existing space within a
single-family dwelling;
conversion of a legally
built detached
accessory structure or
rebuilding to same
footprint and
dimensions)
Small Detached ADU
and Attached ADU
(new construction and
800 square feet or
smaller)
ADU PERMIT
Large Detached ADU and
Attached ADU
(generally, new
construction and over 800
square feet)
Conversion ADU
(interior conversion of
existing non-habitable
area of multi-family
building such as storage
space or boiler room)
Detached ADU
(up two detached ADUs on
a lot that has existing multi-
family dwellings)
Zoning Allowed in all zones that allow residential uses Number of
Accessory Units 1
1; an ADU and an JADU
are permitted on a lot
within the existing or
proposed space of a
single-family dwelling
1; a small detached
ADU may be combined
with 1 JADU
1 At least 1 and no more
than 25% of the existing
unit count in the multi-
family building
Up to 2
Maximum Size 500 sq.ft. 800 sq.ft.
850 sq.ft. for studio and 1
bedroom 1,000 sq.ft.
maximum and, if attached,
no more than 50% of the
floor area of an existing or
proposed primary dwelling
unit
Maximum Height N/A N/A 16 feet 16 feet N/A 16 feet
Side Setbacks N/A Sufficient for fire safety 4 feet 4 feet N/A 4 feet Rear Setbacks N/A Sufficient for fire safety 4 feet 4 feet N/A 4 feet Front and Street-
Facing Setbacks N/A N/A N/A
Front=30 feet
Street-facing property line
other than front=20 feet
N/A N/A
Maximum
Lot Coverage N/A N/A None 60% N/A
Entrance(s) Separate entrance required
Kitchen Efficiency kitchen
requiredc Full kitchen required
Parking None None One spot, generallyd None
B110
5. RESOURCES
5-12
TABLE 5-2 A NTIOCH ADU REQUIREMENTS
Junior ADU Single-Family ADU Multi-Family ADU
Deed Restrictions
The property owner
must record a deed
restriction stating that
owner-occupancy is
required along with all
the conditions required
of an ADU
The property owner must record a deed restriction stating: the ADU may not be sold separately from the primary dwelling; the ADU is restricted to the approved size and to other attributes allowed by the code; the deed restriction runs with the land and may be enforced against future property owners; the deed restriction may be removed if the owner eliminates the ADU; the deed restriction is enforceable by the Director or his or her designee for the benefit of the City.
Short Term Rentals Prohibited
Impact Fees None ADUs less than 750 sq.ft. – None. ADUs equal to or greater than 750 sq.ft. – Impact fees collected must be proportional to square footage of existing dwelling unit.
a Junior ADU (JADU) is a small dwelling unit created from some portion of a single-family dwelling. These units can have their own bathrooms or share with the single-family dwelling. An efficiency kitchen is required.
b Conversions do not allow modifications to the building footprint/dimensions of legally built accessory structures or buildings, except where sufficient ingress and egress may be accommodated. The structure may expand up to 150 square feet to accommodate the ingress and egress. c An efficiency kitchen means a kitchen that includes each of the following: a cooking facility with appliances, a food preparation counter or counters that total at least 15 square feet in area, food storage cabinets that total at least 30 square feet of shelf space. d A parking spot is not required if: ADU is located within one-half mile walking distance of public transit, ADU is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district, on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the ADU, there is an established car share vehicle stop located within one block of the ADU.
Source: City of Antioch, 2022.
B111
5. RESOURCES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 5-13 The City’s ADU requirements are consistent with California Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 and are not a constraint to the development of second dwelling units. The City has seen a substantial increase in ADU development with the implementation of State laws, as discussed further in Chapter 6, Sites Inventory.
4. ZONING FOR A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES
EMERGENCY SHELTERS, TRANSITIONAL/SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, AND SINGLE-ROOM OCCUPANCY (SRO) UNITS
EMERGENCY SHELTERS
State law (Senate Bill (SB) 2) (2008) requires that cities jurisdictions identify one or more zoning districts that allow emergency shelters as a permitted use without a conditional use permit or other discretionary action. SB 2 also requires that emergency shelters are reviewed only against development standards that apply to residential or commercial uses within the same zone. The law also requires that the identified zones contain sufficient capacity to provide shelter for homeless persons that have unmet housing needs.
Consistent with SB 2, in June 2014 the Antioch City Council established a new Emergency Shelter Overlay District where shelters are allowed by-right when they are developed in accordance with mandated standards and requirements (see Section 9-5.3839 of the Zoning Ordinance). This provision was enacted to allow the City to accommodate additional facilities to meet the existing and projected need. More recent legislation, including Assembly Bill (AB) 139 (2019) amending Government Code Section 65583, authorizes local governments to apply a written objective standard that provides sufficient parking to accommodate staff in the emergency shelter, but not more than other residential or commercial uses within the same zone. The Antioch Zoning Ordinance requires 1 parking space per employee on the largest shift plus 0.30 spaces per bed. This written objective standard will be modified to eliminate the additional requirement of 0.3 spaces per bed as stated in Program 3.1.5.a. Emergency Shelters and Transitional Housing.
At present, there is only one emergency housing facility withing Antioch, The Don Brown Shelter. Don Brown Shelter has 20 beds for those suffering from severe mental illness. The shelter also provides housing counseling and other support services in association with Anka Behavioral Health. In addition, Winter Nights Family Shelter moves every two weeks between meeting rooms of local faith communities in Contra Costa County to provide large tents, sleeping pads, sleeping bags, bed linens, and towels. On the City of Antioch’s website, resources about other shelters in surrounding jurisdictions is provided, namely Stand! Domestic Violence Shelter which provides 24 beds for women and children under 18.
According to the 2020-2025 Consolidated Plan, there is a very high need to construct another homeless shelter and CARE Center in East Contra Costa County, and this is a high priority in the 2020-25 Consolidated Plan. The cCity has a 5-acre parcel of land which it rezoned with a Homeless Shelter overlay for this purpose in 2018. In 2020, the cCity sold the parcel as a potential CARE Center/Homeless Housing project. State Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP) funds have been set aside to partially construct the new Center and Shelter, and the City and County Homeless Services are working together to plan for some units of 0-30 percent AMI housing for the unhoused on the back part of the lot. All parties are working together to target the completion of this project during the planning period.
Additionally, the City of Antioch Zoning Ordinance allows homeless shelters in the Light Industrial (M-1) District and Heavy Industrial (M-2) District zones with a use permit. The M-1 zoning district is intended for light industrial and business park uses that will not adversely impact surrounding property. The M-2 zoning district allows heavy industrial uses that may generate adverse impacts on health and safety.
B112
5. RESOURCES
5-14
ADEQUATE SITES FOR EMERGENCY SHELTERS
The Emergency Overlay District includes a total of approximately 16.4 acres located near the intersections of Delta Fair and Century Boulevards and Wilbur and Fulton Shipyard Roads where emergency shelters may be established. These sites are considered appropriate to accommodate an emergency shelter because they are a reasonable walking distance from downtown and are not surrounded by heavy industrial or 24-hour uses that could negatively impact shelter guests. Because the sites do not abut any residential properties, potential impact on residential uses are minimized. Based on an estimated density of 200 shelter beds per acre, these sites can accommodate 124 emergency shelter beds as well as 100 units of transitional housing and associated services.
The recent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance added a new Section 9-5.3839 establishing development and operation standards for all emergency shelters established in the Ccity including:
Maximum of 50 beds/residents.
Minimum 200 sq. ft. (or at least 10 sq. ft. per bed whichever is more) area devoted to waiting and intake areas.
Requirement for the presence of management and security personnel whenever a shelter is in operation.
Required parking at 1 space per employee for the period where the maximum employees are on- siteon the largest shift plus 0.30 spaces per bed. See Program 3.1.5.a. Emergency Shelters and Transitional Housing within Chapter 7, Goals and PoliciesHousing Goals, Policies, and Programs . Limitations on the extent of outdoor activities.
Basic performance standards for lighting and noise.
Allowance, but not requirement, that shelters include services and common facilities such as recreation rooms, laundry facilities, cooking areas, childcare facilities, and counseling services. and that transitional housing and supportive housing be treated as any other residential use, subject only to those restrictions on residential uses contained in the same type of structure in the same zone. The law also requires that the identified zones contain sufficient capacity to provide shelter for homeless persons that have unmet housing needs. In addition, AB 2162 (2018) requires supportive housing to be a use by-right in zones where multi-family and mixes uses are permitted if the development meets certain requirements.
Consistent with State law, residential care facilities that provide care for up to six patients are treated as residential uses and subject only to the same requirements as other permitted residential use of the same housing type in the same district. In addition, residential care facilities, which are a type of supportive housing, are allowed with a use permit in several residential and commercial zones (i.e., R-10, R-20, R25, R-35, C-0, C-1, MCR, H). However, the Antioch Zoning Ordinance does not identify zones that allow the development of supportive housing by-right. Implementation of Program 3.1.5 proposes to establish eligible supportive and transitional housing projects as permitted by-right where multi-family and mixed uses are permitted. The implementation program will result in a revision to the Zoning Ordinance to bring it into consistency with State law.
EMERGENCY SHELTERS
In June 2014, the Antioch City Council established a new Emergency Shelter Overlay District where shelters are allowed by-right when they are developed in accordance with mandated standards and requirements (see Section 9-5.3839 of the Zoning Ordinance). This provision was enacted to allow the B113
5. RESOURCES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 5-15 City to accommodate additional facilities to meet the existing and projected need. More recent legislation, including AB 139 (2019) amending Government Code Section 65583, authorizes local governments to apply a written objective standard that provides sufficient parking to accommodate staff in the emergency shelter, but not more than other residential or commercial uses within the same zone. The Antioch Zoning Ordinance requires 1 parking space per employee on the largest shift plus 0.30 spaces per bed.
This written objective is sufficient to accommodate emergency shelter staff and is less than required in other residential and commercial zones.
At present, there is only one emergency housing facility withing Antioch: the Don Brown Shelter. Don Brown Shelter has 20 beds for those suffering from severe mental illness. The shelter also provides housing counseling and other support services in association with Anka Behavioral Health. In addition, Winter Nights Family Shelter moves every two weeks between meeting rooms of local faith communities in Contra Costa County to provide large tents, sleeping pads, sleeping bags, bed linens, and towels. On the City of Antioch’s website, resources about other shelters in surrounding jurisdictions is provided, namely Stand! Domestic Violence Shelter which provides 24 beds for women and children under 18.
According to the 2020-2025 Consolidated Plan, there is a very high need to construct another homeless shelter and CARE Center in East Contra Costa County, and this is a high priority in the 2020-25 Consolidated Plan. The City has a 5-acre parcel of land which it rezoned with a Homeless Shelter overlay for this purpose in 2018. In 2020, the City sold the parcel as a potential CARE Center/Homeless Housing project. State Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP) funds have been set aside to partially construct the new Center and Shelter, and the City and County Homeless Services are working together to plan for some units of 0-30 percent AMI housing for the unhoused on the back part of the lot. All parties are working together to target the completion of this project during the planning period.
Additionally, the City of Antioch Zoning Ordinance allows homeless shelters in the Light Industrial (M-1) District and Heavy Industrial (M-2) District zones with a use permit. The M-1 zoning district is intended for light industrial and business park uses that will not adversely impact surrounding property. The M-2 zoning district allows heavy industrial uses that may generate adverse impacts on health and safety.
LOW BARRIER NAVIGATION CENTERS
A Low Barrier Navigation Center (LBNC) is a temporary service-enriched shelter that helps homeless individuals and families to quickly obtain permanent housing. AB 101 (2019) established requirements for local jurisdictions to allow low barrier navigation centersLBNCs as a by-right use in certain districts mixed use and nonresidential zoning districts which permit multi-family development . Accordingly, as part of the Housing Element Update the City of Antioch is adopting text amendments to the Zoning Code which will permit LBNCs within the MCR, H, ES, TH, and CIH zoning districts.
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
The City of Antioch amended their Zoning Code in February 2022 to define “Transitional Housing” and create a Transitional Housing Overlay District (TH). Transitional housing is defined as dwelling units with a limited length of stay that are operated under a program requiring recirculation to another program location at some future point in time, Transitional housing may be designated for homeless or recently homeless individuals or families transitioning to permanent housing. Within the overlay district, transitional housing is a permitted use upon approval of a use permit.
B114
5. RESOURCES
5-16
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
State Law (AB 2162 )(2018) requires that jurisdictions allow permanent supportive housing as a permitted use by right in zoning districts where multi-family and mixed uses are permitted, this includes non- residential districts which allow multifamily uses. Accordingly supportive housing uses may only be reviewed against objective design standards applicable to residential uses permitted within the same district, consistent with statutory timelines, and without any conditional use permit or discretionary review process. AB 2162 also states that local jurisdictions may not impose any minimum parking requirements for supportive housing units located within half a mile0.5 miles of a public transit stop.
Supportive housing, as defined by California Health and Safety Code 50675.14(b) and/or 53260(d) is defined as dwelling units with no limit on length of stay and that are linked to on-site or off-site services that assist supportive housing residents in retaining the housing, improving their health status, and maximizing their ability to live and, where possible, work in the community. Supportive housing may be provided in a multiple-unit structure or group residential facility.
As part of the 6th cCycle hHousing eElement update, the City of Antioch’s Zoning Code is being amended to reflect compliance with various state housing laws, inclusive of AB 2162. Revisions include updates to Section 9-5.203 of the zoning code to better define supportive housing uses and complementary modifications to Section 9-5.3803 of the zoning code’s Land Use Regulations Table to allow supportive housing uses as a use by right in zoning districts which allow multi-family residential uses. Accordingly, development applications for supportive housing uses as defined within Section 9-5.203 of the zoning code are permitted in the R-10, R-20, R-25, R-35, MCR, ES, TH, and CIH zoning districts and will be reviewed against Multi-family Objective Design Standards developed and adopted as part of the hHousing eElement update. These supportive housing zoning amendments will implement compliance with AB 2162., Additionally consistent with State law, residential care facilities that provide care for up to six patients are treated as residential uses and subject only to the same requirements as other permitted residential use of the same housing type in the same district. Chapter 7 of this Element includes Program 3.1.1. which proposes amending the city’s Zoning Ordinance by September 30, 2023, to allow for residential care facilities and group homes for 7 or more persons within zoning districts that permit residential development.
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
Transitional housing, which is housing intended for a limited length of stay that is often linked with supportive services, may be provided in a variety of residential housing types (e.g., multiple-unit dwelling, single-room occupancy, group residential, single-family dwelling). No additional approval is required as long as a transitional housing project meets the requirements applicable to the type of residential development in which it is accommodated.
RESIDENTIAL HOTELS (SINGLE-ROOM OCCUPANCY UNITS)
Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) residences are small, one-room units occupied by a single individual, and may either have shared or private kitchen and bathroom facilities. SROs are rented on a monthly basis typically without rental deposit and can provide entry into the housing market for extremely low-income individuals, formerly homeless and disabled persons. As part of the City’s zoning updates to implement the 2007-2014 Housing Element, the Council enacted specific requirements for SRO hotels intended to provide a more consistent level of service for tenants and well as to improve their operation to make B115
5. RESOURCES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 5-17 them more acceptable to surrounding uses. SRO hotels are allowed with a use permit in the R-10, R-20, R-25, R-35, C-0, C-1, C-2, C-3, and MCR zones. SROs are subject to the requirements of Section 9-
5.3841 Residential Hotels, of the Zoning Ordinance. The requirements include development and operation requirements related to maximum occupancy; minimum size and width; provision of cooking and bathroom facilities, closets, and common areas; unit entrances; smoking and alcohol use; tenancy; and facility management.
ADEQUATE SITES FOR EMERGENCY SHELTERS/TRANSITIONAL HOUSING/ SUPPORTIVE HOUSING The Emergency Overlay District includes a total of approximately 16.4 acres located near the intersections of Delta Fair and Century Boulevards and Wilbur and Fulton Shipyard Roads where emergency shelters may be established. These sites are considered appropriate to accommodate an emergency shelter because they are a reasonable walking distance from downtown and are not surrounded by heavy industrial or 24-hour uses that could negatively impact shelter guests. Because the sites do not abut any residential properties, potential impact on residential uses are minimized. Based on an estimated density of 200 shelter beds per acre, these sites can accommodate 124 emergency shelter beds as well as 100 units of transitional housing and associated services.
The recent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance added a new Section 9-5.3839 establishing development and operation standards for all emergency shelters established in the City including:
Maximum number of beds/residents.
Minimum area devoted to waiting and intake areas.
Requirement for the presence of management and security personnel whenever a shelter is in operation.
Limitations on the extent of outdoor activities.
Basic performance standards for lighting and noise.
Allowance, but not requirement, that shelters include services and common facilities such as recreation rooms, laundry facilities, cooking areas, childcare facilities, and counseling services.
MANUFACTURED HOMES AND MOBILE HOME PARKS
Manufactured homes are allowed on approved foundations by-right in the RE, RR, R-4, R-6, and R-10 zones and mobile home parks are allowed with a use permit in the R-10, R-20, R-25, and R-35 zones.
Standards for manufactured homes are found in Section 9-5.3804 of the Antioch Municipal Code.
Manufactured, modular, and mobile homes are subject to objective design and site standards, including standards related to roof pitch, siding materials, and parking. Consistent with Government Code Section 65852.3, the site and design requirements for manufactured and mobile homes do not exceed the requirements of conventional single-family dwellings.
EMPLOYEE HOUSING
The Employee Housing Act (Health and Safety Code Section 17000-17011) establishes requirements for employee housing, including a requirement for jurisdictions to treat employee housing for six or fewer employees as a single-family structure. Employee housing shall not be included within the definition of a boarding house, rooming house, hotel, dormitory, or other similar term that implies that the employee housing is a business of differs in any other way from a family dwelling. The law prohibits requiring a B116
5. RESOURCES
5-18
conditional Conditional use Use permitPermit, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance for employee housing that serves six or fewer employees that is not required of a family dwelling of the same type in the same zone. In addition, the Employee Housing Act requires that employee housing consisting of no more than 12 units or 36 beds designed for use by a family or household be considered agricultural land and permitted the same way as an agricultural use. No conditional Conditional use Use permitPermit, zoning variance, or other discretionary zoning clearance shall be required of this employee housing that is not required of any other agricultural activity in the same zone.
The Antioch Zoning Ordinance does not define Employee Housing and does not include provisions that implement the Employee Housing Act. Project Program 3.1.6. Zoning for Employee Housing is included to amend the Zoning Ordinance for consistency with the Employee Housing Act.
HOUSING FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
Persons with disabilities have a number ofseveral housing needs related to accessibility of dwelling units; access to transportation, employment, and commercial services; and alternative living arrangements that include on-site or nearby supportive living services. The City ensures that new housing development comply with State and federal requirement for accessibility,
REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION PROCEDURES
As a matter of State law (As per SB 520), Ccities are required to analyze potential and actual constraints upon the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities, and demonstrate local efforts to remove governmental constraints that hinder the locality from meeting the need for housing for persons with disabilities. Cities are required to include programs that remove constraints and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for persons with disabilities.
The City currently provides reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities seeking housing. Any person or project requiring reasonable accommodation may submit a request to the City for approval by the Zoning Administrator. If the project also requires some other planning permit or approval, then the applicant must file the request for reasonable accommodation together with the application for such a permit or approval. Article 39 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance details the formal process for requesting reasonable accommodation.
ZONING AND OTHER LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
The following are methods by which the Citycity facilitates housing for persons with disabilities through its regulatory and permitting procedures:
Residential care facilities for six or fewer persons are permitted as a residential use subject to the same requirements as any other permitted residential use of the same housing type that are permitted in the same zone.
Residential care facilities for more than six persons are permitted in R-10, R-20, R-25, R-35, C-0, C-1, MCR, and H zoning districts subject to a use permit, and must abide by the following requirements:
The minimum distance from any other residential facility must be 300 feet. At least 20 square feet of usable open space shall be provided for each person who resides in the facility. Open space shall be designed and screened in compliance with the requirements applicable to multi-family residential development located in the same district.
B117
5. RESOURCES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 5-19 At least one parking space shall be provided for every two persons who reside in the facility.
Parking facilities shall be designed, landscaped, and screened in compliance with the requirements applicable to multi-family residential development located in the same district. Smoking and the possession or consumption of alcohol shall be prohibited in all indoor and outdoor common areas.
Smoke-free living quarters shall be provided for non-smoking residents. Residential care facilities shall be licensed and certified by the State of California and shall be operated according to all applicable State and local regulations.
BUILDING CODES AND ENFORCEMENT
Building and safety codes are adopted to preserve public health and safety and ensure the construction of safe and decent housing. As mentioned in Chapter 4, Constraints, these regulations may increase the cost of housing construction or maintenance. However, these regulations are important for establishing minimum standards to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Antioch’s residents. The City also requires that all new residential construction complies with California Building Code accessibility requirements for certain types of buildings.
E. ENERGY CONSERVATION OPPORTUNITIES
The City of Antioch requires compliance with the 2019 California Building Code for all new construction.
Compliance with the California Building Code on the use of energy efficient appliances and insulation has reduced energy demand stemming from new residential development.
Antioch and other eastern parts of Contra Costa County are typically colder in the winter and hotter in the summer than places that are closer to San Francisco Bay. This means that air conditioning, which can use a significant amount of energy, is more of a necessity in inland communities like Antioch. At the same time, the City’s sunny climate gives a greater opportunity for harvesting solar energy than in some other areas. To mitigate the effects of weather extremes, buildings should be sited to maximize solar gain in the winter and natural cooling potential in the summer. Additionally, trees should be strategically positioned to help control indoor temperatures.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), which provides electricity and gas service in the City of Antioch, offers public information and technical assistance to homeowners regarding energy conservation.
PG&E provides numerous incentives for energy efficient new construction and home remodeling.
Remodeling rebates include cool roofs, insulation, and water heaters. PG&E offers the following financial and energy-related assistance programs for its low-income customers:
Energy Savings Assistance Program. PG&E’s Energy Savings Assistance program offers free weatherization measures and energy-efficient appliances to qualified low-income households. PG&E determines qualified households through the same sliding income scale used for CARE. The program includes measures such as attic insulation, weather stripping, caulking, and minor home repairs. Some customers qualify for replacement of appliances including refrigerators, air conditioners, and evaporative coolers.
Energy Efficiency for Multi-Family Properties. The Energy Efficiency for Multi-Family Properties program is available to owners and managers of existing multi-family residential dwellings containing five or more units.
B118
5. RESOURCES
5-20
Multifamily Properties. The Energy Efficiency for Multifamily Properties program is available to owners and managers of existing multi-family residential dwellings containing five or more units. The program encourages energy efficiency by providing rebates for the installation of certain energy-saving products.
California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE). PG&E offers this rate reduction program for low-income households. PG&E determines qualified households by a sliding income scale based on the number of household members. The CARE program provides a discount of 20 percent or more on monthly energy bills.
California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE). PG&E offers this rate reduction program for low-income households. PG&E determines qualified households by a sliding income scale based on the number of household members. The CARE program provides a discount of 20 percent or more on monthly energy bills.
REACH (Relief for Energy Assistance through Community Help). The REACH program is sponsored by PG&E and administered through a non-profit organization. PG&E customers can enroll to give monthly donations to the REACH program. Qualified low-income customers who have experienced uncontrollable or unforeseen hardships, that prohibit them from paying their utility bills may receive an energy credit. Eligibility is determined by a sliding income scale based on the number of household members. To qualify for the program, the applicant’s income cannot exceed 200 percent of the Federal federal poverty guidelines.
Medical Baseline Allowance. The Medical Baseline Allowance program is available to households with certain disabilities or medical needs. The program allows customers to get additional quantities of energy at the lowest or baseline price for residential customers.
One of the most well-known strategies in building energy-efficient homes is following the U.S. Green Building Council’s guidelines for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Certification.
LEED-certified buildings demonstrate energy and water savings, reduce maintenance costs , and improve occupant satisfaction. The LEED for New Construction program has been applied to numerous multi- family residential projects nationwide. The LEED for Homes program was launched in 2005 and includes standards for new single-family and multi-family home construction. The LEED certification standards are one piece of a coordinated green building program. A green building program considers a broad range of issues including community design, energy efficiency, water conservation, resource-efficient material selection, indoor environmental quality, construction management, and building maintenance. The end result will be buildings that minimize the use of resources; are healthier for people; and mitigate the effects of the environment.
The following presents a variety of ways in which Antioch can promote energy conservation:
Provide information regarding rebate programs and energy audits available through Pacific Gas and Electric(PG&E).
Refer residents and businesses to energy conservation programs such as Build It Green and LEED for Homes.
Develop incentives, such as expedited plan check, for developments that are utilizing green building. Promote funding opportunities for green buildings, including available rebates and funding through the California Energy Commission.
Provide resource materials regarding green building and conservation programs.
B119
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 6-1
ADEQUATE SITES
State Housing Element Law (Government Code Sections 65583(a)(3)) requires that cities Cities demonstrate they have adequate sites to meet their housing obligations. The City must complete an analysis of land resources to demonstrate capacity to meet the projected housing needs during the planning period, taking into consideration zoning, development standards, and the availability of public services and facilities to accommodate a variety of housing types and incomes. The inventory includes vacant sites that can be developed with housing within the planning period and non-vacant (i.e., underutilized) sites having potential for redevelopment. California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) guidance also states that the inventory can include sites that are in the process of being made available for residential development (i.e., through rezoning), provided that the Housing Element includes a program that “commits the local government to completing all necessary administrative and legislative actions early in the planning period.” The housing projectionlanning period for this Housing Element is January 2023 to January 2031.
The analysis in this chapter demonstrates that there is adequate supply of suitable land to accommodate the City’s housing allocation of 3,016 units, including housing for very low- and low-income households.
The chapter starts with a description of the City’s housing target for the 2023-2031 planning period , called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). It then provides an analysis of suitable sites, including residential units in the pipeline, anticipated Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), and vacant and non-vacant sites where housing is or will become an allowed use before the start of the planning period.
A. REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION (RHNA)
RHNA is the State-required process that seeks to ensure each California jurisdiction is planning for enough housing capacity to accommodate their “fair share” of the state’s housing needs for all economic segments of the community. The RHNA process for the nine-county Bay Area is described below. Regional Determination. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)HCD provided the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) with a Regional Housing Needs Determination . HDC provided ABAG a regional determination of 441,176 units. This is the number of units the Bay Area must plan for between 2023 and 2031. It represents the number of B120
6. ADEQUATE SITES
6-2
additional units needed to accommodate the anticipated growth in the number of households, to replace expected demolitions and conversions of housing units to non-housing uses, and to achieve a future vacancy rate that allows for healthy functioning of the housing market. The Regional Housing Needs Determination for the first time ever also included adjustments related to the rate of overcrowding and the share of cost-burdened households, which resulted in a significantly higher number of housing units for which the Bay Area must plan compared to previous RHNA cycles. RHNA Methodology. ABAG developed a RHNA methodology to allocate the Regional Housing Needs Determination across all cities, towns, and counties in the region. The RHNA methodology must be consistent with State objectives, including but not limited to promoting infill, equity, and environmental protection; ensuring jobs-housing balance; and affirmatively furthering fair housing. The allocation also takes into accountconsiders factors such as employment opportunities, the availability of suitable sites and public facilities, commuting patterns, and type and tenure of housing need. ABAG developed the RHNA methodology in conjunction with a committee of elected officials, staff from jurisdictional staffs, and other related stakeholders called the Housing Methodology Committee.
More information about ABAG’s RHNA methodology is available at https://abag.ca.gov/our- work/housing/rhna-regional-housing-needs-allocation.
Housing Element Updates. Each jurisdiction much thenmust adopt a Housing Element that demonstrates how it can accommodate its assigned RHNA for each income category through its zoning. HCD reviews each jurisdiction’s Housing Element for compliance with State law. Antioch’s Housing Element must demonstrate capacity to accommodate 3,016 units as further described below.
1. ANTIOCH’S FAIR SHARE
In determining a jurisdiction’s share of new housing
needs, ABAG splits each jurisdiction’s allocation into
four income categories:
Very Low-Income – 0 to 50 percent of Area
Median Income (AMI)
Low-Income – 51 to 80 percent of AMI
Moderate-Income – 81 to 120 percent of AMI
Above Moderate-Income – more than 120
percent of AMI
In addition, each jurisdiction must also address the
projected need of extremely low-income
households, defined as households earning 30
percent or less of AMI. The projected extremely
low-income need is assumed to be 50 percent of the
total RHNA need for the very low-income category.
As such, there is a projected need for 396 extremely
low-income housing units.
In December 2021, ABAG identified the City of Antioch’s fair share of the region’s housing needs as 3,016 new housing units, as shown in Table 6-1. This allocation represents a planning goal by requiring the City to demonstrate sufficient development capacity through the identification of potential site and zoning, and not a goal for actual production of housing within the planning period.
INCOME LEVELS IN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
The Area Median Income (AMI) in Contra Costa
County for a family of four is $125,600. This is
broken down into How this breaks down into
income categories for different household sizes is
shown below.
Income
Level
Persons Per Household
1 2 4
Very Low $47,950 $54,800 $68,500
Low $76,750 $87,700 $109,600
Moderate $105,500 $120,550 $150,700
Source: Department of Housing and Community Development, 2021.
Where this Housing Element refers to housing
that is affordable to the different income levels
shown above, we meanit means a household
spends no more than 30 percent of their income
on housing.
B121
6. ADEQUATE SITES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 6-3 TABLE 6-1 C ITY OF ANTIOCH REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION, 2023-2031 Income Category Units
Percent
of Total
Very Low-Income (0-50% AMI) 792 26%
Low-Income (51-80% AMI) 456 15%
Moderate-Income (81-120% AMI) 493 16%
Above Moderate-Income (Over 120% of AMI) 1,275 42%
Total 3,016 100%
Note: AMI = Area Median-Income. Percentages may not add up to 100 percent due to rounding.
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments, Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan, 2021.
RHNA BUFFER
Recent changes to State law require jurisdictions to
continually maintain adequate capacity in their
Housing Ssites Iinventories to meet their RHNA. In
the event thatIf a site is developed below the density
projected in the Housing Element or at a different
income level than projected, the CitycCity must
have adequate sites available to accommodate the
remaining balance of the RHNA. If a city City does
not have adequate sites, it must identify and rezone
for new sites that can accommodate the remaining need. To ensure that sufficient capacity exists in the Housing Element to accommodate the RHNA throughout the Planning planning Periodperiod, HCD recommends that jurisdictions create a buffer of at least 15 to 30 percent more capacity than required by RHNA.
For these reasons, the City is including an additional capacity buffer of at least 20 percent above the RHNA in each income category to avoid and minimize the risk of “no net loss.” The buffer ranges from 20 percent for low-income units to 92 percent for moderate-income units.
B. CREDITS TOWARD THE RHNA
Per HCD guidance, housing units that are proposed, approved, or under construction are counted towards the current RHNA so long as a Certificate of Occupancy is not issued before the projection period start date, June 30, 2022. Projects that receive a Certificate of Occupancy before June 30, 2022 , count towards the previous RHNA cycle. Antioch’s pipeline projects are described below, including the City’s assumptions around ADU production for the eight-year planning period.
1. PIPELINE PROJECTS
Projects that were approved but had not been issued building permits prior to June 30, 2022, are included in the RHNA as credits. The list of approved projects by is shown in Table 6-2. In total, the CitycCity has recently approved 394 units, referred to as the AMCAL Project. The project, (91 very low-income units, 299 low-income units, and 4 above moderate-income units), which are is expected to be constructed during the 6th cycle Cycle production period at approximately 26.5 dwelling units per acre (du/acre), will
RHNA CYCLES
This current RHNA cycle is the sixth time the
State has gone through the RHNA/Housing
Element process. When referring to the current
RHNA and current Housing Element planning
period, the term “6th cycleCycle” may be used.
B122
6. ADEQUATE SITES
6-4
consist of 91 very low-income units, 299 low-income units, and 4 above moderate-income units, . These units were issued building permits in November 2020 and are currently under construction.
TABLE 6-2 A PPROVED UNITS UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Project
Name Address Description Status Income Level
Number
of Units
AMCAL 3560 E. 18 th St. Affordable housing
development with mix of
family and senior units on a
previously vacant,
approximately 15-acre site.
Senior housing density bonus
used to reach a density of
26.5 unitsdu/acre.
Approved in May
2019 and currently
under construction.
Certificate of
Occupancy
anticipated after
June 2022.
91 very low-
income units
299 low-income
units
4 above
moderate-
income units
394
Total 394
Source: Urban Planning Partners and City of Antioch, 2022.
The CitycCity does not have anyhas two active applications for pending residential developments projects.
These pending projects are included below in Table 6-3 and propose development on five of the cCity’s housing sites which are mapped below in Figure 6-3. Together these pending projects total 290 residential units, inclusive of 286 above moderate-income units and four4 very low-incomelow-income units.
2. PENDING PROJECTS
TABLE 6-3 A PPROVED UNITS UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Project
NameSit
e
Number Address Description Status Income Level
Number
of Units
Site 113-
115, 184
Neroly Road &
Country Hills
Drive.
SB 330 housing development
proposed to be consolidated
on four housing sites at
approximately 11 du/acre
gross density and , 15 du/acre
net density.
City received
application for
development in
November 2022.
Anticipated to
obtain entitlement
approval during the
planning period.
216 above
moderate-
income units
216
123 810 Wilbur
Avenue
State Density Bonus housing
development proposed at
approximately 26 du/acre.
City received
application for
development in
November 2022.
Anticipated to
obtain entitlement
approval during the
planning period.
4 very low-
income units
70 above
moderate-
income units
74 Total 290
Source: xx.City of Antioch, 2022
B123
6. ADEQUATE SITES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 6-5
2.3. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
In addition to pipeline projects, HCD guidance stipulates that a projection of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) expected to be built within the eight-year planning period can also be counted as part of the inventory. The Citycity has seen a dramatic increase in ADU production in recent years, particularly since 2018 State legislation was enacted to facilitate the construction of ADUs. Figure 6-1 shows the City’s issuance of ADU building permits since 2015. An average of 17 building permits were issued for ADUs over the last three years, with the biggest growth in the last two years. If only looking at 2020 and 2021, the two-year average is 25 permits.
Figure 6-1 ADU Permit Trends
Source: City of Antioch and Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
The significant growth in ADUs indicates that the CitycCity can reasonably expect increased ADU production above the 2021 rate through the duration of the planning period, especially since the COVID- 19 pandemic disrupted permitting and construction during much of 2020. However, for the purposes of the Housing Ssites iInventory, the CitycCity is utilizing an annual production rate of 17 ADUs based on the three-year average. At a rate of 17 ADUs/year, a total of 136 ADUs would be constructed in Antioch during the eight-year planning period this cycle. This number is conservative given additional changes in State law and the City’s efforts to further facilitate ADU construction and actual ADU production over the last two years. The CitycCity currently has a handout explaining what an ADU is, ADU development standards, and the permitting process. The CitycCity also has a submittal checklist and simple , one-page application form for ADUs. In addition, Program 2.5.21.8.a. Promote Development of ADUs as Affordable Housing and Program 2.1.8.b. ADU/JADU Loans isare intended to increase ADU production for affordable housing. For these reasons, a production rate of 17 ADUs/per year is a conservative estimate for future production in the planning period.
In order to determine assumptions around ADU affordability in the Bay Area, ABAG further examined the data from a survey conducted by the University of California at Berkeley’s Center for Community Innovation in collaboration with Baird + Driskell Community Planning. The survey received responses from 387 Bay Area homeowners who had constructed ADUs in 2018 or 2019. The analysis found that 1 0 0
2 1
17 32
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Building Permits
Year
ADU Permit Trends
B124
6. ADEQUATE SITES
6-6
many ADUs are made available to family members, often at no rentwith no monthly rent obligation. Of the ADUs that were on the open market (i.e., not rented to family or friends), most charged rents between $1,200 and $2,200. The ABAG analysis found that these market rate units were usually affordable to low- or moderate-income households. Table 6- 43 shows the assumptions for affordability based on the survey findings and Antioch’s estimated ADU projections based on the data. ABAG concluded that 60 percent of ADUs were affordable to lower-income (i.e., very low- and low-income households). Based on these affordability assumptions, Antioch’s 136 ADUs projected in this planning period are estimated to fall into the income categories as follows: 41 ADUs would be affordable to very very-low-income households, 41 ADUs would be affordable to low-income households, 41 ADUs would be affordable- to moderate-income households, and 13 ADUs would be affordable to above moderate- income households.
TABLE 6-34 E STIMATED AFFORDABILITY OF PROJECTED ADUS
Income Level
Percent of
ADUs
Projected
Number of ADUs
Very Low-Income (0-50% AMI) 30% 41
Low-Income (51-80% AMI) 30% 41
Moderate-Income (81-120% AMI) 30% 41
Above Moderate-Income (Over 120% AMI) 10% 13
Total 100% 136
Notes: AMI = Area Median- Income.
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments, 2021.
3.4. RHNA CREDITS SUMMARY
As shown in Table 6-45, when the pipeline and pending projects and projected ADUs are credited towards the RHNA, there is a remaining need to accommodate 2,486 units through the sHousing Sites Iinventory. The following section describes how the Citycity hasthe land availability to accommodate the remaining RHNA.
TABLE 6-45 RHNA CREDITS
Very
Low-Income
Units
Low-Income
Units
Moderate-
Income
Units
Above
Moderate-
Income Units
Total
Units
RHNA 792 456 493 1,275 3,016
Pipeline Units 91 299 4 394
Projected ADUs 41 41 41 13 316136
Pending Units 4 0 0 286 290
Subtotal: RHNA Credits 132136 340 41 17303 530820
Remaining RHNA 660656 116 452 1,258972 2,486196
Source: Urban Planning Partners and City of Antioch, 2022.
B125
6. ADEQUATE SITES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 6-7 C. SITES INVENTORY METHODOLOGY
The CitycCity has identified adequate sites to accommodate the remaining RHNA and a healthy buffer for all income categories after credits are applied. To identify suitable sites, the CitycCity and its consultant team used Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping software to identify vacant and non-vacant sites that currently allow residential uses or are appropriate to rezone to allow residential uses. Sites that are appropriate for residential development include the following:
Vacant, residentially zoned sites;
Vacant, non-residentially zoned sites that allow residential development; Underutilized residentially zoned sites capable of being developed at a higher density or with greater intensity; and
Non-residentially zoned sites that can be redeveloped for, and/or rezoned for, residential use (via program actions).
From the remaining sites, the City and consultant team used HCD guidance and trends from recent projects to calculate the realistic capacity of sites, as described in this section.
1. RECENT DEVELOPMENT TRENDS
The CityCcity has experienced approved several multi-family projects in recent years, including the AMCAL project, a 100 percent affordable housing projectdiscussed below . Table 6-56 presents recent multi-family projects within the city limits.
The AMCAL project , as previously mentioned, is a 100 percent affordable project. A senior density bonus request was approved to achieve of yield of 106 percent of the maximum allowed by the underlying zoning. Overall, recent project yields range from 80 percent to 106 percent of the allowed density, with an average yield of 92 percent across all recent projects. However, many of the projects are in Planned Development (P-D) Districts, which use varying residential densities as established in a Preliminary Development Plan. Projects are reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Given the discretionary density maximums that apply in P-D Districtszones, these examples may not accurately reflect development trends. In
B126
6. ADEQUATE SITES
6-8
TABLE 6-56 R ECENT MULTI-FAMILY PROJECTS
Project Name
Site Size
(Acre)
Zoning
District
Allowed
Density
(Units)
Unit
Count
Built
Density
(du/ac) Yield Status
AMCAL 14.9 R-25 25 394 26.5 106% Under Construction
Wildflower Station
(Multi-Family) 7.0 P-D As Built 98 14 -- Under Construction Wildflower Station
(Single-Family) 4.5 P-D As Built 22 4.9 -- Completed October 2020 Almond Knolls 2.9 R-20 20 58 20 100% Completed May 2020 Deer Valley Estates 37.6 P-D 3.6 121 3.22 89% Entitled August 2021 The Ranch 253.5 P-D As Built 1,177 4.6 Entitled July 2020 Quail Cove 5.6 P-D 6 30 5.4 90% Completed July 2021
Oakley Knolls 5.6 P-D 6 28 5 83% Under Construction
Creekside Vineyards at
Sand Creek 59.0 P-D 4.6 220 3.7 80% Entitled March 2021 Average Yield 92%
Average Yield
Excluding P-D zones 100%
Notes: Ac= acres. Du/ac = dwelling units per acre.
Source: City of Antioch and Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
In addition, the Housing Element is primarily focused on multi-family development planned in the following medium- and high-density residential districts:
R-20 Medium-Density Residential District: 11-20 dwelling units per acre (du/acre) (R-20) R-25 25 High-Density Residential District: 20-25 25 du/acre (R-25) R-35 High-Density Residential District: 3025-35 du/acre (R-35) When looking only at recent projects in these zones, the average yield is 100 percent. However, in order toto be conservative, a yield of 100 percent was not used. As explained in the following sections, conservative estimates were baked intoused for the capacity calculations.
2. REALISTIC CAPACITY
All sites in the sites Housing Sites Iinventory have an existing or proposed zoning district of R-20, R-25, or R-35. As shown in Table 6-67, there are required minimum densities in R-25 and R-35 zoning districts.
Consistent with HCD guidance, housing capacities on sites zoned R-25 or R-35 utilize these required minimum densities to calculate realistic capacity. Sites identified in R-20 zones used input from developers, economists, and architects to calculate the realistic capacity, as explained below.
TABLE 6-67 R ESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS AND DENSITY REQUIREMENTS Zoning
District
Minimum
Density
(du/ac)
Maximum
Density
(du/ac)
Density Used
for Realistic
Capacity Notes on Realistic Capacity
R-4 -- 4 N/A The site inventory does not include sites with this zoning.
B127
6. ADEQUATE SITES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 6-9 R-6 -- 6 N/A
The site inventory does not include sites with this zoning.
Seven parcels currently zoned R-6 are identified to be rezoned as R-20 (one parcel) or R-35 (six parcels).
R-10 -- 10 N/A The site inventory does not include this zone.
R-20 -- 20 0-20
Densities of 0, 6, 12, or 20 du/ac were utilized for capacity calculations based on input from development professionals (as explained in the section below).
R-25 20 25 20 Required minimum density utilized for capacity calculations per HCD guidance.
R-35 3025 35 3025
Required minimum density utilized for capacity calculations per HCD guidanceReflects density of recent development
projects, such as the AMCAL Apartments in the city, which include lower income units.
Source: City of Antioch and Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
R-20 ASSUMPTIONS
The realistic development capacity on sites with R-20 zoning was calculated on a case-by-case basis.
Existing uses, surrounding uses, and the proposed building typology of future development were evaluated. Three different scenarios applied.
1. Missing Middle Housing. This Housing Element seeks to facilitate the redevelopment of underutilized sites clustered around Viera Avenue and along East 18 th Street between Trembath Lane and St Claire Drive (see sites 1-104 on Figure 6-3). These clusters would be rezoned to R-20, which allows densities up to 20 du/acre, to enable small infill and missing middle projects. In consultation with Mogavero Architects, it was determined that some of these sites would not be redeveloped, given their size and existing uses, and those sites were not included in determining the realistic capacity. In order toTo be conservative, smaller sites (typically 0.25 acres or less) were assumed to have a yield of zero. They are included in the Housing Sites Iinventory since the sites will be rezoned before the Planning planning Period period commences. Denser residential use would be allowed if proposed, but the unit yield is not included in the realistic capacity calculations. More typically, Mogavero Architects found that sites in these clusters could accommodate 8 or 9 units and the larger sites could even accommodate up to 15 or 20 units. Medium and larger sites in these clusters used a density of 6 du/acre to calculate the realistic capacity, which is a conservative estimate given this is only 30 percent of the allowed density.
2. Townhomes. The City commissioned a study on the financial feasibility of infill housing, which found townhomes at densities of 16 du/acre to be a viable building typology in Antioch from a financial feasibility perspective.1 This density is consistent with feedback from local developers, who cited ranges of 15 to -30 du/acre as the “sweet spot” for development in Antioch. However, townhome projects are typically designed between 12 and 14 du/ac re. Therefore, in order toto be conservative, the Housing Ssites Iinventory used a density of 12 du/acre to calculate the realistic capacity of sites where townhome type development is anticipated. This is a conservative assumption given that 12 du/acre is only 60 percent of the allowable density in the R-20 zone. The parcels identified to develop with townhomes were selected based primarily on the surrounding land uses; R-20 parcels that primarily abut single-family homes were selected for townhome development. Consideration was also given to the site size and shape. Sites identified as townhome sites are identified in the Section D, Adequate Sites section of this chapterin this chapter.,
1 BAE Urban Economics, 2021. Antioch Infill Housing Financial Feasibility Analysis, July.
B128
6. ADEQUATE SITES
6-10
3. Medium-Density Residential. Some parcels zoned for R-20 are anticipated to develop with medium-density apartments. According to input from local developers, densities from 18 to 30 du/acre are appropriate for three-story, medium-density projects depending on the parking configuration (e.g., tuck under, surface parking). For these projects, a density of 20 du/ac re was used to calculate the realistic capacity. However, a capacity yield of 80 percent was applied in order toto not overinflate the numbers. The 80 percent yield is conservative given that the development trends shown in Table 6--56 (above) indicate an average yield above 90 percent. Parcels selected to develop with medium-density apartment projects (rather than townhomes) were identified based primarily on the surrounding land uses and existing zoning district; parcels already zoned R-20 have previously been identified as sites that are appropriate for medium-density residential (as opposed the townhome sites above which all require rezoning). Consideration was also given to the site size and shape. These sites are discussed further in Section D, Adequate Sites in this chapter.the Adequate Sites section.
3. DENSITIES AND AFFORDABILITY
In general, in order toto make it feasible to develop housing that is affordable to very very-low- and low- income households, housing must be built at higher densities. HCD has published guidance that specifies the minimum residential densities deemed necessary to accommodate lower-income households. Antioch is considered a jurisdiction in a metropolitan county and has a “default density” of 30 du/ac re. This means that sites that allow denser development of at least 30 du/ac re are considered able to accommodate lower-income unit. All lower-income sites on the inventory are therefore in the R-35 district, which has a minimum density of 30 25 du/acre and a maximum of 35 du/acre.
Consistent with HCD guidance, sites on R-20 and R-25 districts are used to accommodate the moderate- and above moderate-income RHNA.
No housing sites included within the cCity’s sHousing Sites iInventory are developed with multi-family or deed-restricted affordable units.
4. SITE SIZE
Consistent with HCD guidance, sites used to accommodate lower-income housing affordable to lower- income households are between 0.5 acres and 10 acres, with some exceptions , including sites proposed for consolidated development and sites larger than 10 acres, explained below. To encourage the development of housing affordable to lower -income units on both large and small sites, this update to the hHousing eElement will be accompanied by several rezonings as outlined below in Table 6-9. These rezonings will upzone 166 housing sites to allow residential uses at increased densities than currently allowed. There are 46 housing sites that are being rezoned to the R-25 zoning district which will allow the development of residential uses between 25 to -35 du/acre. Given the City’s “default density” of 30 du/acre, as described above, these up zonings will encourage the development of housing affordable to lower -income households.
CONSOLIDATED SITES
The City also considered adjacent parcels less than 0.5 acres in size with common ownership as eligible to accommodate lower-income units. While these individual parcels do not meet the size requirements, they collectively function as a single site and add up to over 0.5 -acre and would not require consolidation.
Since the sites have common ownership, there would be no constraint or required parcel assembly in order toto achieve the size of 0.5 acres, which is presumed to be a realistic size for lower-income sites B129
6. ADEQUATE SITES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 6-11 pursuant to State law. Additionally, the CitycCity can meet its lower-income RHNA without these sites, but they are included due to their high potential and likelihood of redevelopment during the near future.
These sites include Consolidated Site B at Windsor Drive and Consolidated Site G at Jessica Court, as shown in Figure 6-2. Overall, the Housing Sites Iinventory utilizes 10 parcels less than 0.5 acres that can accommodate lower-income units as part of a consolidated site greater than 0.5 acres. The Assessor’s Parcels Numbers (APNs) are as follows: 068-252-042, 051-390-006, 051-390-005, 051-390-004, 051-390- 003, 051-390-002, 051-390-016, 051-390-011, 051-390-010, and 051-390-009.
LARGE SITES
As shown in Table 6-56 above, the AMCAL 100 100-percent affordable project is being constructed on an approximately 15-acre site. In fact, in consulting with the developer, the large size of the site was cited as a positive factor tofactor to provide the desired amount of parking solely through surface parking. More costly tuck-under or podium parking is not currently feasible in Antioch. The project provides almost 400 affordable units. The example of AMCAL illustrates that site ’s greater than 10 acres can accommodate affordable housing in Antioch.
Given the example of AMCAL, there is one 12.3-acre site (APN 074-080-026) included in the Housing Sites Iinventory for affordable units. This site is near single-family and multi-family housing and a short walk from amenities and services including the Contra Costa County Antioch Service Complex (which includes Children and Family Services and Employment and Human Services Department), Turner Elementary School, and several daycare centers. The site is also near Marchetti Park ; , Kaiser Permanente Delta Fair Medical Offices; , and several banks, grocery stores, shops, and restaurants. The Tri Delta Transit Line 391 stops at the southwestern corner of the site at Delta Fair Boulevard and Belle Drive.
Given the site’s proximity to amenities and services, it was identified as an ideal location for affordable housing. The size of the site would not preclude or prevent development of lower-income housing production given the City’s track record of affordable housing on larger sites. If necessary to facilitate affordable housing development, regulation would allow the sites to be subdivided.
D. ADEQUATE SITES
A site-by-site listing of adequate sites identified by the city for inclusion within the Housing Site Inventory is included as an attachment to this Element as Appendix C. Figure 6-3 shows allmaps the city’s Housing Site Inventory housing opportunity sites within the City of Antioch and Table 6-78 summarizes how the CitycCity will meet its RHNA. Based on pipeline and pending projects, projected ADU production, and the realistic capacity of the sites Housing Sites iInventory, the City has capacity to accommodate 4, 715 531 housing units, including 1,597 lower-income units. The development capacity within Antioch — illustrated in the Housing sites Sites inventory Inventory—allows for a 27 to 29 percent “no net loss” buffer for lower-income units, as explained at the beginning of this chapter under RHNA Buffer .in Section A, Regional Housing Needs Allocation in this chapter.
Table 6-89 shows the realistic yield by zoning district. The cCity will accommodate its lower-income units on sites between 0.5 and 10 acres 2 in the R-35 zoning district, where a minimum density of 30 25 du/acre applies. Recent development trends experienced within the city, including the 394-unit AMCAL project
2 Except forWith the exception of one 12.3-acre site (APN 074-080-026), as explained earlier under “Large Sites” of Section C, Sites Inventory Methodology of this chapter..
B130
6. ADEQUATE SITES
6-12
described within Section B, Credits Toward the RHNA inthe RHNA Credits section of this Cchapter, indicate that lower income units are being developed within the city at around 25 du/acre. See age 6-4.
As shown in Table 6-89, there are 57 sites totaling over 130 acres that are identified to housing extremely extremely-low-, very very-low-, and low-income households in the R-35 district. Moderate- and above above-moderate-income units are accommodated on sites that are less than 0.5 acres and/or sites that are zoned for medium-density residential uses (i.e., R-20 and R-25 zones). . Additionally, no sites included within the Housing Sites Inventory are developed with housing affordable to individuals and families of lower - or very -low -income households, or subject to any other form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power.
B131
AUTO
C
ENTER
DR
SOM
ERSVILLERD
10TH ST
18TH ST
PUTNAM ST
T S L
BUCHANANRD
4th St
CO
NTRA
LO
M
A
BLVD
WILBUR AVE
DAVISON DR
LAURELRD
E V A E R I P M E
T S A
GENTRYTOW
N
DR
T S G
DELTA FA IRBLVD
LONE TREE WAY
HILLCREST AVE
D
EERVALLEY
RD
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
N
1. Move frame to project location
2. Set scale to preferred scale
3. Save preferred scale to bookmarks with specific details
4. Turn on / Add layers as appropriate
5. If using aerial, decide between ESRI or Bing (which ever is better)
6. Once set, convert street labels to annotations, and adjust position accordingly (or do in AI)
7. Export as Adobe Illustrator file
AUTO
C
ENTER
DR
SOM
ERSVILLERD
10TH ST
18TH ST
PUTNAM ST
T S L
BUCHANANRD
4th St
CO
NTRA
LO
M
A
BLVD
WILBUR AVE
JAMES DONLON BLVD
DAVISON DR
LAURELRD
E V A E R I P M E
T S A
G
ENTRY
TO
WNDR
T S G
DELTA FA IRBLVD
LONE TREE WAY
HILLCREST AVE
D
EERVALLEY
RD
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
N
1. Move frame to project location
2. Set scale to preferred scale
3. Save preferred scale to bookmarks with specific details
4. Turn on / Add layers as appropriate
5. If using aerial, decide between ESRI or Bing (which ever is better)
6. Once set, convert street labels to annotations, and adjust position accordingly (or do in AI)
7. Export as Adobe Illustrator file
AUTO
C
ENTER
DR
SOM
ERSVILLERD
10TH ST
18TH ST
PUTNAM ST
T S L
BUCHANANRD
4th St
CO
NTRA
LO
M
A
BLVD
WILBUR AVE
JAMES DONLON BLVD
DAVISON DR
LAURELRD
E V A E R I P M E
T S A
G
ENTRY
TO
WNDR
T S G
DELTA FA IRBLVD
LONE TREE WAY
HILLCREST AVE
D
EERVALLEY
RD
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
N
1. Move frame to project location
2. Set scale to preferred scale
3. Save preferred scale to bookmarks with specific details
4. Turn on / Add layers as appropriate
5. If using aerial, decide between ESRI or Bing (which ever is better)
6. Once set, convert street labels to annotations, and adjust position accordingly (or do in AI)
7. Export as Adobe Illustrator file
C
B
A
F
D
G
City of Antioch Housing Element Update
Figure 6-2
Consolidated Sites
Source: Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
Consolidated Sites
N
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
B132
City of Antioch Housing Element Update
Figure 6-3
Sites Inventory
Source: Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
Nonvacant Sites
Vacant Sites
Affordable Housing Sites
N
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
City of Antioch Housing Element Update
Figure 6-3
Sites Inventory
Source: Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
Nonvacant Sites
Vacant Sites
ơ
N
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
City of Antioch Housing Element Update
Figure 6-3
Sites Inventory
Source: Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
Nonvacant Sites
Vacant Sites
ơ
N
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
AUTO CENTER
DR
SOM
ERSVILLERD
10TH ST
18TH ST
PUTNAM ST
L ST
BUCHANANRD
4th St
CO
NTRA
LO
M
A
BLVD
WILBUR AVE
DAVISON DR
LAURELRD
EMPIRE AVE
A ST
GENTRYTOW
N
DR
G ST
DELTA FA IRBLVD
LONE TREE WAY
HILLCREST AVE
D
EERVALLEY
RD
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
N
1. Move frame to project location
2. Set scale to preferred scale
3. Save preferred scale to bookmarks with specific details
4. Turn on / Add layers as appropriate
5. If using aerial, decide between ESRI or Bing (which ever is better)
6. Once set, convert street labels to annotations, and adjust position accordingly (or do in AI)
7. Export as Adobe Illustrator file
AUTO CENTER
DR
SOM
ERSVILLERD
10TH ST
18TH ST
PUTNAM ST
L ST
BUCHANANRD
4th St
CO
NTRA
LO
M
A
BLVD
WILBUR AVE
JAMES DONLON BLVD
DAVISON DR
LAURELRD
EMPIRE AVE
A ST
G
ENTRY
TO
WNDR
G ST
DELTA FA IRBLVD
LONE TREE WAY
HILLCREST AVE
D
EERVALLEY
RD
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
N
1. Move frame to project location
2. Set scale to preferred scale
3. Save preferred scale to bookmarks with specific details
4. Turn on / Add layers as appropriate
5. If using aerial, decide between ESRI or Bing (which ever is better)
6. Once set, convert street labels to annotations, and adjust position accordingly (or do in AI)
7. Export as Adobe Illustrator file
AUTO
CENTERDR
SOMERSVILLERD
10TH ST
18TH ST
PUTNAM ST
L ST
BUCHANANRD
4th St
CO
NT
RA
LOM
A
BLVD
WILBUR AVE
JAMES DONLON BLVD
DAVISON DR
LAURELRD
EMPIRE AVE
A ST
GENTRYTOW
N
DR
G ST
DELTA FAIR BLVD
LONE TREE WAY
HILLCREST AVE
DEERVALLEY R
D
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
N
1. Move frame to project location
2. Set scale to preferred scale
3. Save preferred scale to bookmarks with specific details
4. Turn on / Add layers as appropriate
5. If using aerial, decide between ESRI or Bing (which ever is better)
6. Once set, convert street labels to annotations, and adjust position accordingly (or do in AI)
7. Export as Adobe Illustrator file City of Antioch Housing Element Update Figure 6-3
Sites Inventory
Source: Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
Nonvacant Sites
Vacant Sites
ơ
N
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
184
1-82
83-104
183
162
184
114
1-82
83-104
183
162
B133
6. ADEQUATE SITES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 6-15 TABLE 6-78 S UMMARY OF RESIDENTIAL SITES INVENTORY
Very-
Low-Income
Units
Low-
Income
Units
Moderate-
Income Units
Above
Above-
Moderate-
Income Units Total Units
2023-2031 RHNA 792 456 493 1,275 3,016
Pipeline Units 91 299 0 4 394
Projected ADUs 41 41 41 13 136
Pending Units 4 0 0 286 290
Future Multi-Family Development 967746 548420 947804 2,1132,091 4,575 4,061 Total 1,099882 888760 988845 2,130394 5,1054,881
Surplus 30790 432304 495352 8551,119 2,0891,865
Buffer Percentage 3911% 9567% 10071% 6788% 6962%
Source: ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments, 2021; City of Antioch and Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
TABLE 6-89 R ESIDENTIAL CAPACITY BY ZONING
Zoning
District
Permitted
Density
Number
of Parcels Acreage
Realistic Yield
Very
Low Low Mod.
Above
Mod. Total
R-20 0-20 du/acre 121120 85.3 0 0 207 323 530
R-25 20-25 du/acre 57 13.522.7 04 0 133 133337 266474
R-35 25-35 du/acre 5753 130.8119.6 967742 548420 607464 1,657215 3,7792,841 S-P Net 15 du/acre* 4 18.6 216 216
Total 182184 229.6246 967746 548420 947804 2,113091 4,575061 Note: Assumes the rezonings shown in Table 6-910.
Housing sites designated S-P within the Housing Sites Iinventory represent sites no. 1113-115, 184 which are included within a development application received by the cCity during the public review of the dDraft hHousing eElement which proposes the development of 216 above - moderate -income units at approximately 15 du/acre.
Source: ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments, 2021; City of Antioch and Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
1. REZONING
As part of the Housing Element Update, the City will adopt a series of General Plan amendments required to facilitate rezonings related to meeting the City’s RHNA requirements. As shown in Figure 6-4, the Housing Sites Inventory includes several housing sites that will be upzoned concurrent with adoption of this Housing Element to allow the development of greater residential density as well as sites that will be rezoned to allow residential uses, or to allow residential development at greater densities, to satisfy the City’s RHNA obligations as demonstrated in Table 6-89 above. Rezonings will allow for the development of sites with 100 percent residential uses. None of the housing sites contained within the City’s Housing Sites Inventory will be zoned a district which allows for non-residential uses.
Consistent with AB 725, which requires at least 25 percent of a jurisdictions’ moderate and above moderate RHNA obligations be provided on sites allowing development of at least 4, but no greater than 100, du/acre; the Housing Ssites Ie inventory proposes 50 percent, or 66 out of the 133 sites proposed to accommodate moderate - and above -moderate -income units, to allow development of greater than 4, but less than 100 dwelling units.
B134
6. ADEQUATE SITES
6-16
To ensure these rezonings are consistent with the cCity’s General Plan, the Housing sSites Iinventory also includes several associated General Plan Amendments as well . These rezonings and general plan amendments are outlined in Program 4.I.14, Rezoning and Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments of Chapter 7, Housing Goals, Policies and Programs of this Element and and will All All rrezonings and associated General Plan amendments advanced under Impelmentation Program 4.1.14 (Rezoning and Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments) will be adopted prior to the start of the 6th Cycle are anticipated to be completed before the beginning of the Pp lanning Period period in January 2023. The properties that are being rezoned, and undergoing General Plan andAmendments, and long with their their residential capacities, are listed in Table 6-910.
2. 3.2. BY-RIGHT SITES
State legislation requires special treatment for non-vacant sites that are repeated from the 5 th cycle Cycle Housing Element and vacant sites that are repeated from the 4 th and 5th cycle Cycle Housing Elements.
This Housing Element reuses eight sites that were used in previous Housing Element(s). Half of the previously used sites are vacant sites that were used in the two consecutive previous Housing Elements and the other half are non-vacant sites that were used in the prior 5th cCycle, 2015-2023 Housing Element. Table 6-101 provides an overview of the eight recycled sites.
B135
Source: Urban Planning Partners, 2 022.
g n i n o Z d e s o p o r Pg n i n o Z g n i t s i x E C-1
C-2
C-3
C-O
P-D
P-D / S-H
PBC / Cannabis Overlay
R-20
R-25
R-35
R-6
S
S-P R-20
R-25
R-35
Affordable Housing Sites
N
0 4,100 8,2002,050
Feet
City of Antioch Housing Element Update
Figure 6-4
Rezoned Sites
184
183
162
1-82
83-104
123
114
B136
6. ADEQUATE SITES
6-18
TABLE 6-910 REZONING
APN Address Acreage
Current
General Plan
Proposed
General Plan Current Zoning
Current
Maximum
Density
(du/ac)
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Max Density
051-200-
076
Holub Ln &
E 18th St 1.08
Convenience Commercial High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-35 35
051-230-
028 3200 E 18th St 1.286 Eastern Waterfront Employment Focus Area – Business Park
High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-35 35
051-400-
027
Wilson St &
E 18th St 1.204
Eastern Waterfront Employment Focus
Area – Business Park
Medium-
Density
Residential
P-D -- R-20 20
052-042-
044 3901 Hillcrest Ave 1.62 Open Space High-Density
Residential P-D 6 R-35 35
052-342-
010
Wildflower Dr &
Hillcrest Ave 3.77
Low Density Residential High-Density
Residential R-6 R-35 20
053-060-
055
Neroly Rd &
Country Hills Dr 0.525 East Lone Tree Specific Plan Focus Area High-Density Residential S-P R-35 35
053-060-
056
Neroly Rd &
Country Hills Dr 0.606 East Lone Tree Specific Plan Focus Area High-Density Residential S-P R-35 35
053-060-
057
Neroly Rd &
Country Hills Dr 7.219 East Lone Tree Specific Plan Focus Area High-Density Residential S-P -- R-35 35
055-071-
106
Lone Tree Way &
Country Hills Dr 3.628
Business Park High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-35 35
055-071-
107
Lone Tree Way &
Country Hills Dr 2.322
Business Park High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-35 35
055-071-
108
Lone Tree Way &
Deer Valley Rd 9.54
Business Park High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-35 35
055-071-
113
Lone Tree Way &
Country Hills Dr 0.96
Business Park
Medium-
Density
Residential
P-D -- R-20 20
056-130-
014 5200 Heidorn Ranch Rd 1.95
Medium Low Density Residential High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-35 35
056-130-
011 5320 Heidorn Ranch Rd 5.04
Medium Low Density Residential High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-35 35
065-071-
020 1205 A St 0.31
A Street Interchange Focus Area –
Residential
Medium-
Density
Residential
C-0 25 R-20 20
B137
6. ADEQUATE SITES
A N T I O C H H O U S I N G E L E M E N T 2 0 2 3 - 2 0 3 1 6-19 TABLE 6-910 REZONING
APN Address Acreage
Current
General Plan
Proposed
General Plan Current Zoning
Current
Maximum
Density
(du/ac)
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Max Density
065-110-
006 810 Wilbur Ave 2.86 High-Density Residential High-Density Residential R-25 25 R-35 35
065-110-
007 701 Wilbur Ave 2.5 High-Density Residential High-Density Residential R-25 0 R-35 35
065-161-
025 301 E 18th St 0.31
Medium Low Density Residential
Medium-
Density
Residential
C-0 0 R-20 20
067-093-
022 A St & Park Ln 0.32
A Street Interchange Focus Area –
Commercial and Residential
Medium-
Density
Residential
C-0 0 R-20 20
067-103-
017 A St 1.774
A Street Interchange Focus Area –
Commercial and Residential
Medium-
Density
Residential
C-o 0 R-20 20
068-082-
057
Terrace Dr &
E 18th St 0.659
Neighborhood Community Commercial
Medium-
Density
Residential
C-2 6 R-20 20
068-252-
041 2721 Windsor Dr 1.57
Medium Low Density Residential High-Density
Residential R-6 6 R-35 35
068-252-
042 Windsor Dr & Iglesia Ct 0
Medium Low Density Residential High-Density
Residential R-6 6 R-35 35
068-252-
043 Windsor Dr & Iglesia Ct 0 Medium Low Density Residential High-Density Residential R-6 6 R-35 35
068-252-
045 2709 Windsor Dr 0
Medium Low Density Residential High-Density
Residential R-6 6 R-35 35
071-370-
026 3351 Contra Loma Blvd 1
Public/Institutional
Medium-
Density
Residential
R-6 -- R-20 20
072-400-
036
Cache Peak Dr &
Golf Course Rd 2.01
Convenience Commercial High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-35 35
072-400-
039 4655 Golf Course Rd 2
Convenience Commercial High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-35 35
072-400-
040
Cache Peak Dr &
Golf Course Rd 0.212
Convenience Commercial High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-35 35
B138
6. ADEQUATE SITES
6-20
TABLE 6-910 REZONING
APN Address Acreage
Current
General Plan
Proposed
General Plan Current Zoning
Current
Maximum
Density
(du/ac)
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Max Density
072-450-
013 Dallas Ranch Rd 1.5
Office High-Density
Residential P-D 0 R-35 35
074-122-
016 Delta Fair Blvd 0.6
Western Antioch Commercial Focus Area
– Regional Commercial
Medium-
Density
Residential
C-3 0 R-20 20
074-123-
004
Delta Fair Blvd &
Fairview Dr 1.75
Western Antioch Commercial Focus Area
– Regional Commercial
High-Density
Residential C-3 0 R-35 35
074-123-
005 Fairview Dr 1.45 Western Antioch Commercial Focus Area – Regional Commercial
High-Density
Residential C-3 0 R-35 35
074-343-
034 2100 L St 1.5
Convenience Commercial
Medium-
Density
Residential
C-1 0 R-20 20
075-460-
001
James Donlon Blvd &
Contra Loma Blvd 3.13
Office High-Density
Residential C-1 -- R-25 25
052-061-
053 4325 Berryessa Ct 5 Low Density Residential High-Density Residential P-D 20 R-35 35
071-130-
026 3195 Contra Loma Blvd 2.9
High-Density Residential High-Density
Residential R-20 25 R-35 35
068-251-
012 620 E Tregallas Rd 0.86
High-Density Residential High-Density
Residential R-25 -- R-35 35
052-061-
014 4215 Hillcrest Ave 0.998 Open Space High-Density Residential S 6 R-35 35
052-042-
037 4201 Hillcrest Ave 4.39
Open Space High-Density
Residential R-6 -- R-35 35
052-140-
013 Wildflower Drive 4.18 Mixed Use High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-25 25
052-140-
014 Wildflower Drive 3.95
Mixed Use High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-25 25
052-140-
015 Wildflower Drive 0.91
Mixed Use High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-25 25
052-140-
016 Wildflower Drive 1.31 Mixed Use High-Density
Residential P-D -- R-25 25
B139