Agenda packet — Concord City Council, March 14, 2023 (part 1 of 3)

1 COUNCILMEMBERS
Laura M. Hoffmeister, Mayor
Edi E. Birsan, Vice Mayor
Dominic D. Aliano
Laura M. Nakamura
Carlyn S. Obringer
Civic Center
1950 Parkside Drive
Concord, CA 94519
www.cityofconcord.org
Regular Meeting of the
Concord City Council/City
Council Sitting as the
Local Reuse Authority
Tuesday,
March 14, 2023
6:00 p.m. - Closed Session
6:30 p.m. - Open Session
Closed Session:

City Council
Conference Room
1950 Parkside Drive
Open Session:

Council Chamber
1950 Parkside Drive
and/or Various
telephonic/electronic
locations
*IMPORTANT NOTICE ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENTS AND MEETING PARTICIPATION* UPDATED MARCH 2, 2023
City Councilmembers will be participating from the Council Chamber. Members of the public are invited to attend and participate at: Council Chamber, 1950 Parkside Drive, Concord, CA.

As a courtesy and technology permitting, members of the public may continue to provide live remote oral public comment via the City’s Zoom Platform. However, the City cannot guarantee that the public’s access to teleconferencing technology will be uninterrupted, and technical difficulties may occur from time to time. In those instances, so long as the public may still attend the meeting in person, the meeting will continue. Members of the public desiring to provide comments as a part of the meeting are encouraged to either submit written comments by 3:00 p.m. prior to the meeting or to attend the meeting in person.

AMENDED AGENDA

CHANGES HIGHLIGHTED
2 NOTICE: The Closed Session portion of the meeting agenda will be held in person only in the City Council Conference Room,
1950 Parkside Drive. Public Comment for the Closed Session item will be taken in person only when the Closed Session begins at 6:00 p.m.

HOW TO PARTICIPATE
The public is invited to participate in the City Council meeting using any of the following methods:
For meeting interpretation from English to Spanish during the meeting, please join the meeting Zoom webinar by following THIS LINK
Para traducción de Ingles a Español durante esta junta, por favor entre a la junta de Zoom usando ESTE ENLACE

1. IN PERSON:
a.Members of the public can provide in-person comments in the Council Chamber.

Members of the public are encouraged, but not required, to fill out a speaker card. The Council Chamber will have seating available for members of the public to attend in person up to full seating capacity.

2. REMOTE:
a. Zoom:
https://cityofconcord.zoom.us/j/88624380277?pwd=aEd3eHJhdFlHU3o2UnhsOHQ5Qjd MQT09 or Zoom Webinar ID: 886 2438 0277 and Passcode: 395268 b.Zoom Phone Numbers. Dial Toll Free: (669) 900-6833 or (346) 348-7799 or (253) 215- 8782.
c.During the meeting, each period for public comment will be announced, and participants may use the “Raise Hand” feature on Zoom to request to speak. If calling in via Zoom use *9 to raise and lower your hand. The meeting host will call on you, by name, and promote you to panelist in the webinar so you can be seen via your camera. Please enable your microphone when it is your turn to speak. In order to ensure the orderly administration of the meeting using this method, providing your name is encouraged, but is not required. (If you need instructions on how to use this feature, please contact the City Clerk by 3:00 p.m. of the meeting date at [email protected]).

3. EMAIL:
a.Public comments can also be submitted via email to [email protected]. Please note that emailed comments will not be read aloud by staff. Any public comments received up until 3:00 p.m. of the meeting date will be:

1. distributed to the Council before the meeting,

2. posted online for public inspection at
https://stream.ci.concord.ca.us/OnBaseAgendaOnline/Meetings/Search, and

3. inserted into the meeting record.
b.As emails containing public meeting comments are part of the official record, note that personal contact information may be published if it is included with your email. 3 4. TO WATCH OR LISTEN ONLY:
a.Watch on TV on Comcast Channel 28, Astound/Wave Channel 1026, and AT&T U-verse Channel 99
b.Watch the TV broadcast through the City’s website by following THIS LINK c.Watching Live Streaming of the meeting by following THIS LINK d.Join the Zoom webinar by following THIS LINK

CLOSED SESSION

1. OPENING
Roll Call

2. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is a 15-minute Public Comment Period for items within the City Council’s subject matter jurisdiction that are not on this agenda. Each speaker will be limited to approximately three minutes.

State law prohibits the City Council from acting at this meeting on any matter raised during the Public Comment Period. Please see “How to Participate” above.

3. CLOSED SESSION
a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: One potential case.

4. RECESS TO OPEN SESSION
4 OPEN SESSION

5. OPENING
Roll Call
Pledge of Allegiance – Councilmember Aliano

6. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
This is a 15-minute Public Comment Period for items within the City Council’s subject matter jurisdiction that are not on this agenda. Each speaker will be limited to approximately three minutes.

State law prohibits the City Council from acting at this meeting on any matter raised during the Public Comment Period. Please see “How to Participate” above.
a. Written Public Comment

7. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
The public is entitled to address the City Council on items appearing on the Consent Calendar before or during the City Council’s consideration of the Consent Calendar. Adoption of the Consent Calendar may be made by one motion of the City Council, provided that any Councilmember, individual or organization may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration.

If a request for removal of an item from the Consent Calendar has been received, the Mayor may defer action on the particular item and place the same on the regular agenda for consideration in any order s/he deems appropriate. Please see “How to Participate” above. a. Considering – approval of the minutes from the January 17, 2023, meeting.

Recommended by the City Clerk.
b. Considering – adoption of a Resolution approving the street names for Villas at Walters Place Townhomes Subdivision (Tract No. 9585), located at 1200 Detroit Avenue. Recommended by the Director of Community Development.

CEQA: Previously determined to be exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Infill Development Projects); street naming not a project/exempt under Public Resources Code 21065, CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), 15378, and/or 15061(b)(3).
c. Considering – adoption of a Resolution approving the street name for Walnut Grove Major Subdivision (Tract No. 9434), near the intersection of Mohr Lane and Wicket Court. Recommended by the Director of Community Development.

CONSIDERATION ITEM
The public is entitled to address the LRA on items appearing on the agenda before or during the City Council’s consideration of that item. Each speaker will be limited to approximately three minutes.

Please see “How to Participate” above.
a. Study Session – for the Local Reuse Authority/City Council to consider and provide direction to staff on desired Term Sheet parameters and the method for selecting a master developer. Report by Guy Bjerke, Director of Economic Development and Base Reuse.

CEQA: Not a project/exempt under Public Resources Code Section 21065, CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c), 15061(b)(3), and/or 15378.

9. CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING
Persons who wish to speak on Public Hearings listed on the agenda will be heard when the public hearing is opened, except on public hearing items previously heard and closed to public comment.

After the public has commented, the item is closed to further public comment and brought to the Council level for discussion and action. Further comment from the audience will not be received unless requested by the Council. No public hearing shall commence after 10 p.m. unless approved by majority vote of the City Council. Please see “How to Participate” above. a. Considering – adoption of a Resolution: (1) adopting the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update (PL23013 – GP) (“2023-2031 HEU”); (2) finding the 2023-2031 HEU exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption; (3) finding the 2023-2031 HEU substantially complies with Government Code section 65580 et seq. (“Housing Element Law”); (4) approving a General Plan Amendment repealing the 2014-2022 Housing Element and adopting the 2023-2031 HEU; and (5) authorizing the City Manager or designee to make changes to the 2023-2031 HEU to achieve internal consistency or address non-substantive changes or amendments requested by the Department of Housing and Community Development to certify the 2023-2031 HEU (PL23013 – GP), and (6) making other related findings and delegations as appropriate. Report by Aaron Sage, Principal Planner.

CEQA: Exempt under CEQA Guidelines 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption); Initial Study/Negative Declaration.

10. CORRESPONDENCE
Correspondence received at the City Council meeting will be listed here on the Annotated Agenda.

11. REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Closed Session Announcements
6 City Manager or Staff Reports
Council Reports

12. ADJOURNMENT
Next Meeting: Regular Meeting
Date: 3/28/2023 6:30 PM

NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
There is a 90-day limit for the filing of a challenge in the Superior Court to certain City administrative decisions and orders which require a hearing by law, the receipt of evidence, and the exercise of discretion. The 90-day limit begins on the date the decision is final (Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6). Further, if you challenge an action taken by the City Council in court, you may be limited by California law to raising only those issues you or someone else raised in the hearing or in a written correspondence delivered to the City Council prior to or at the hearing.

In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and California Law, it is the policy of the City of Concord to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to everyone, including those with disabilities. If you are disabled and require a copy of a public hearing notice, or an agenda and/or agenda packet in an appropriate alternative format; or if you require other accommodation, please contact the ADA Coordinator Tianjun Cao at (925) 671-3243 or [email protected], at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. Advance notification within this guideline will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility.
2380 Salvio Street, Suite 301, Concord, CA 94520 ⏐ 925.692.0090 x 5 ⏐ www.rainbowcc.org
Our Mission:

Rainbow builds community, equity, and well-being among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, and Intersex (LGBTQIA+) people & our allies.

Concord City Council
1950 Parkside Drive
Concord, CA 94519
March 14, 2023
Mayor Hoffmeister, Vice Mayor Birsan, and Councilmembers Aliano, Nakamura, and Obringer, The leadership of Rainbow Community Center is writing to express our profound disappointment in the egregious handling of last week’s council meeting on Tuesday, March 7th. We have concerns about the overall conduct and lack of leadership of this council in relation to ARPA (American Rescue Plan Act) federal funds of $7mil disseminated by the council for nonprofit organizations serving Concord.

The Ad Hoc Committee, comprised of Mayor Laura Hoffmeister and Councilmember Dominic Aliano, proposed awards to 22 organizations. None of those funds were designated to the LGBTQIA+ community and our allies in Concord. Rainbow Community Center’s request for $270,604 to sustain and expand our life saving services to Concord LGBTQIA+ youth and family members was rejected. Following the announcement of the Ad Hoc recommendations on Friday, March 3rd, Rainbow notified our staff, board, and community members about the exclusion of anything for the City's LGBTQIA+ community and allies.

Over a dozen community members; Rainbow staff, Board members, young people, Concord residents and parents of LGBTQIA+ children sprung into action over the next three days. We made an urgent call for support to the Council on Tuesday via public comment delivered in person, via Zoom, and via submitted written comments, on the need to rectify this exclusion.

At a time of unprecedented attacks on our LGBTQIA+ youth, both across the country and here in our own community, the Concord City Council missed a tremendous opportunity to make a significant positive impact on the mental health and wellness of our most marginalized communities. Rainbow is committed to making the Concord City Council aware of their mistake. We will continue to utilize all avenues and resources we have available to ensure our community is heard and supported by city leadership.

Some of the compelling testimony shared last week was from parents of queer and trans children who opened their hearts to Councilmembers about how lost they were when their kids came out. They shared how they were terrified of their LGBTQIA+ children’s depression, self-harming, and attempts at suicide.

They shared how the school districts were not equipped with adequate expertise and resources needed to fully support their suffering children and the entire family, and how Rainbow Community Center was a “lifeline” in their most urgent time of need. Rainbow is the only local entity able to provide an effective and timely intervention, peer and clinical support, as well as the education and training that our community vitally needs to be able to protect its LGBTQIA+ youth and families and build an inclusive culture.

Legitimate issues and questions were raised by the public about the Ad Hoc Committee’s recommendations that went wholly unaddressed, including concerns about a highly questionable organization receiving funds, the Council’s prioritization of funding, and lack of equity in the process. .

OUR VALUES: Authenticity. Bravery. Education. Healing. Liberation. 1 6.a

Page 1 of 3 ends

Members of the Council suggested that nonprofit organizations should have taken the time to “lobby” more for these funds. We believe that nonprofits doing the work on the ground to make Concord a safe, inclusive and hospitable place to live for all people should be considered for City Council funding on the basis of the need in our community and the merit of our work.

We have a long standing history and proven track record of effectively serving the LGBTQIA+ community and our allies since 1995. We continue to choose to be based in Concord. After over a decade on Willow Pass Road, in September of last year we opened our new facility right over on Salvio Street in Concord.

Why are we being ignored, disregarded and marginalized by our own City Council? After the community waited eight months for the Ad Hoc Committee’s delayed recommendations, the Council spent only 30 minutes deliberating. Councilmember Aliano and Mayor Hoffmeister did not see fit to address any of the public concerns raised and refused to reconsider their original Ad Hoc Committee proposals. Propelled by a forced ultimatum on the part of Vice Mayor Birsan, Concord City Council ended up unilaterally approving the full Ad Hoc Committee recommendations, excluding the input of the other two Councilmembers Nakamura and Obringer, as well as ignoring the entirety of the important public input and concerns that were just raised.

Ad Hoc Committee recommendations are supposed to be just that; recommendations. The Concord City Council urgently needs to consider public input in how they lead and operate our city. Why was public opinion solicited, why did Rainbow Community Center bring parents to the podium to courageously disclose their family’s personal stories and struggles, only for all of this valuable input to be ultimately ignored by Concord City Council?
The events surrounding the ARPA allocation of $7mil of funding from Concord City Council amount to a disturbing misuse of power and a profound neglect of public input.

Rainbow has a long standing history of largely one-sided support for Concord City Council. With Councilmembers routinely making public appearances at our events, issuing City Proclamations about and to us, raising flags with us during Pride month, while making various other requests at opportune times in order to appear inclusive. If the Council holds our work in such high regard, why did they ignore the call for a share of once-in-a-lifetime federal dollars they had at their disposal? Strong voices are needed to break through the hate speech and rhetoric of those who would deny us our humanity and rights. Raising the Pride flag each year is needed to provide visibility so that all can see what progress and pride look like. Symbolic support is appreciated, but without actual dollars in accompaniment, it is performative allyship intended to bolster one’s image. We are tired of being tokenized by our own city government, and we demand genuine allyship.

According to the Human Rights Campaigns’ (HRC) 2022 evaluation of Concord with their “Municipal Equality Index Scorecard,” which you can view at www.bit.ly/hrcconcord, the City of Concord receives a 2/8 score on Leadership on LGBTQ+ Equality, and a 5/12 score in the category of Municipal Services.

Drawing from this tool and our deep collective experience serving this community for nearly three decades, the leadership of Rainbow Community Center is presenting the Council with tangible steps to take and a path forward, in order to move the needle on the culture of LGBTQIA+ inclusion here in Concord, as well as the health and wellness for LGBTQIA+ residents and their allies.

OUR VALUES: Authenticity. Bravery. Education. Healing. Liberation. 2

Page 2 of 3 ends

Sometimes, systemic change and giving representative folks a seat at the table is what is necessary to ensure that voices are heard, and we can explore, address and meet the urgent needs of LGBTQIA+ and ally residents. With this in mind, we demand the Council respond within 30 days to the following actions and strategies that we seek to partner with you on, that will move this City forward:
● Within one year, to post a new job for an LGBTQ+ Liaison in the City’s Executive Office ● Within one year, to assemble an LGBTQIA+ Task Force, with at least one City Council member, one healthcare leader, one leader from MDUSD, one leader from Rainbow Community Center, and the new LGBTQ+ Liaison. This group should be led by the City, and meet quarterly. ● Add a seat in the housing group with Councilmember Nakamura and Vice Mayor Birsan, relating to the process and $5.4mil now being allocated specifically to housing issues in Concord. ○ This group has seats and representation ranging from; Concord residents and business owners, mental health, veterans, lived experience, and more. ○ LGBTQIA+ youth are 120% more likely to experience homelessness than the general population. Given this, why are transitional age youth and LGBTQIA+ individuals not given any representation in this working group?
○ Rainbow Community Center needs at least one seat in this group, to represent the key perspectives of LGBTQIA+ transitional age youth (TAY), and our expertise with our HouselessTransitional Youth Program providing direct services to LGBTQIA+ TAY experiencing homelessness.
● According to code 1.20.150 of the Concord Municipal Code, the Community Services Commission must consist of “no more than seven members…representative of the general public and the religious, racial, age, sex, disabled, and ethnic groups in the city.” ○ Given the clear erasure and lack of institutional representation afforded to the LGBTQIA+ community, we need sexual orientation and gender identity added as a category in the municipal code, and an eighth member added to the Community Services Commission.

We look forward to hearing your response. We sincerely hope you will center the urgent needs of the LGBTQIA+ community and our allies in your decisions moving forward, and that you will choose to work together in partnership with us and other leaders, to make Concord a more inclusive and safe City for all.

Signed,
Dodi Zotigh, CST, MS
Interim Executive Director
Board of Directors
Robyn Kuslits
Board President Kelly Ferguson
Director of Development
Denisen Hartlove, Board Secretary
JC Chung, MBA, Board Treasurer
Jonathan H.X. Lee, PhD
Sara Tucker, MC
Melitta Rorty, MS
Valerie Crowell
Dee Vieira
OUR VALUES: Authenticity. Bravery. Education. Healing. Liberation. 3

Page 3 of 3 ends

CONTINUED REGULAR MEETING OF THE

CONCORD CITY COUNCIL/CITY COUNCIL

SITTING AS THE LOCAL REUSE

AUTHORITY/CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE

CONCORD-PLEASANT HILL HEALTH CARE

DISTRICT

CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
1950 PARKSIDE DRIVE

CONCORD, CALIFORNIA AND VARIOUS

TELEPHONIC/ELECTRONIC LOCATIONS
TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 2023
The Concord City Council met in a continued regular meeting in the Council Chamber, located at 1950 Parkside Drive and via various telephonic/electronic locations at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, January 17, 2023, with Mayor Hoffmeister presiding. Minutes follow in abbreviated form per Resolution 3361 and Council Minutes of September 26, 1966.

ROLL CALL
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Dominic Aliano, Edi Birsan, Laura Nakamura, Carlyn Obringer, Laura Hoffmeister
STAFF PRESENT: Valerie Barone, City Manager; Susanne Brown, City Attorney; Justin Ezell, Assistant City Manager; Joelle Fockler, City Clerk; Stefanie Ananthan, Deputy City Clerk; Greg Taylor, Director of Information Technology; Kevin Marstall, Director of Community Development; Mark Bustillos, Chief of Police; James Nakayama, Police Captain; Mindy Gentry, Planning Manager; Aaron Sage, Principal Planner

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
WHO ADDRESSED THE COUNCIL: Ady Olvera; Natalie

CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS

COMMENTS FROM CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (HCD) – City’s Draft Housing Element Update (HEU) – continued from January 10, 2023 Principal Planner Aaron Sage provided an updated schedule of next steps and meeting dates towards Council adoption of the Final Draft Housing Element Update (HEU) based upon the continuance of the item from the January 10, 2023 meeting. Mr. Sage then provided a brief overview of the previously presented staff report, the comments and recommended revisions from California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) related to the City’s draft HEU, and next steps and the consequences for non-compliance. Mr. Sage explained that the Council was being requested to provide input to be incorporated into a revised HEU for adoption by the City Council on revisions proposed by staff in the staff report dated January 10, 2023.

Following questions and discussion by the City Council, the Council indicated support for staff recommendations and provided input on the following:
 Additional tenant protections
 Targeted outreach to inform residents within City’s racially/ethnically diverse areas of poverty regarding available social services, programs, and available funding  Consult with local businesses in Monument Corridor to spend $150,000 in settlement funds to advance small business development and economic vitality in Monument Corridor

7.a

Page 1 of 4 ends

City Council Minutes January 17, 2023
2  Seek project partners
 Simplify emergency shelter regulations
 Amend Development Code to allow multi-family housing in commercial districts  Amend Development Code’s Design and Site Review procedures to require staff-level ministerial review for multi-family housing projects
 Amend Development Code to reduce the amount of parking required for group housing uses  Amend Development Code to require only objective criteria for Large Residential Care Facilities
Mayor Hoffmeister recessed the meeting at 8:34 p.m. The meeting resumed at 8:42 p.m.

SELECTION OF APPLICANTS TO INTERVIEW FOR HOMELESS STRATEGIC PLAN WORKING GROUP – continued from January 10, 2023
City Clerk Joelle Fockler presented the staff report, provided background related to the development of the Homeless Strategic Plan Working Group, discussed the composition of the Working Group and the number of applications received for each category, and explained that the Council was being requested to select applicants to interview for the Homeless Strategic Plan Working Group. Based upon the number of applications received in the categories of Mental Health Professional and Substance Abuse Professional, the City Council was provided the following recommendation from staff:

1. Determine process for the Mental Health and Substance Abuse positions; and

2. Select two applicants each from the other five categories to interview, reviewing the list one category at a time
Following questions from the City Council, Mayor Hoffmeister opened a public comment period.

Ady Olvera spoke about the importance in finding solutions for the unhoused in Concord and said if the Council is considering reopening the categories for the Mental Health and Substance Abuse positions, the application deadline should be extended for all categories. She also stated there should be additional members chosen to serve in the Concord resident category.

Mayor Hoffmeister closed the public comment period.

Following comments from the City Council, a motion was made by Obringer and seconded by Aliano to extend the application period for the categories of Mental Health Professional and Substance Abuse Professional, with the deadline for applications due to the City Clerk on February 3, 2023 at 5:00 p.m. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Aliano, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: Birsan A motion was made by Aliano and seconded by Birsan to select applicants Leonard Ramirez and John Eckstrom to be interviewed for the category of Veterans Homeless Services Provider. The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

A motion was made by Aliano and seconded by Obringer to select applicants Eric Rehn and Mark Unterbach to be interviewed for the category of Business Community Representative. The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

Page 2 of 4 ends

City Council Minutes January 17, 2023
3 A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to select applicants Desiree McDonagh and Lance Goree to be interviewed for the category of Concord Resident and Property Owner. The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

A motion was made by Nakamura and seconded by Obringer to select applicants Kelly McKinley and Bob Pickett to be interviewed for the category of Nonprofit Homeless Services Provider. The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

A motion was made by Nakamura and seconded by Birsan to select applicants Kent Davis and Brandi Martinez to be interviewed for the category of Lived Experience Representative. The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

City Council directed staff to amend Resolution No. 22-77 to omit reference to Concord resident from the category of Business Community Representative, and to extend the application period for the category of Business Community Representative, with the deadline for applications due to the City Clerk on February 3, 2023 at 5:00 p.m.

APPROVAL OF THE 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR – continued from December 13, 2022 and January 10, 2023
City Clerk Joelle Fockler presented the staff report, explaining that the Council was being requested to approve the 2023 City Council Meeting Calendar, per staff’s recommendation, and to discuss whether to change the meeting start time from 6:30 p.m. to an earlier start time.

Mayor Hoffmeister opened a public comment period.

Ady Olvera spoke in favor of staff’s recommendation for a Council break in July, but expressed concern about an earlier meeting start time of 5:30 p.m.

Natalie expressed concern over an earlier meeting start time.

Mayor Hoffmeister closed the public comment period.

Following comments from the City Council, a motion was made by Obringer and seconded by Birsan to approve the proposed 2023 City Council Meeting Calendar. The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

It was the consensus of the Council to not change the meeting start time to earlier than 6:30 p.m.

CORRESPONDENCE
a. Agenda Item No. 5.a – Draft Housing Element Update – Benched Correspondence b. Agenda Item No. 5.a – Draft Housing Element Update – PowerPoint Presentation c. Agenda Item No. 5.b – Homeless Strategic Plan Working Group Applications – PowerPoint Presentation

COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmembers shared information on events and activities in which they had participated since the last meeting and commented on items of interest.

Page 3 of 4 ends

City Council Minutes January 17, 2023
4 ADJOURNMENT
By order of the Mayor, the meeting was adjourned on January 17, 2023, at 9:50 p.m.

LAURA M. HOFFMEISTER
MAYOR

JOELLE FOCKLER, MMC

CITY CLERK

Page 4 of 4 ends

Report in Brief
The Villas at Walters Place Townhomes Subdivision Final Map (Tract No. 9585), a 17- unit townhome project, was approved by the Planning Commission on April 11, 2022.

Council review and approval of street names is required by the City’s street naming procedures. The names being requested for approval are “Walters Place” and “Walters Court.”
Recommended Action
Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) approving the street names for the Villas at Walters Place Townhomes Subdivision (Tract No. 9585), located at 1200 Detroit Avenue.

7.b7.b7.b7.b

Page 1 of 8 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.b
March 14, 2023
Background
On April 11, 2022, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the Tentative Map, Planned Development Use Permit, Design and Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit for the Villas at Walters Place Townhomes Subdivision, subject to conditions of approval.

On January 31, 2023, Discovery Builders submitted a request for selection of street names for the new streets (Streets A and B) as required by the conditions of approval.

On February 1, 2023, the Planning Division routed the street name request to the City’s Street Naming Committee, which includes internal departments and external agency members, for a response by February 17, 2023. On February 14, 2023, the Planning Division requested additional alternative street names from the applicant that did not include the local street name (Walters) for the Council’s consideration, which were received and routed to the Street Naming Committee the following day, for a response by February 22. The eight street names proposed included: “Walters Place” for Street A and “Walters Court” for Street B as applicant’s preference. Other options reviewed were:

Street A
 Walters View
 Stanley Lane
 Bruno Terrace
Street B
 Howard Place
 Silver View Court
 Ruggers Alley Loop
Analysis
As required by Section 17.20.030(17) of the Concord Municipal Code, the proposed street name options were circulated to various departments and agencies including the Concord Police Department, the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (Fire District), and the U.S. Postal Service for review in order to avoid name conflicts or duplications.

Staff received comments from the Fire District removing Stanley Lane from consideration and the City of Clayton indicated they had no comments on the street names. No other substantive comments were received regarding the proposed street names from the departments and agencies that were informed of the request by the requested deadline. Staff recommends approving the applicant’s preference to name

Page 2 of 8 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.b
March 14, 2023
the subdivision’s streets “Walters Place” (Street A) and “Walters Court” (Street B) as shown in Exhibit A to Attachment 1.

Financial Impact
This project has no fiscal impact on the City.

Environmental Determination
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq., as amended and implementing State CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (collectively, “CEQA”), the Planning Commission previously determined on April 11, 2022, as part of its review and approval of the project, that the project was exempt from CEQA, pursuant to 15332 (Infill Development Projects). A Notice of Exemption was filed on April 18, 2022.

The subject street naming does not change the project and all findings, terms, and/or conditions of approval remain in full force and effect. Accordingly, the street naming does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3) or 15378 because there is no potential that the activity will result in a reasonably foreseeable indirect or direct physical change in the environment.

Even if the street naming did constitute a project under CEQA, it falls within the “common sense” exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), excluding projects where “it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment…” Therefore, the proposed street naming does not warrant further environmental review.

Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted.

Attachments

1. Resolution approving the street names for the Villas at Walters Place Townhomes Subdivision (Tract No. 9585), located at 1200 Detroit Avenue Exhibit A: Street Name Site Plan
Exhibit B: Applicant request

Page 3 of 8 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 1

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CONCORD

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A Resolution Approving the Street Names for the
Villas at Walters Place Townhomes Subdivision
(Tract No. 9585), located at 1200 Detroit Avenue.

Resolution No. 23-XX
__ _ /
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2022, the Planning Commission approved a Tentative Map, Planned Development Use Permit, Design and Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit for a 17-unit townhouse project, the Villas at Walters Place Townhomes subdivision, located at 1200 Detroit Avenue (referred to herein as the “Project’); and
WHEREAS, on July 11, 2017, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 17-9 amending the Subdivision Ordinance, requiring the City Council’s review and approval of street naming for all subdivisions, prior to or concurrent with final map approval; and WHEREAS, on January 23, 2023, the applicant, Discovery Builders, Inc., submitted a request for new street names for the Project; and
WHEREAS, on February 1, 2023, the item was routed to the City’s Street Naming Committee, which includes internal departments and external agencies; and WHEREAS, on February 15, 2023, the item was routed once again with additional names to the City’s Street Naming Committee, for a response by February 22; and WHEREAS, the provisions of Section 17.20.30(17) of the Concord Municipal Code regarding street names have been satisfied; and
WHEREAS, the Street Naming Committee eliminated Stanley Lane from consideration and otherwise, no substantive comments regarding the preferred street names for the Project were received from the City’s Street Naming Committee; and
WHEREAS, the proposed street names of “Walters Place” (Street A) and “Walters Court” (Street B) are being brought to the City Council for review and approval, in conformance with the Subdivision Ordinance; and
Attachment 1

Page 4 of 8 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 2
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2023, the City Council, at a duly-notice regular meeting, considered and reviewed the proposed street names; and
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2023, after consideration of all pertinent plans, documents, reports, and oral and written testimony received at the public meeting, the City Council approved the street names for the Villas at Walters Place Townhome Subdivision (Tract No. 9585) as “Walters Place” (Street A) and “Walters Court” (Street B).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CONCORD DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. All of the facts set forth in the Recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference.

Section 2. CEQA. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq., and implementing State CEQA Guidelines, title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations all as amended from time to time (collectively “CEQA”), the Planning Commission previously determined on April 11, 2022, as part of its review and approval of the Project, that the Project was exempt from the CEQA, pursuant to 15183.3 (Infill Project Development). A Notice of Exemption was filed on April 18, 2022. The subject street naming does not change the Project and all findings, terms, and/or conditions of approval remain in full force and effect. Accordingly, the street naming does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3) or 15378 because there is no potential that the activity will result in a reasonably foreseeable indirect or direct physical change in the environment. Even if the street naming did constitute a project under CEQA, it falls within the “common sense” exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), excluding projects where “it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” Therefore, the proposed street naming does not warrant further environmental review. This determination reflects the City’s independent judgement and analysis.

Section 3. The City Council has reviewed, considered, and evaluated all of the information

Page 5 of 8 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 3
prior to acting upon this Resolution.

Section 4. The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council has based its decision are located in and may be obtained from the City of Concord Clerk’s Office, 1950 Parkside Drive, Concord, CA 94519.

Section 5. The City Council hereby approves the street names “Walters Place” (Street A) and “Walters Court” (Street B) for the Villas at Walters Place Townhomes Subdivision as shown on site plan (Exhibit A).

Section 6. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption and shall remain effective until amended, superseded or repealed by a separate resolution adopted by the City Council.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Concord on March 14, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers -
NOES: Councilmembers -
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers -
ABSENT: Councilmembers -
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 23-XX was duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Concord on March 14, 2023.

Joelle Fockler, MMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Susanne Meyer Brown
City Attorney
Attachments: Exhibit A - Street Name Site Plan
Exhibit B - Applicant’s request

Page 6 of 8 ends

Exhibit A to Attachment 1

Page 7 of 8 ends

4061 Port Chicago Highway, Suite H
Concord, California 94520
(925) 682-6419
Fax (925) 689-7741
February 14, 2023
City of Concord
1950 Parkside drive
Concord Ca 94519
C/O: Joan Ryan
Re: Villas at Walters Place- street names
Good Morning
I would like to request the following street A & street B names for our Villas at Walters Place (1200 Detroit Ave). Engineering has request street names for the final map and approval of the Grading & Improvement plans. Below are my recommendations.

Street A
1) Walters Place
2) Walters View
3) Stanley Lane
4) Bruno Terrace
Street B
1) Walters Court
2) Howard Place
3) Silver View court
4) Ruggers Alley Loop
Thanks in advance
Mon e Davis
Exhibit B to Attachment 1

Page 8 of 8 ends

Staff Report
Date: March 14, 2023
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Reviewed by: Kevin Marstall, PE, Director of Community Development Mindy Gentry, Planning Manger
Frank Abejo, Principal Planner
Prepared by: Ryan Lenhardt, Senior Planner
[email protected]
(925) 671-3162
Subject: Considering adoption of a Resolution approving the street name for Walnut Grove Major Subdivision (Tract No. 9434), near the intersection of Mohr Lane and Wicket Court.

Report in Brief
The Walnut Grove Major Subdivision Final Map (Tract No. 9434) project, a 14-lot subdivision for new single-family detached homes, was approved by the Planning Commission on July 20, 2022, and acceptance of the Final Map is anticipated to come before the City Council this spring. Staff requests City Council approval of the street name proposed for the subdivision, “Hunter Court,” as required by the City’s street- naming procedures and the Subdivision Ordinance.

Recommended Action
Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) approving a street name for the Walnut Grove Major Subdivision (Tract No. 9434), near the intersection of Mohr Lane and Wicket Court.

7.c7.c7.c7.c

Page 1 of 8 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.c
March 14, 2023
Background
On July 20, 2022, the Planning Commission unanimously approved an application by West Coast Land Development for a Tentative Map Amendment, Density Bonus, Tree Removal Permit Amendment, and Design and Site Review Amendment to modify the Walnut Grove Major Subdivision and it became a 14 lot subdivision that includes three affordable units. The final map for this project is anticipated to go before Council in the spring for acceptance.

On January 3, 2023, West Coast Land and Development, Inc., submitted a request for selection of a street name for the subdivision.

On January 9, 2023, the Planning Division routed the street name request to the City’s Street Naming Committee, which includes internal departments and external agency members, for a response by January 23, 2023. The three street name options proposed included: “Chadwick Lane” (applicant’s preference), “Hunter Court,” and “Hunt Way.” Analysis
As required by Section 17.20.030(17) of the Concord Municipal Code, the proposed street name options were circulated to various departments and agencies including the Concord Police Department, the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (Fire District), and the U.S. Postal Service for review in order to avoid name conflicts or duplications.

Staff received comments from the Fire District indicating the acceptable names are “Hunter Court,” and “Hunt Way” and the other proposed name, “Chadwick Lane,” would be problematic because it would duplicate an existing street name in Bay Point. No other substantive comments were received regarding the proposed street name options from the departments and agencies that were informed of the proposed request. Staff recommends approving the applicant’s second choice to name the subdivision’s street “Hunter Court” as shown in Exhibit A to Attachment 1.

Financial Impact
This project has no fiscal impact on the City.

Environmental Determination
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq., as amended and implementing State CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (collectively, “CEQA”), the Planning Commission previously determined on July 20, 2022, as part of its review and approval of the project, that the project was exempt from CEQA, pursuant to 15332 (Infill Development Projects).

The subject street naming does not change the project and all findings, terms, and/or conditions of approval remain in full force and effect. Accordingly, the street naming

Page 2 of 8 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.c
March 14, 2023
does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3) or 15378 because there is no potential that the activity will result in a reasonably foreseeable indirect or direct physical change in the environment.

Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted.

Attachments

1. Resolution approving a street name for the Walnut Grove Major Subdivision (Tract No. 9434), near the intersection of Mohr Lane and Wicket Court Exhibit A: Street Name Site Plan
Exhibit B: Written statement

Page 3 of 8 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 1

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CONCORD

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A Resolution Approving the Street Name for the
Walnut Grove Major Subdivision (Tract No. 9434),
near the intersection of Mohr Lane and Wicket Court
Resolution No. 23-XX
__ _ /
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2017, the Planning Commission approved a Tentative Subdivision Map, Tree Removal Permit, and Design and Site Review for an eight-lot (seven single- family detached homes and a remainder parcel) Walnut Grove Major Subdivision; and WHEREAS, on July 20, 2022, the Planning Commission approved a Tentative Map Amendment, Density Bonus, Tree Removal Permit Amendment, and Design and Site Review Amendment for a 14-lot subdivision for new single-family detached homes, the Walnut Grove Major Subdivision, near the intersection of Mohr Lane and Wicket Court (referred to herein as the “Project’); and
WHEREAS, on July 11, 2017, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 17-9 amending the Subdivision Ordinance, requiring the City Council’s review and approval of street naming for all subdivisions, prior to or concurrent with final map approval; and WHEREAS, on January 3, 2023, the applicant, West Coast Land and Development, Inc., submitted a request for a new street name for the Project; and WHEREAS, on January 9, 2023, the item was routed to the City’s Street Naming Committee, which includes internal departments and external agencies; and WHEREAS, the provisions of Section 17.20.30(17) of the Concord Municipal Code regarding street names have been satisfied; and
WHEREAS, no substantive comments regarding the preferred street name for the Project was received from the City’s Street Naming Committee, for response by January 23, 2023; and WHEREAS, the proposed street name of “Hunter Court” is being brought to the City Council for review and approval, in conformance with the Subdivision Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2023, the City Council, at a duly-notice regular meeting, Attachment 1

Page 4 of 8 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 2
considered and reviewed the proposed street name; and
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2023, after consideration of all pertinent plans, documents, reports, and oral and written testimony received at the public meeting, the City Council approved the street name for the Walnut Grove Major Subdivision (Tract No. 9434) as “Hunter Court.”

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CONCORD DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. All of the facts set forth in the Recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference.

Section 2. CEQA. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq., and implementing State CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations all as amended from time to time (collectively “CEQA”), the Planning Commission previously determined on July 20, 2022, as part of its review and approval of the Project, that the Project was exempt from the CEQA, pursuant to 15332 (Infill Project Development). The subject street naming does not change the Project and all findings, terms, and/or conditions of approval remain in full force and effect. Accordingly, the street naming does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3) or 15378 because there is no potential that the activity will result in a reasonably foreseeable indirect or direct physical change in the environment. Even if the street naming did constitute a project under CEQA, it falls within the “common sense” exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), excluding projects where “it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” Therefore, the proposed street naming does not warrant further environmental review.

This determination reflects the City’s independent judgement and analysis.

Section 3. The City Council has reviewed, considered, and evaluated all of the information prior to acting upon this Resolution.

Section 4. The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council has based its decision are located in and may be obtained from the City of

Page 5 of 8 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 3
Concord Clerk’s Office, 1950 Parkside Drive, Concord, CA 94519.

Section 5. The City Council hereby approves the street name “Hunter Court” for the Walnut Grove Major Subdivision as shown on site plan (Exhibit A).

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Concord on March 14, 2023, by the following vote:

Joelle Fockler, MMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Susanne Meyer Brown
City Attorney
Attachments: Exhibit A - Street name site plan
Exhibit B - Written statement

Page 6 of 8 ends

Exhibit A to Attachment 1

HUNTER COURT

Page 7 of 8 ends

Walnut Grove Major Subdivision Street Naming
January 3, 2023
West
Coast Land and
Development, Inc.

City of Concord Planning Division,
Please consider the following names for use with the Wal nut Grove Major
Subdivision on Mohr Lane.

Chadwick Lane;
Hunter Court; or
Hunt Way
Respectfully,
Pamela West

RECEIVED
JAN 3 2023

PLANNING
Exhibit B to
Attachment 1

Page 8 of 8 ends

Staff Report
Date: March 14, 2023
To: City Council/City Council Sitting as the Local Reuse Authority From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Prepared by: Guy Bjerke, Director of Economic Development & Base Reuse [email protected]
(925) 671-3076
Subject: Study Session for the Local Reuse Authority/City Council to consider and provide direction to staff on desired Term Sheet parameters and the method for selecting a master developer.

CEQA: Not a project/exempt under Public Resources Code
Section 21065, CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c),
15061(b)(3), and/or 15378.

Report in Brief
To successfully restart the CNWS Reuse Project, the Local Reuse Authority (LRA)/City Council (Council) will need to provide direction on project vision differences that were identified during consideration of the last proposed Term Sheet and on the selection process for a new master developer.

This report provides a list of Term Sheet considerations and a proposed method to select a master developer for public discussion, Council deliberation, and Council direction to staff.

In addition to gathering information requested by the Council, staff and consultants will conduct interviews with interested developers, stakeholders, and the broader community. That information, together with Council’s input tonight, will form the basis for the drafting of a new Hybrid Request for Qualifications seeking a new master developer.

Staff will return to Council on April 25, 2023 for review, approval, and authorization to release the new Hybrid Request for Qualifications.

8.a8.a8.a8.a8.a

Page 1 of 28 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.a
March 14, 2023
Recommended Action
Review and discuss the list of Term Sheet considerations and the proposed method to select a master developer, identify any additional information needed by Council for the upcoming Master Developer Selection process, and provide direction to staff.

Background
Redevelopment of the former Concord Naval Weapon Station represents an unparalleled opportunity to revitalize approximately 2,300 acres of undeveloped land adjacent to the North Concord BART Station into a world-class extension of the vibrant Concord community. Following adoption of the CNWS Area Plan in 2012, the City has explored its redevelopment vision with two competitively selected master developers. In March 2020, the Council/LRA rejected a request from Lennar Concord, LLC for an extension to its Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate, ending the master developer’s relationship with the City. That process illuminated the need for a redevelopment partner with a stronger commitment to certain labor terms, and the complicated trade- offs between desired community benefits and financial feasibility of the development, including payment to the U.S. Navy for the land.

Staff prepared a Restart Memo for Council/LRA consideration in December 2020, which led to the issuance of a Hybrid Request for Qualifications (RFQ) in April 2021. Three respondents answered that RFQ – Brookfield, City Ventures, and Concord First Partners, LLC (CFP). In August 2021, the Council/LRA selected CFP by a vote of 3 to 2 to negotiate an Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate (ENA). The Council/LRA unanimously approved the ENA with CFP in October 2021 and staff began negotiating a Term Sheet for the project.

The ENA’s Term Sheet negotiation period was extended first by the City Manager and then by the Council/LRA to January 31, 2023, as it was determined that forward progress on the Term Sheet was continuing to be made.

On November 30, 2022, LRA staff and CFP agreed upon and released a Term Sheet; staff also provided a report for LRA/Council consideration. LRA staff and CFP provided two community presentations, on December 1 and December 15, 2022. The LRA/Council then heard presentations from staff, CFP, and took public testimony at a 9- hour special meeting on January 7, 2023. That meeting was continued to January 28, 2023. On January 28, 2023, the LRA/Council voted 3 to 2 to reject the proposed CFP Term Sheet and allow the ENA to expire on January 31, 2023.

Analysis
The LRA desires to identify an experienced master developer who can incorporate lessons learned from the previous efforts and prepare a responsive and financially feasible strategy for development of the CNWS Reuse Project. The new master developer would need to propose a Term Sheet, and, upon LRA/Council approval, finance and work with staff to guide the drafting of a Specific Plan, prepare an

Page 2 of 28 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.a
March 14, 2023
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), help negotiate the Economic Development Conveyance (EDC) with the U.S. Navy, and invest significant resources to bring required infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, electricity) to the CNWS site. The master developer will be required to spend tens of millions of dollars on project and land use planning and hundreds of millions of dollars on critical infrastructure and related improvements over the course of the 30-40 year project.

This staff report provides a list of Term Sheet considerations and a proposed method to select a master developer for City Council deliberation and public discussion. Staff is also asking Council to identify any additional information the Council needs in support of making the future master developer selection.

Term Sheet Considerations
Council discussion of Term Sheet considerations is intended to confirm the LRA’s expectations regarding the project’s community benefits and financial feasibility.

Staff will use LRA/Council responses and direction on the Term Sheet consideration questions outlined below to survey the thinking of developers, stakeholders, and the broader community on these questions. In reporting the results of the survey to Council, staff will identify survey participants by organization, but their responses will be anonymously aggregated in the staff report prepared to inform the Council’s review and authorization of the Hybrid RFQ for master developer selection at the April 25, 2023 meeting.

Proposed Term Sheet Considerations to Be Discussed with Stakeholders

1. Should a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) continue to be required? If so:
a. Should a prospective master developer be required to negotiate and reach agreement on a Project Labor Agreement prior to LRA selecting a new master developer or should negotiation of a Project Labor Agreement be deferred until after master developer selection?
b. Should the LRA require that the terms of any Project Labor Agreement be disclosed to the City Council and public?
c. Rather than a public disclosure of the Project Labor Agreement, would a public disclosure by the prospective master developer summarizing the scope and potential financial impacts of the Project Labor Agreement be more appropriate?

2. Should the LRA express a willingness to consider changes to aspects of the Area Plan to enhance the financial feasibility of the project? a. Is the LRA willing to increase the residential unit cap in the Area Plan? b. If the residential unit cap is increased, how should the Affordable Housing component be addressed to respond to the increase?

Page 3 of 28 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.a
March 14, 2023
c. What is realistic green frame (buffer) expectation north of Willow Pass Road?

3. Should the project’s first phase be guided by the market or should it, regardless of market conditions, be required to incorporate Transit Oriented Development near the North Concord BART Station? If yes to requiring incorporation of Transit Oriented Development in phase 1, are there parameters on what would be acceptable to the LRA?

4. Should the community benefits proposed in the latest (CFP) Term Sheet (see Attachment 1 for a listing) not already discussed above be required in the future Term Sheet, subject to demonstration of financial feasibility?

5. Should the LRA require the master developer to provide quarterly reporting of litigation, threats to the company’s financial condition, and changes to company leadership? Should other topics be added to this required disclosure?

6. Should the City continue to require that the Specific Plan and CEQA documents include the North Concord BART Station property?
Proposed Master Developer Selection Method
This current effort will be the LRA’s third attempt to choose a master developer partner in pursuit of a Specific Plan, Infrastructure Plan, Environmental Reviews, and other entitlements necessary to conclude negotiations with the Navy on the EDC and achieve property transfer. The Navy has been a patient partner with the LRA and has 1,200 acres (out of 2,300 acres) ready for transfer to the LRA (known as “First Transfer”). The Navy recognizes the need for, and role that, a Master Developer will play in the ultimate success of the project. A strong partnership between the Master Developer and the LRA will result in a productive transfer of property from the Navy to the LRA.

Recommended Method
Based on Council input tonight and information obtained from stakeholder surveys, staff will prepare a Hybrid Request for Qualifications. The Hybrid RFQ will seek answers to key questions (similar to the April 2021 Hybrid RFQ selection process) including the viability of the adopted Area Plan and a potential list of community benefits that may include, among other benefits, some or all the benefits listed in the CFP Term Sheet.

The benefits of this approach is that it creates an equal playing field for all interested parties, provides the LRA/City with negotiating power, and has a constrained time frame. Use of the Hybrid RFQ process would allow the City/LRA to complete selection of a Master Developer and Term Sheet negotiations within six to nine months, which is a time frame acceptable to the Navy.

Staff will return to Council on April 25, 2023 for review, approval, and authorization to release the new Hybrid Request for Qualifications.

Page 4 of 28 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.a
March 14, 2023
Financial Impact
The financial impact of the next master developer selection process will be evaluated and described in the April 25 staff report.

Environmental Determination
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065, CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c), 15378, and, this activity is not subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, as it does not constitute a “project,” does not commit the City to a definite course of action, does not constitute discretionary approval of a specific project, and will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and in the alternative is exempt from CEQA as it falls within the “common sense” exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), excluding projects where “it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” This determination reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis. Individual projects will undergo CEQA analysis as necessary.

Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted. Notice of the meeting with a link to the staff report was shared with the project’s interested party list.

Attachments

1. Summary of CFP Term Sheet Community Benefits

2. Correspondence received

Page 5 of 28 ends

Summary of CFP Term Sheet Community Benefits as listed in the January 7, 2023 Staff Report
Community Benefits
The following is a summary of priority community benefits:

1. CFP has entered into a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) with the Contra Costa Building and Construction Trades for all project construction. The Term Sheet also has provisions for local hiring priorities, training programs and opportunities for local businesses.

2. A commitment ensuring at least 50% of the market-rate residential units will be offered to third party builders not affiliated with CFP.

3. Implementation of the Legally Binding Agreements regarding the provision of housing for the homeless and land for future Food Bank expansion.

4. Contribution of land (4 acres in Phase 1) for a future Veterans Hall.

5. Provision of an Affordable Housing Goal of 25% including:
a. Balanced delivery of building pads and infrastructure at an estimated value of $187 million through all 5 phases to provide the opportunity for 3,020 affordable units for low income households (80% or below Area Median Income). b. Contribution of $50 million towards Affordable Housing projects – ($10 million per Phase).
c. Contribution of 879 Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADU) incorporated into Market Rate Units with regulatory agreements regarding affordability. d. Partnership with Related California and non-profits to promote successful implementation of the affordable housing strategy.

6. Provision of 856.6 acres of Parks, Recreations and Trails delivered by phase.

7. Contribution $100 million towards the Tournament Sports Park - $5 million in Phase 1 and $95 million in Phases 2-4.

8. Contribution $65 million towards a Campus District Community Center/Library in Phases 2 & 3.

9. Provision of expedited repayment of City Loans to the LRA of approximately $15 million in Phases 1 & 2.

10. Provision of an interim Delta-DeAnza trail connection in Phase 1.

11. Restoration of Mount Diablo Creek Corridor and trail creation over 5 phases, consistent with adjacent phased development.

Attachment 1

Page 6 of 28 ends

444 Spear Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94 105 Page 1 of 1
February 24, 2023
Concord City Council
C/O Guy Bjerke
Director, Economic Development & Base Reuse
City of Conco
rd
1950 Parkside Drive
Concord, CA 94519
Re: Concord Naval Weapons Station Statement of Interest Dear Members of the City Council,
On June 18, 2021, City Ventures, LLC submitted a Qualified Response to the City of Concord’s RFQ (Concord Nava
l Weapons Station Concord Reuse Project Area Plan Implementation Request for Master Developer Qualifications, published April 16, 2021), which was reviewed by City Council at its Special Meeting of August 21, 2021. Please consider this letter a formal renewal of our interest in serving as the City’s Master Developer for the Concord Naval Weapons Station Concord Reuse Project.

City Ventures is a leader in publi
c‐private partnerships to redevelop land throughout California. We are the leading solar all‐electric developer and builder in the state with a proven track record of building inclusive, environmentally friendly masterplan, housing, and mixed‐use projects. City Ventures is committed to its Community Workforce Agreemen t with the Contra Costa County Building Trades. We are committed to transparency, engagement, and inclusivity. We have engaged with, and continue to work with, local and regional stakeholders as we begin to undertake this important project.

We look forward to your consideration of our continued commitment to become your partner.

Sincerely,

Philip Kerr
CEO – City Ventures
Attachment 2

Page 7 of 28 ends

From: D'Marco Anthony <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 1:00 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Item 8a public comment

Dear Concord City Council,

I wanted to express concern about possible unintended consequences if there is a local hire requirement for the CNWS project. I obviously support local hire, and having a project that will benefit our local community in many ways. However, if the threshold is so high, that it would be nearly impossible for future developers to avoid hiring workers from problematic local companies (e.g. Seeno/Discovery), this could be a huge problem. The public already made it clear that we reject Seeno, so we need to make sure that Discovery is not part of this project (whether it be direct or indirect).

I also want to reiterate my opposition to a veterans hall being *required* for a term sheet. It is not appropriate to make a veterans hall a mandatory requirement, especially since the project is supposed to be community driven. Instead, I would like to offer a museum of some sort as a possible alternative. This would provide an educational benefit, given the history of the the naval base, and *everyone* in the community could benefit from it. It would also be less politically contentious than a veterans hall. At the very least, the future master developers should have the ability to explore with the community which would be a better fit.

Thanks,
D’Marco J. Anthony

Agenda Item No. 8.a
Benched Correspondence
March 14, 2023

Page 8 of 28 ends

Good evening Mayor and City Council, my name Is Jordon Bluestein, I live in Walnut Creek.

I’m a frequent bicyclist in Contra Costa County and beyond. I volunteer at BikeConcord. I’m representing several area cyclists who helped with this proposal to improve safety at the Willow Pass Road bridge.

We’re proposing interim safety improvements for the area on the east side of Willow Pass Road leading to the Willow Pass bridge from Concord and north to the De Anza trail. In addition to improved safety, this is a community recreation and transit benefit.

Please check the attached images. On the eastside of the bridge, there’s unimproved roadway off Willow Pass Rd., into, and through the GoMentum Station area, then north to the Highway 4 overpass.

The shoulder on Willow Pass Rd. is wide enough for a 2 way bicycle/pedestrian path to and from the start of the De Anza trail. This proposal could extend the DeAnza trail onto Willow Pass Rd., which has plans for improvement.

We’d like to have the locked gates at the GoMentum Station open to cyclists/pedestrians. And, improve the shoulder for bicycle/pedestrian access.

The property belongs to the U.S. Navy. Guy Bjerke, Base Reuse Director, says no interim changes can be made until after the land is transferred to the City of Concord. We think something can be done sooner.

Please consider expediting this implementation for improved transit and recreational user safety.

Risky alternate routes are the Highway 4 shoulder from Port Chicago to Willow Pass Rd. and Bailey Rd.

Our proposal would fit longer-term plans to improve Willow Pass Rd. and Contra Costa Canal trail inside the weapons station.

Please let me know if you have questions, comments, or suggestions for next steps.

Thanks in advance for your consideration.

Jordon Bluestein
Walnut Creek
Email: [email protected]

Page 9 of 28 ends

From: Doug Leich <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 9:31 AM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Comment on March 14 City Council meeting agenda item 8.A

Dear Concord City Council / Local Reuse Authority,
As a resident of Contra Costa County and a member of East Bay Housing Organizations (EBHO), I fully support EBHO's March 10, 2023 letter to you, "RE: Comments on Restart Process for Concord Naval Weapons Station Reuse Project."

In particular, before proceeding with a new RFQ, I ask you to consider alternative development structures, especially the possibility of a public management entity instead of a private master developer.
• The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has already indicated both the availability of funding for and their interest in working with the City to develop a Specific Plan for the Reuse Area.
• Other actors at the state, regional, and federal level could be partners that would help the project be developed more quickly and with all of the promised community benefits. • This alternative would follow the model used in many other advanced countries and currently being used successfully by San Francisco to build over eight thousand homes on Treasure Island via the Treasure Island Development Authority. • At the very least, the City should do its due diligence by gathering information about these other options and assessing their feasibility in another study session before directing staff to launch a new RFQ.

Using the same method of RFQ and private master developer that has failed twice now puts the project at greater risk of delay and endangers crucial community benefits. If this process is used in spite of these risks, the City should make clear that certain baseline requirements must be met:
• The 25% affordable unit requirement must be fulfilled without reliance on JADUs and should receive significant developer support over that proposed by Concord First Partners.
• The portion of the project closest to the North Concord BART Station must be prioritized in the first phase of development. This was partially recognized by Lennar in their original proposal and should be a firm requirement going forward. • The Developer must undertake meaningful stakeholder engagement throughout the process to draft a new Term Sheet, Specific Plan, and any other project plans. • The Developer must honor all legally binding commitments made to the Homeless Collaborative.

Thank you for considering my comments.
~~~~~~~~
Douglas Leich
[email protected]

Page 10 of 28 ends

From: Bruce 0le Ohlson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 11:31 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Public comment on Item 8a

Please read this public comment at the appropriate time during the consideration of Item 8a. Thank you.

"Good evening, Mayor and City Council persons. I am Bruce Ohlson, an individual who regularly uses a bicycle for transportation between Pittsburg and Concord.

Thank you to everyone who is working to obtain safe access between the northern portion of Concord and the western portion of Bay Point via the Delta de Anza Regional Trail. This trail currently ends at the edge of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station at the end of Evora Road near the Willow Pass Road freeway interchange.

All three of the currently existing routes are unacceptable:
• Bailey Road is a death trap for anyone not in an automobile because of the narrow lanes, absence of shoulders, and short-sight-distance curves.
•
• Willow Pass Road has the World-War-Two-era bridge, which is a death trap for anyone not in an automobile because it has narrow traffic lanes and is without shoulders or a s idewalk.
•
• Eight-lane Highway 4 between the Port Chicago Highway interchange and the Willow Pass Road interchange permits bicyclists on the shoulders. This is the safest option we have. Really? A FREEWAY?
Please make the removal of the old and undoubtedly not structurally or seismically up-to-date bridge on Willow Pass Road a high priority when constructing infrastructure prior to the development of the inland portion of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station. In the meantime, we could easily and inexpensively build gates into the fences and allow bicyclists to go around this bridge.

Thank you for providing infrastructure useable by all modes of transportation. Motorists have a complete network that leads everywhere in the city, the county, the state, and the nation. Bicyclists want accommodation on only one short segment of roadway that currently goes over an outdated bridge."

Thank you.

A
ll best wishes,

~0le

Bruce "0le" Ohlson
Bike East Bay
Delta Pedalers Bicycle Club
Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle Advisory Committee
CCTA Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee
Caltrans District 4 Bicycle Advisory Committee
TRANSPLAN appointee to Highway 4 Integrated Corridor Management Study

Page 11 of 28 ends

From: Jan Warren <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 1:29 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: City of Concord Council Meeting March 14, 2023, agenda item 8a Direction for Staff for development of CNWS

Comments on City of Concord City Council
March 14, 2023, Agenda item 8a, master developer CNWS

Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
The Multifaith Action Coalition Housing and Shelter Task Force has followed the CNWS development since its inception. Since the past two Master Developers, Lennar and Concord First Partners have not been successful partnerships with the City of Concord; the ask is to consider another process.

It is my understanding that the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has already indicated both the availability of funding for, and their interest in working with the City to develop a Specific Plan for the Reuse Area. I ask you to consider this avenue and others at the State, Regional, or Federal level who could partner with the City of Concord and expedite the project and support the community benefits.

At the least, consider this possibility before directing staff to launch a new RFQ. We know the difficulties incurred by the former developers and costs have only gone up. There are a limited number of developers who have the resources and expertise to manage such a development. We support the development not being piecemealed.

The commitment to affordable housing for the homeless and lower-income must be met by something other than JADUs. Best wishes for your continued endeavors for Concord to be offer leadership in the need for regional housing.

Jan Warren
Chair, Multifaith Action Coalition Housing and Shelter Task Force

Page 12 of 28 ends

-----Original Message-----
From: Hope Johnson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 1:40 PM
To: Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; City Clerk <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Nakamura, Laura <[email protected]>
Cc: Bjerke, Guy <[email protected]>; Barone, Valerie <[email protected]> Subject: CNWS developer selection process Item 8a at 3/14/23 Council meeting

Dear Concord City Council:

This email is regarding the CNWS master developer selection process study session on your agenda this evening (Item 8a). Please be advised that I have copied some parties on this email who may be interested using blind cc to keep emails private.

THIRD PARTY INTERVENTION

Concord needs third party intervention. The only options for a reasonable chance at competent and unbiased master developer selection are:

1. Replace City Manager Valerie Barone and/or Redevelopment Director Guy Bjerke. They are unfortunately either unable to rise to the level of management required for this project or are too entrenched in local politics to avoid allowing the usual corrupt suspects to run the selection. What other entity would allow the same management to start a third time on a twice failed $6B project that involved two of the most criminal developers that could be selected?

2. Require a third party consultant or panel to manage the RFQ process. Meaning to completely manage it, no control at all by anyone employed at the City of Concord or elected to its public offices. This would be similar to when Catellus and Lennar were the last two competitors with one very important change:
that the third party consultant or panel would prepare the RFQ and then a developer recommendation report to Council without allowing any interference whatsoever from the City Manager, Councilmembers, or Redevelopment Director. City staff could prepare rebuttals to the consultant or panel RFQ and recommendation if needed but the RFQ and recommendation must be required to be delivered as written by the third party to council at public meetings. Remember, it was the City Manager and then Councilmember Grayson who orchestrated changing the recommendations made by the previous experts to pave the way for Lennar to become the developer (the expert panel had recommended Catellus).

There is no otherway. The status quo must be out of the process.

PROCESS SUGGESTIONS

1. No hybrid RFQ. The hybrid approach is ridiculous and should not ever be used again. It is too vague, allowing for interference by special interests and staff out of public view. This approach allowed Seeno to hide the ball on changes it knew it needed to make to its initial proposal until it thought Concord was

Page 13 of 28 ends

too far into the Exclusive Negotiating process to back out (adding 3000 housing units, using junior units toward affordable housing count, etc.). No reasonable management team would suggest using this again, further supporting the points made in the above sections 1 and 2.

2. Developers should submit draft term sheets with their RFQ responses. Council and the public need this to evaluate what each developer assesses is needed to start the project. Without draft term sheets, Council is selecting a developer based on nothing in writing. This can only lead to further surprise changes as well as pave the way for special interests and staff to interfere in the selection process.

3. RFQ process must lead to at least two developers competing at the same time to secure the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement at a public city Council meeting. This allows each developer to try to sweeten its deal as Council hears from both developers. It allows Council to ask questions of each developer on the spot to find out if what they are being told must happen at the CNWS is true or the likely outcome.Tentative expectations for a term sheet are needed to decide which developer is best suited to exclusively negotiate further. This is how the initial process was intended to proceed until the City Manager and then Councilmember Grayson interfered in the process. The Exclusive Negotiating process is not intended to create a draft term sheet without competition; it is intended to adjust and improve upon an existing draft term sheet for Concord to get its best deal.

4. RFQ responses should be submitted to a third party consultant or panel, not to City Staff. As previously stated, this is the only way to prevent the continued biased approach we have now seen multiple times.

5. Developers should not be required to sign a PLA before submitting proposals. If Council wants to require a PLA, which it appears to be in agreement with each other to do, developers can sign and submit with their RFQ responses an acknowledgement that they will be required to sign a PLA before being awarded the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement. Their RFQ responses should include confirmation that their draft term sheets incorporate a PLA, and they should be able to explain how it is incorporated during a public city Council meeting in order to secure the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement. The construction trades should not be the point of first contact with developers with respect to an RFQ response, the City of Concord is the point of first contact. Otherwise, developers may choose to enter into an unenforceable PLA as Seeno appears to have done or the construction trades could choose to eliminate a qualified developer by refusing to coordinate with them. Not requiring a PLA be signed before submission of a response to the RFQ does not and will not prevent a PLA from being secured; Council always remains in control of requiring a PLA.

6. The RFQ should require disclosure of information related to the cleaning of contamination. CNWS is a super fund site. Developers should be required to include in responses their experience with developing contaminated sites and to disclose any related complaints they have received or lawsuits against them regarding cleanup. The responses should include written agreement to keep Council and the public informed of all cleanup related activities at public Council meetings on a set schedule.

7. No salary payments to city staff or the Redevelopment Director without public disclosure.The RFQ should make it clear that Council and the public will be provided with detailed information at public meetings on how much the developer is paying any city staff. There should be a set time for periodic disclosure to Council at a public meeting of this information. In addition, if no draft term sheet is required with the RFQ response, the developer selected for the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement should not be paying any salary to anyone employed at the City of Concord. It is an open and obvious conflict of

Page 14 of 28 ends

interest for the Redevelopment Director or any city staff to be paid by a developer with whom the staff person is supposed to be negotiating a term sheet with the best deal for Concord. No draft term sheet up front, no paid salaries from the developer.

8. RFQ should require developers to provide periodic itemized spreadsheets of expenses paid by Concord. Each developer should agree that it will keep track of any expenses it asks Concord to cover related to the project. City staff should also keep track of detailed expenses paid and each itemized list should be presented to Council at a public meeting on an ongoing and pre-determined periodic basis.

Thank you for yourconsideration.

Hope Johnson
Concord Resident

Page 15 of 28 ends

Study Session:

Term Sheet Parameters &
Master Developer Selection Method

GUY BJERKE, DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

AND BASE REUSE
MARCH 14, 2023
1

Page 16 of 28 ends

Today’s Agenda

1. S taff Presentation

2. City Council Questions

3. Public Comment

4. Council Consideration
2

Page 17 of 28 ends

Staff Presentation

1. Master Developer Selection Summary

2. Feedback on Term Sheet Considerations
◦ Survey/Interviews with Developers/Stakeholders and Community Groups

3. Proposed Master Developer Selection Method

4. Return with information and draft Hybrid RFQ
for Council consideration in la te April/early May.
3

Page 18 of 28 ends

Master Developer Selection Summary
2006 – B ase Closure
2007 - 2009 – C ommunity/Regional Outreach
2010 – R euse Plan – Clustered Villages with EIR
2012 – A rea Plan adopted with EIR amendments
2014 - 2016 – M aster Developer Selection #1 – ENA/Term Sheet 2017 – 2019 – D rafting of Specific Plan
March 2020 – E NA Expiration
4

Page 19 of 28 ends

Master Developer Selection Summary
(continued)
2020 – P roject Reset
◦ Discussion with developers/stakeholders on project success factors 2021 – M aster Developer Selection #2
◦ Project Labor Agreement > Streamlined RFQ for entire EDC ◦ RFQ issued in April 2021
◦ Three respondents in June 2021
◦ August 2021 – C ouncil votes 3 for CFP, 2 for Brookfield ◦ October 2021 – C ouncil votes 5-0 to enter ENA with CFP 5

Page 20 of 28 ends

Master Developer Selection Summary
(continued)
2022 – M aster Developer Selection #2
◦ January 2022 – L RA staff and CFP start Term Sheet negotiations ◦ May 2022 – C ouncil votes 4-1 to extend ENA to January 31, 2023 ◦ June - N ovember 2022 – Term Sheet negotiations
◦ November 30, 2022 – T erm Sheet released for public consideration ◦ December 1 and 15, 2022 – C ommunity Presentations
◦ Agency/Stakeholder/Organization Briefings
January 7, 2023/January 28, 2023 – C ity Council considers Term Sheet and votes 3-2 to reject and end ENA with CFP . 6

Page 21 of 28 ends

Term Sheet Considerations
•Staff is seeking feedback from Council on the following T
erm Sheet Considerations and the recommended Master
Developer Selection method.
•Staff will survey the thinking of developers, stakeholders, a
nd the broader community on these questions and return
with the results and a proposed Hybrid RFQ that has
considered all feedback and lessons learned from previous efforts.
7

Page 22 of 28 ends

Term Sheet Considerations

1. Project Labor Agreement requirement?
◦ a. When? Prior to selection or after?
◦ b. S hould PLA be disclosed to public?
◦ c. Substitute PLA disclosure with financial impact analysis?

2. Changes to Area Plan to enhance financial feasibility? ◦ a. Is an increase to the residential unit cap acceptable? ◦ b. If unit cap is increased, how should Affordable Housing be a
ddressed to respond to the increase?
◦ c. What is a realistic green frame buffer north of Willow Pass Rd.? 8

Page 23 of 28 ends

Term Sheet Considerations
(continued)

3. Should the project’s first phase be required to include Transit Oriented Development around North Concord BART? ◦ If yes, under what parameters?

4. Should the community benefits in the latest (CFP) Term Sheet be the basis for the next Term Sheet, subject to
f
inancial feasibility? (See Staff Report Attachment 1)

5. Should the LRA require enhanced and regular reporting from the master developer on topics that impact the public- pr
ivate partnership?
9

Page 24 of 28 ends

Term Sheet Considerations
(continued)

6. Should the Specific Plan and CEQA (EIR) documents
include the North Concord BART Station property?
10

Page 25 of 28 ends

Proposed Selection Method
Hybrid Request for Qualifications (RFQ)
•An open, hybrid RFQ will seek to understand each teams q
ualifications and answers to key questions (similar to the April 2021 Hybrid RFQ).
•This method creates an equal playing field, is both fair and f
ast, and enables the LRA to make significant progress
toward entitlements in the next six to nine months.
•Proposed Hybrid RFQ and consideration timeline will return t
o Council in late April/early May.
11

Page 26 of 28 ends

Questions?
12

Page 27 of 28 ends

Page 28 of 28 ends

Staff Report
Date: March 14, 2023
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Reviewed by: Kevin Marstall, PE, Director of Community Development Mindy Gentry, Planning Manager
Prepared by: Aaron Sage, Principal Planner
[email protected]
(925) 671-3465
Subject: Considering adoption of a Resolution: (1) adopting the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update (PL23013 – GP) (“2023-2031 HEU”); (2) finding the 2023-2031 HEU exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption; (3) finding the 2023-2031 HEU substantially complies with Government Code section 65580 et seq. (“Housing Element Law”); (4) approving a General Plan Amendment repealing the 2014-2022 Housing Element and adopting the 2023-2031 HEU; (5) authorizing the City Manager or designee to make changes to the 2023-2031 HEU to achieve internal consistency or address non-
substantive changes or amendments requested by the
Department of Housing and Community Development to certify the 2023-2031 HEU , and (6) making other related findings and delegations as appropriate.

CEQA: Exempt under CEQA Guidelines 15061(b)(3) (Common
Sense Exemption); Initial Study/Negative Declaration.

Report in Brief
Pursuant to state law, every city and county in California must adopt a housing element as part of its general plan. The housing element contains policies and programs to address the housing needs of all economic segments of the community over an eight- year planning cycle, which for Bay Area jurisdictions covers the period 2023 to 2031

9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a9.a

Page 1 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
(also known as the “sixth cycle”). State law requires Bay Area jurisdictions to adopt updated housing elements for the sixth cycle and submit them to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for certification by January 31, 2023, while providing a 120-day “grace period” during which HCD will not take enforcement action against jurisdictions that fail to meet this deadline.

On May 27, 2022, the City of Concord (City) released the first public draft of its Housing Element Update (HEU) for a 30-day public review period. On June 21, 2022, the City Council (Council) considered this draft, received public comments, and provided input for a revised draft to be submitted to HCD. On August 8, 2022, the City released the revised draft for a 7-day public review period, and on August 16, 2022, the City submitted this draft to HCD with responses to public comments received during the initial 30-day review period. On November 14, 2022, HCD provided a letter with comments on the revised draft HEU (Attachment 2). On January 17, 20231, the Council considered HCD’s comments and provided input on further revisions to address these comments, which have been incorporated into the attached final draft HEU (Attachment 1, Exhibit B). On February 27, 2023 the Planning Commission considered the final draft HEU and recommended its adoption by Council. After adoption, staff will submit the HEU to HCD for certification, the final step in the HEU process.

Recommended Action
Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1): (1) adopting the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update (PL23013 – GP) (“2023-2031 HEU”); (2) finding the 2023-2031 HEU exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption; (3) finding the 2023-2031 HEU substantially complies with Government Code section 65580 et seq. (“Housing Element Law”); (4) approving a General Plan Amendment repealing the 2014-2022 Housing Element and adopting the 2023-2031 HEU; (5) authorizing the City Manager or designee to make changes to the 2023-2031 HEU to achieve internal consistency or address non-substantive changes or amendments requested by the Department of Housing and Community Development to certify the 2023-2031 HEU; and (6) and making other related findings and delegations as appropriate.

Background
Current Housing Element
On January 6, 2015, the Council adopted the City’s 2014 - 2022 Housing Element, which HCD certified on January 20, 2015.2
Initial Council Direction
1 The discussion on the HEU was continued from the January 10, 2023 meeting where the City Council heard a presentation from staff and received public comment. The public comment period was closed at the January 10 meeting.
2 Available at: https://www.cityofconcord.org/DocumentCenter/View/1170/Housing-Element-Update--- Final-11-07-2014-PDF

Page 2 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
On June 22, 2021, staff provided Council with an overview of the Housing Element Update (HEU), and Council accepted public comments and provided direction to staff on the HEU advisory process and community engagement strategy. Specifically, Council:
 Designated the Housing and Economic Development Council Committee (HED Chair McGallian, member Aliano) as the lead advisory body for the HEU, with the responsibility to review and comment on all public documents in the Housing Element process, provide a dedicated forum for public testimony, discuss key policy issues, and make recommendations to the Council prior to final adoption.  Directed staff to consult with a variety of community-based organizations (CBOs) and other stakeholder groups regarding community engagement strategies for the HEU, and to consider how to incorporate this input into the HEU’s Community Engagement Plan.

Community Engagement Process
An extensive and inclusive community engagement process is essential to a successful HEU and is required by state law.3 A detailed Community Engagement Summary is provided in Appendix F of the attached HEU, and Appendix H of the HEU provides all community comments on the previous draft received during the 30-day public review periods, along with responses to each comment, and any revisions made to address the comment. Attachment 3 provides all comment letters not included in Appendix H. The engagement process was developed to be a multipronged and layered approach to reach as many different segments of the community as possible. As a result, the HEU project team had nearly 1,500 contacts with individual community members and worked with over 25 community groups through 14 events (both virtual and in-person) and an online survey. The following section summarizes key steps in the HEU community engagement process, and major themes expressed by participants.  Initial Council and Stakeholder Input
On July 21 and 22, 2021, to implement Council’s direction, staff held eight one- hour “listening sessions” with representatives from 25 CBOs, business groups, and other key stakeholders to gather input on the HEU engagement process. On August 24, 2021, staff presented a Community Engagement Plan (“Plan”) incorporating this input to Council, and Council approved the Plan along with the consultant task order for the HEU.
 “Town Hall” Meetings
On October 16 and 19, 2021, the project team held two “town hall” meetings to introduce the community to the HEU process and obtain initial, high-level input.

Approximately 17 community members participated in the in-person event on October 16, and the top priorities identified were senior housing, ensuring that new housing fits within the community’s physical character, and preventing 3 Govt. Code § 65583(c)(9).

Page 3 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
people from losing their homes (displacement). Approximately 25 community members participated in the virtual event on October 19, and the top priorities identified were creating more affordable rental units and housing for unsheltered persons, persons with disabilities, and seniors, and preventing displacement.

On March 15 and 27, 2022, the project team held the second series of “town hall” events, which presented a preliminary inventory of potential housing sites, discussion of fair housing issues, and current City policies and programs that address displacement, and invited the public’s input on these topics. The March 15 event, which was held via Zoom, was attended by 58 persons, and 62 persons attended the March 27 event, which was held in person at Todos Santos Plaza. At the March 15 event, several community members and advocates spoke on their desire for greater tenant protections including rent stabilization, and to locate new affordable housing throughout the City, including upper-income areas.

At the March 27 event, which was an informal open house format, staff spoke with community members from many backgrounds, including four unsheltered persons and several Spanish-speaking persons (a translator was provided).

Attendees included several members of First 5’s Central County Regional Group, an organization which advocates for lower-income Concordians.

On June 4 and 8, 2022, the project team held the third and final series of “town hall” events to present the entire draft HEU, with a focus on the proposed programs. 47 persons attended the June 4 event, which was held as an “open house” format at Todos Santos Plaza, and 14 persons attended the June 8 event, which was held via Zoom. At the June 4 event, the project team had several in-depth conversations with community members, most of whom were new to the process and wanted to better understand housing issues in Concord.

The June 8 event featured a one-hour, open-ended discussion period, during which several community members and advocates spoke on their desire for greater tenant protections. Several speakers also stated that while the HEU identifies displacement as an ongoing issue, it does not contain sufficient actions to address that issue.
 HED Meetings
In its role as the advisory body for the HEU, the HED Committee considered key components of the HEU and received public testimony on three occasions. On February 28, 2022, the HEU project team provided the HED Committee with an overview of the following topics:
(1) policies and programs from the current or fifth cycle Housing Element that are recommended to be continued into the sixth cycle Housing Element; (2) the City’s housing needs for the sixth cycle; and
(3) fair housing issues facing the City in accordance with new state laws regarding Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH).

Page 4 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
Following the project team’s presentation, the HED Committee received public comment from several speakers. Major themes of public comment included the need to consider all available data on displacement issues and loss of affordable housing, including public testimony over the past several years, and the need for the fair housing analysis to be presented early in the HEU process. After public comment, HED Committee members requested that the project team consider all available data on displacement issues, bring forward potential anti-displacement policies as soon as possible, and address potential opportunities for increased home ownership.

On March 21, 2022, the project team provided the HED Committee with an overview of constraints on housing production and the preliminary inventory of sites available for housing development to satisfy the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Following the presentation, the Committee received public comment from several speakers. Several speakers stated that the preliminary inventory resulted in too much concentration of lower income4 housing sites in the western portion of the City (in and near Downtown and the Monument Corridor), and that these sites should be distributed throughout the City, including in more affluent areas to the south and east. One speaker requested several changes to the format of future town hall meetings to better facilitate public participation. After public comment, HED Committee members expressed similar concerns regarding concentration of lower income sites and requested that staff provide the presentation slides further in advance of the next meeting to allow more time for review.

On May 4, 2022, the project team informed the HED Committee that the sites inventory had been revised to reduce the concentration of lower-income sites in the western portion of the City. The project team also provided the Committee with an overview of proposed programs for the HEU, including a rezoning program that would allow for additional opportunities for lower-income sites outside of “low resource” areas5 of Concord (see Attachment 4). Additional 4 In state housing element law, “lower-income” includes the “very-low income” and “low income” categories as defined by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. This term applies to housing that is affordable to households earning 80 percent or less of the area median income (AMI). It does not include housing for “moderate income” households (earning 80-120 percent of AMI) or “above moderate income” households (market-rate housing with no income restrictions). 5 This term comes from the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee’s (TCAC) Opportunity Maps (
https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp), which score all Census tracts in California based on access to various opportunities that are linked to critical life outcomes, such as education, employment, economic development, safe and decent housing, low rates of violent crime, transportation, and recreation. “Low Resource” indicates the lowest-scoring tracts on the Opportunity Maps, while “Highest Resource” indicates the highest-scoring tracts. The northern, central and western portions of Concord are designated as “Low Resource”. Pursuant to AB 686, HCD requires that jurisdictions consider these resource designations in developing their Affirmatively Further Fair Housing analysis and programs.

Page 5 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
discussion of the sites inventory and rezoning program is provided below. Staff also provided an overview of various Council actions around tenant protections since 2016, while noting that Council had chosen not to implement rent stabilization or prohibit evictions without a pre-defined “just cause”. Almost all speakers stated that the proposed programs do not adequately address displacement issues for low-income renters and should include rent stabilization and a prohibition of evictions without “just cause”. Several speakers stated that they appreciate the proposed rezoning program, but that the timeline for this program should be earlier than December 2026.

After public comment, Committee member Aliano stated that:
o He appreciates staff’s presentation and looks forward to discussion by Council at the study session on June 14;
o He has concerns about transportation and parking issues on Monument Boulevard given that he believes public transportation is not a viable option for many residents in this area;
o He appreciates the inclusion of a rezoning program in the proposed programs; and
o His position on furthering tenant protections has not changed, and Council will need to provide direction on this issue on June 14.

After Committee member Aliano’s comments, Chair McGallian stated that:
o He also appreciates staff’s presentation;
o He agrees with Committee member Aliano’s comments about transportation and parking issues on Monument Boulevard; o He appreciates the potential for upzoning in the proposed rezoning program and he believes this is a significant step by the City given that upzoning is typically opposed by residents in most cities; and o He would like to receive further information on any pending legislation regarding investment companies purchasing housing units and/or short- term rental units.6
6 After the HED meeting, staff provided the Committee with information on two pending state bills that would address this issue, AB 2170 and AB 1850. AB 2170 is aimed at “giving more Californians the chance to own a home by giving owner-occupants and public entities a “First Look” at purchasing bank- owned properties, and by prohibiting “bulk sales” of foreclosed homes.” AB 1850 (Ward) which prohibits a city, county, or joint powers authority from acquiring unrestricted, multifamily housing unless the development meets specified criteria, which includes affordability and rental restrictions.

Page 6 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
 Community Survey
To engage with a broader range of community members than would be possible with the above events, the project team also prepared an online survey in both English and Spanish of housing issues. The survey was open from December 15, 2021, through March 31, 2022. Gift cards were offered to encourage greater participation, and a total of 846 participants completed the survey. A detailed discussion of the survey results is available in Appendix F of the HEU. Below are some of the most noteworthy survey results:
o Concord residents selected affordability, proximity to family and friends, and proximity to work (in that order) as their top reasons for choosing to live in Concord.
o Concord residents who took the survey were 75 percent homeowners and 24 percent renters; the remaining 1 percent stated they have “other housing arrangements”.
o About 30 percent of respondents said they have experienced, or are experiencing, homelessness.
o Respondents ranked priorities for new housing in the following order:

1. Locate new housing throughout the City, not just in lower-income areas (selected by 51.4 percent of respondents).

2. Locate new housing near transit, amenities, jobs and services (selected by 49.5 percent of respondents).

3. Prioritize redevelopment of vacant or underutilized commercial properties (selected by 43.5 percent of respondents).

4. Preserve the character of existing lower-density neighborhoods (selected by 34.2 percent of respondents).
o Respondents indicated the following as their greatest concerns regarding displacement:

1. Long-term residents cannot afford to stay in the community.

2. Sudden rent increases.

3. Sudden lease termination.
 Pop-Up Events
The project team has also conducted the following “pop-up” events to provide further opportunities for community engagement:
o Music and Market, Todos Santos Plaza, September 30, 2021 o Farmer’s Market, Todos Santos Plaza, October 12, 2021 o The Veranda, December 11, 2021

Page 7 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
o Concord and North Concord BART Stations, June 13 and 15, 2022, respectively
o Las Montañas Supermarket, June 16, 2022
 Meeting with CBOs
On December 21, 2022, City staff and a facilitator met with representatives of several CBOs who have been highly engaged in the HEU process and have submitted substantial comments on the draft HEU. The purpose of this meeting was to share the remaining steps in the HEU process, seek information on the history of the area formerly identified as a Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Area of Poverty (RECAP), and increase the City’s understanding of the CBOs’ comments on the HEU. A summary of this meeting is provided in Attachment 5.

To ensure accuracy, staff shared a draft of this summary with all participants and made edits based on their corrections.

City Council Input on First Draft HEU
On June 21, 2022, the City Council considered the first draft HEU along with a summary of community and HED input to date, received new public comments, and directed staff to make the following revisions prior to submitting the HEU to HCD:
 To address concerns regarding neighborhood impacts from large residential care facilities, revise Program 2 (Addressing Constraints to Development) to maintain current discretionary permit requirements for such facilities.  To address concerns about lack of parking, remove multi-family parking reductions from Program 16, and limit reductions for religious institutions to the minimum required by state law.
 To address concerns regarding displacement, evaluate best practices and report back to Council regarding a potential Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA) and Community Opportunity to Purchase Act (COPA). This was added to the previous draft HEU as Objective 10.4.
 To address concerns regarding conversion of dwelling units to short-term rentals (e.g. Airbnb’s), evaluate best practices and report Council regarding a potential ordinance to regulate such conversions. This was added to the previous draft HEU as Program 24.
 Revise Program 20 (Tenant Protections) to accelerate the timeline for outreach regarding the City’s new tenant anti-harassment ordinance.  Add a summary of all tenant protection and housing programs and services provided by the City in the past several years. This was added as Section 1.5 in the previous draft HEU.
 Include additional actions (such as working with regional partners) to advocate for funding and legislation that will address the needs of the unsheltered and

Page 8 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
construction of affordable housing. This was included in Program 25 of the previous draft HEU.

The Council also discussed whether a program regarding rent stabilization and just cause eviction should be added to the HEU. A majority of the Council did not support this change.

HCD Comments and Program Revisions
HCD’s November 14, 2022 letter (Attachment 2) provides 63 individual comments, nine of which staff classified as “major” because they would require the Council to authorize new or substantially revised programs. These major comments are summarized below in categories based on HCD’s letter, followed by program revisions to address each comment, for which the Council indicated its support on January 17, 2023. A matrix with comprehensive responses to each comment has been included as Attachment 1, Exhibit C.
 A.1 – Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
 HCD Comment #6 – Local Data and Knowledge and Other Relevant Factors7
Summary: This comment states: “The element should complement federal, state, and regional data with local data and knowledge where appropriate to capture emerging trends and issues, including utilizing knowledge from local and regional advocates, public comments, and service providers.” The opening portion of HCD’s letter also states that “the City should continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available and considering and incorporating comments where appropriate.”8 HCD’s letter also notes that HCD considered comments from several affordable housing advocates that submitted letters on the draft HEU.

Discussion: Government Code Section 65583(c)(10)(A)(ii) requires that the HEU’s AFFH analysis include the “local data and knowledge” cited above, including “racially and or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and affluence, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk.” According to one of the advocate letters HCD considered, “54 out of 65 of the individuals or organizations who submitted comments on the Draft (83%) called for more robust tenant protections, including rent stabilization and just cause 7 HCD, November 14, 2022, Appendix, p. 2.
8 HCD, November 14, 2022, Cover letter, p. 2.

Page 9 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
eviction policies”, and “63% of commenters and 64% of comments [at public hearings on tenant protections prior to the HEU process] were in favor of tenant protections”.9
Based on the above HCD comments, state law, and the preponderance of public comments in favor of additional tenant protections and other revisions described below, staff recommended, and the Council indicated support for, the additional tenant protections discussed below.

Program Revisions: This is a general comment to provide the context and framework of how HCD is considering engagement and public participation throughout the HEU process. No proposed program revisions were directly related to this comment; however, this comment informed and directed the revisions for which the Council indicated its support on January 17, 2023.
 HCD Comment #4 – RECAP (Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Area of Poverty)10
Summary: This comment pertains to a portion of the Monument Corridor (shown in Figure 1 below) which the previous draft HEU identified as a RECAP based on the most recent federal definition and maps.11 As discussed below, this area no longer qualifies as a RECAP, but HCD still requires analysis of previously identified RECAPs. The comment requests further analysis of “quality of life conditions” (e.g., housing, infrastructure, parks, etc.) and “the effectiveness or absence of past strategies related to [creating an] equitable quality of life.”
Discussion: As noted above, the area in Figure 1 no longer qualifies as a RECAP using HUD’s current definition and the most recent Census data.

This area continues to exhibit substantial racial segregation and poverty, even if income levels have risen above the RECAP poverty threshold.

Public testimony and anecdotal evidence indicates that gentrification may be contributing to this change, which raises displacement concerns for HCD. Furthermore, the HEU identifies significant racial and economic disparities throughout Concord, as shown in the TCAC Opportunity Maps 9 Raise the Roof Coalition, August 12, 2022.
10 HCD, November 14, 2022, Appendix, p. 1.
11 The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) defines “racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty” as “geographic area[s] with significant concentrations of poverty and minority concentrations.” Per current HUD guidelines, this designation applies to Census tracts with a non-White population of 50 percent or greater, and a poverty rate exceeding 40 percent or three times the overall poverty rate, whichever is lower. See HUD’s “AFFH Rule Guidebook”, December 31, 2015 for further details. HUD last published RECAP maps in 2018, prior to the 2020 Census.

Page 10 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
(Attachment 4). State AFFH laws require agencies to address such disparities in their HEU programs, including through “Place Based Investments” that target new investment toward low-resource areas.

For these reasons, staff believes that the underlying thrust of HCD’s comment on the RECAP would still apply to the low-resource segregated areas of Concord even if no RECAP analysis were required, and on January 17, 2023, the Council indicated support for additional programs to respond to HCD’s comments on this issue (see below).

Page 11 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
Figure 1. Monument Corridor RECAP Boundary
Program Revisions: The HEU has been updated to note that Concord would not have a RECAP using the most recent Census data. As part of the AFFH analysis in Appendix D, the revised HEU includes additional information on the existing conditions of the former RECAP area. Based on Council’s input on January 17, 2023, the following program revisions have been made to address this comment (see below under HCD Comment #7 for additional programs targeted toward higher resource areas):
 Continue the City’s practice of investing at least 50 percent of its capital improvement budget in racially/ethnically diverse areas of poverty during the first half of the sixth cycle (2023-2027). In addition to this baseline amount, complete a project of at least one million dollars in one of these areas (with priority given to areas of high racial and economic segregation), with a focus on improving safety and mobility (e.g., bikeways, pedestrian improvements, pavement rehabilitation, and safe routes to schools). (Objective

26.3)
 Conduct targeted outreach to inform residents within the City’s racially/ethnically diverse areas of poverty regarding available social services, programs, and available funding. (Objective 8.2)

Page 12 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
 Commit at least 20 percent of the Cannabis Community Benefit Fund to the City’s racially/ethnically diverse areas of poverty, and identify qualifying projects (e.g. workforce development, small business assistance, improving quality of life and economic opportunity, and public improvements, etc.) which would be informed by a community outreach process. (Objective 26.1)  Consult with local businesses12 in the Monument Corridor to spend $150,000 in settlement funds to advance small business
development and economic vitality in the Monument Corridor. (Objective 26.2)
 Seek project partners, and if successful in doing so, apply for Project Homekey funds for acquisition and rehabilitation of an at- risk apartment building and/or a “nuisance” motel in or near a racially/ethnically diverse area of poverty, or other areas in the City, for permanently affordable housing. (Objective 26.4)
 Conduct targeted outreach to residents of racially/ethnically diverse areas of poverty regarding their right to use Housing Choice (i.e.

Section 8) Vouchers (HCVs) in any area of Concord. Conduct outreach to owners of rental properties in moderate- and high- resource areas of Concord with majority white population regarding their obligation to accept HCVs from qualifying applicants. This program would include notification regarding protection for HCVs in Senate Bill (SB) 9 and ADU application materials. (Objective 8.2(d))  HCD Comment #7 – Identified Sites and AFFH13
Summary: This comment requests further analysis to demonstrate the City’s sites inventory will meet the state’s AFFH mandate, which includes “taking meaningful actions … that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.”14 The comment requests analysis of “any isolation of the RHNA by income group and whether the distribution of sites improves or exacerbates conditions. If sites exacerbate conditions, the element should identify further program actions that will be taken to mitigate this (e.g., anti-displacement strategies).”
Other Related HCD Comments: #3, #5, and #58
Discussion: This comment aligns with numerous public comments regarding the lack of lower-income housing opportunities in the more 12 These “local businesses” are those named in the Settlement Agreement with Cardenas. 13 HCD, November 14, 2022, Appendix, p. 2.
14 HCD AFFH Guidance, April 2021, p. 9.

Page 13 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
affluent areas of the City, as well as potential displacement impacts from the construction of moderate- and above-moderate income housing in the lower-resource areas of the City. Program 8 of the draft HEU already committed the City to rezoning properties outside of Concord’s lower- resource areas by 2026. However, the attached HEU modifies this program with more robust and concrete goals to satisfy this comment and obtain HCD certification. In addition, to address continued economic pressures on lower-income tenants, which are driven in part by increasing rents, a lack of affordable housing, and construction of moderate- and above-moderate income housing in the immediate vicinity, the attached HEU includes programs to adopt rent stabilization and just cause for eviction ordinances.

Program Revisions: The revised HEU includes further analysis regarding this issue. Based on Council’s input on January 17, 2023, the following program revisions have been made to address this comment:
 Revisions to the rezoning program in Program 8 (Objective 8.6) that addresses housing opportunities in higher resource areas as follows:
o Added objective metrics of 20 acres, 60 units per acre, and at least 1,000 total units on sites meeting the state’s criteria for lower-income RHNA sites.
o Directly target moderate- and high-resource areas with majority white population for this rezoning, using not only Tax Credit Allocation Committee resource areas, but also other segregation indices such as the Equity Atlas15 and the state’s Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (see maps in Attachment 6). Seek community input regarding this effort. o Accelerated timeline for completion of rezoning to 2024 rather than 2026. This change will require delaying code amendments to implement SB 9 and SB 35; however, the
City is already following these state statutes without a local ordinance, and would continue to do so.
o Within six months following the completion of rezoning, work with property owners to proactively identify prime sites, notify affordable housing developers of these sites, and provide technical assistance and priority processing for affordable projects without adding an additional “priority processing” charge. Include site information in the Affordable Housing Toolkit (Program 3).
15 PolicyLink/USC Equity Research Institute, National Equity Atlas, www.nationalequityatlas.org.

Page 14 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
 Revised Program 9 (Middle Housing) to specify that an ADU and a JADU will be allowed in addition to the two conventional dwelling units provided for by SB 9 within a single-family residential district.16  Revised Objective 10.4 (evaluation of TOPA/COPA programs) to include consideration of potential funding sources, through identification of partner organizations/agencies, to facilitate lower- income tenants’ usage of this program, if adopted.
 Pursue additional funding for preservation and production of affordable housing, including, but not limited to, annual applications to available state and regional funding programs (see Objectives

8.4, 8.5, and 26.4).
 Develop regulations to allow deed-restricted affordable cottages/tiny homes and other types of affordable housing on religious properties by 2024. (Objective 16.1)
 Develop regulations to allow public educational agencies (e.g., Mount Diablo Unified School District) to construct affordable housing on their properties.(Objective 4.7)
 Adopt a rent stabilization ordinance exceeding the tenant protections of state law (AB 1482) by December 2023, or earlier if possible.(Objective 20.6)
 Adopt a just cause eviction ordinance by December 2023, or earlier if possible. (Objective 20.6)
16 With the passage of SB 9, which provides for construction of two residential units per lot, state law requires cities to allow up to four total units, which could include primary residential units, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), and/or junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) on a single-family residential zoned lot. SB 9 also allows for ministerial lot splits of a single-family residential zoned lot; however, a jurisdiction processing a qualifying SB 9 lot split is not required to allow more than two total units (primary, ADU, or JADU) per lot subdivided using SB 9. While some cities have adopted SB 9 implementing ordinances to enforce this limitation authorized by Government Code section 66411.7(j), SB 9 provides cities the flexibility to allow up to four total units (two primary residential, one ADU, and one JADU) on each SB 9 subdivided lot by allowing SB 9 lots splits to be used in combination with the other provisions of SB 9 as well as ADU and JADU laws. Adopting a more expansive utilization of SB 9 could increase the number of allowed units on a single-family residentially zoned property. The implementation of this program would provide increased opportunities to affirmatively further fair housing by increasing the density and additional housing opportunities in single-family residential districts.

Page 15 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
 A.3 – Sites Inventory
 HCD Comment #27 – Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types:

Emergency Shelters17
Summary: This comment requests additional analysis to demonstrate that the City’s emergency shelter regulations and development standards are not a constraint on the development of such shelters. The focus of the comment is on distancing and proximity to transit requirements as well as to clarify that shelters are allowed by right. The comment states that the HEU “must analyze distancing requirements for emergency shelters such as distance from schools, libraries, residential zones and requirements that emergency shelters must be located on transit routes, and the various facility requirements.” The comment further states that the HEU “must clarify if emergency shelters are allowed by right (without discretion) in the identified zones i.e., OBP [Office Business Park], IBP [Industrial Business Park], and IMX [Industrial Mixed-Use].”
Discussion: Under Program 22, the previous draft HEU already committed to amending the Development Code to clarify that emergency shelters are not subject to the Design and Site Review process, to ensure a by-right process in conformance with AB 139. However, HCD’s request for additional analysis indicates they are seeking an additional program to simplify the City’s emergency shelter regulations.

It should also be noted that the state recently adopted new requirements for emergency shelters under AB 2339. As discussed further in Attachment 7, these requirements include that zoning districts allowing shelters without a discretionary permit must allow residential uses, and that agencies must provide additional analysis of potential shelter sites.

These new requirements would only apply to drafts of the City’s HEU that are submitted to HCD on or after April 1, 2023. However, the City would still have the option to comply with these requirements when implementing the emergency shelter amendments already proposed in the HEU. 17 “Emergency shelters” means housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person. This includes facilities that provide temporary housing, meals, showers, and other related services to persons who are homeless and where on-site supervision is provided whenever the shelter is occupied, operated by a public or nonprofit agency. Specialized programs and services related to the needs of the residents may also be provided.

This classification does not include emergency shelters set up for disaster relief which are allowed in any zoning district or group homes that provide accommodations for a longer term.

Page 16 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
Program Revisions: The revised HEU includes further analysis regarding this issue. Based on Council’s input on January 17, 2023, the following program revisions have been made to address this comment:
 Amend and simplify the emergency shelter regulations, including distancing and transit access requirements, maximum bed count, and other facility requirements.(Objective 22.6)
 A.4 – Government Constraints
 HCD Comment #33 – Local Processing and Permit Procedures18 Summary: The City’s Development Code requires a Use Permit for multi- family housing in the Commercial Office (CO), Commercial Mixed Use (CMX), Downtown Mixed Use (DMX), Downtown Pedestrian (PD), and Neighborhood Commercial (NC) districts (see zoning map in Attachment 8). This comment asks the City to identify the required findings in these districts and “address impacts on housing cost, supply, timing and approval certainty.” Notably, the comment further states that “subjecting multifamily housing to [a Use Permit] in zones where multifamily housing is already allowed is generally considered a constraint.” Other Related HCD Comments: #32
Discussion: Because the comment already indicates that HCD considers the Use Permit requirement to be a constraint, it is likely that the City will need to modify this requirement to obtain certification of the HEU. The existing Use Permit requirement allows the City the opportunity to ensure there are a blend of uses, including adequate commercial space to promote active street frontages and economic vitality. Staff recommends this issue be addressed through the code amendments listed below.

Program Revisions: The revised HEU includes further discussion regarding the Use Permit findings for multi-family housing in commercial districts. Based on Council’s input on January 17, 2023, the following program revisions have been made to address this comment:
 Amend the Development Code to allow multi-family housing by right in the CO, CMX, DMX, DP, and NC districts when objective standards are met. Develop minimum standards for commercial space in these districts (including for mixed-use projects), with an exception process for non-compliant projects. (Objective 15.2) 18 HCD, November 14, 2022, Appendix, p. 7.

Page 17 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
 HCD Comment #34 – Design Review19
Summary: “Analyze the [Design Review] approval timelines, procedures and decision-making criteria for potential constraints on housing supply, affordability, and timing. Demonstrate this process is not a constraint or include a program to address, as appropriate.”
Other Related HCD Comments: #32
Discussion: This is a frequent comment from HCD and usually culminates in a requirement to eliminate discretionary Design Review procedures for multi-family housing developments. The City is already developing objective design standards for such projects, which would facilitate a ministerial Design Review process.

Program Revisions: The revised HEU includes further discussion regarding the City’s Design and Site Review process. Based on Council’s input on January 17, 2023, the following program revisions have been made to address this comment:
 Amend the Development Code’s Design and Site Review
procedures to require staff-level ministerial review for multi-family housing projects, utilizing only objective design standards. (Objective 15.2)
 HCD Comment #40 – Housing for Persons with Disabilities: Group Housing Parking20
Summary: Group housing is “a facility that provides shared living quarters with shared kitchen and bathroom facilities,” such as rooming and boardinghouses and dormitories. The Development Code requires one parking space per bed or bedroom for a group housing project, and two to four spaces for single-family dwellings, depending on the number of bedrooms. Group housing projects must also provide guest parking, which is not required for single-family dwellings.

HCD’s comment states that the above parking “requirements are a constraint on providing housing for persons with disabilities and requires [sic] more parking spaces than other similar uses in these zones (i.e., single family residences). The element must analyze this requirement and include a program to address the constraint.”
19 HCD, November 14, 2022, Appendix, p. 7.
20 HCD, November 14, 2022, Appendix, p. 8.

Page 18 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
Other Related HCD Comments: #32
Discussion: This housing type is an important source of affordable housing, particularly for persons with disabilities. Because the comment already indicates that HCD considers the current parking requirement to be a constraint, it is likely that the City will need to modify this requirement to obtain certification of the HEU.

Program Revisions: The revised HEU includes further discussion regarding the group housing parking requirement. Based on Council’s input on January 17, 2023, the following program revisions have been made to address this comment:
 Amend the Development Code to reduce the amount of parking required for group housing uses. (Objective 16.2)
 HCD Comment #41 – Housing for Persons with Disabilities: Group Homes/Residential Care Facilities21
Summary: Large Residential Care Facilities (a.k.a. “group homes”) are single-family dwellings licensed by a federal or state agency to provide 24- hour nonmedical care, supervision etc. to seven or more unrelated adults or others with special needs. The Development Code requires discretionary approval for all such facilities. HCD’s comment requests analysis of this requirement “as a potential constraint on housing for persons with disabilities, and [addition of] a program to ensure zoning permits group homes objectively with approval certainty.” Discussion: As noted earlier, the previous draft HEU reviewed by Council included a program to allow this use by right, but Council provided direction to remove this program. Based on the above comment, it is likely that the City will need to revise the approval process for this use to obtain HCD certification. HCD typically requires that any discretionary permits for this use are subject only to objective criteria, in order to provide greater certainty to project applicants.

Proposed Program Revisions: The revised HEU includes further analysis regarding the approval process for Large Residential Care Facilities.

Based on Council’s input on January 17, 2023, the following program revisions have been made to address this comment:
21 HCD, November 14, 2022, Appendix, p. 8.

Page 19 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
 Amend the Development Code to require only objective criteria for Large Residential Care Facilities. Consider adopting new objective standards to address potential impacts of such facilities on surrounding uses, consistent with state law. (Objective 2.5) Planning Commission Recommendation
As noted earlier, on February 27, 2023 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the final draft HEU. One member of the public, a representative of East Bay Housing Organizations (“EBHO”), spoke on the item, stating that while EBHO was generally supportive of the current draft, they have the following outstanding concerns which they believe put the City at risk of not receiving HCD certification:
 The sites inventory needs to be more realistic, including not “over-relying” on a single BART-owned site for close to 40% of the lower-income units.  Lower-income sites should be spread throughout the City, including in high resource areas.
 The HEU should include a program to place additional funding for affordable housing on a future ballot, with more flexible language and timing options than previously presented to Council.
 Various fair housing programs, including rezoning in areas with a majority white population, creating objective design standards, streamlining development applications, and allowing more units per parcel, should be strengthened and given more actionable timelines.

After closing the public hearing, and recommending its adoption by Council with a vote of 4-0 (one seat is vacant). The Planning Commission did not recommend any changes to the draft released on February 24.

Analysis
Summary of Revised HEU
As noted earlier, the City released a revised HEU on February 24, 2023 (Attachment 1, Exhibit B). To facilitate an easier review, a redline version of the changes between the August 8, 2022 draft and the February 24, 2023 HEU has been included as Attachment

10. This section summarizes the major components of this document.  Housing Goals
The HEU identifies the following five goals to address the City’s housing needs during the sixth cycle. These goals are essentially the same as the fifth cycle goals, but with revised language that expresses the desired “end state” for each goal. Each goal also has a series of more detailed implementing policies; see the HEU for these policies.

Page 20 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
o Goal 1: A balanced supply of housing types, densities, and prices to meet the needs of all income groups residing or who wish to reside in Concord. o Goal 2: Preserved and enhanced neighborhoods that improve quality of life for all residents.
o Goal 3: A City with housing opportunities for all special housing needs, including households with older adults, persons with disabilities, female- headed households, large families, and people experiencing homelessness.
o Goal 4: A City with equal housing opportunity and access for all people regardless of race, religion, gender, marital status, age, ancestry, national origin, color, sexual orientation, familial status, source of income, or disability.
o Goal 5: A sustainable City that protects the environment while lowering the cost of energy.
 Summary of Current Tenant Protections and Housing Programs and Services As directed by the Council on June 21, 2022, Section 1.5 of the HEU provides an overview of the housing policies, programs, services, and funding that the City has provided since 2015, as a result of numerous community-wide discussions regarding the housing crisis. These actions are in the categories of housing development (e.g., allocating $7.8 million toward the affordable 62-unit Galindo Terrace project), housing preservation and tenant protections (e.g., the Rent Registry program, Residential Tenant Protection Program, and Residential Tenant Anti-Harassment Protection Ordinance), homeownership (e.g., the Below Market Rate Homeownership and First Time Homebuyer programs), homelessness (e.g., allocating funds to develop and implement a Strategic Plan to address homelessness), accessory dwelling units (ADUs) ( e.g., developing pre-approved ADU plans), and more general efforts (monitoring pending State housing legislation, policies, and funding, and advocating for changes that will increase affordability and homeownership opportunities and reduce the risk of displacement and homelessness in Concord).
 Programs
The HEU’s programs section is the key component of the document, as it is built from the other components of the HEU and identifies the concrete actions that the City will take over the next eight years to address its housing needs. The proposed programs are provided in Section 1.6 of the HEU. Each program addresses a different housing issue (e.g., ADUs, homelessness, etc.) and provides objectives, timeframes, responsible agencies, funding sources, relevant HEU policies, and AFFH information. The draft sixth cycle HEU has a different format that results in fewer programs than the fifth cycle HEU, but each program

Page 21 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
contains multiple actions which are similar in format to the fifth cycle HEU programs.

The programs can generally be grouped into three main categories:
o Programs already being conducted by the City which are effective and should be continued.
o New programs required by the state, including Development Code amendments to bring the City’s code into conformance with state law; and o New programs not directly required by the state but proposed by the City to address its housing needs.

The complete list of HEU programs is very lengthy and includes many programs already being conducted, or already authorized, by the City. In addition, many of the new programs have been listed above in response to the HCD’s comment letter. Therefore, the following list includes only the most substantial new programs in the HEU that are not listed above:
o Objective 1.4: Adopt financial and regulatory incentives for affordable ADUs (required by state law).
o Objective 6.1: Allow projects by right on sites listed in a previous housing element (required by state law).
o Objective 12.2: Expand the City’s inclusionary (below market-rate) requirements to include rental and condominium projects. o Objective 12.3: Allow moderate-income rental units to satisfy inclusionary requirements.
o Objective 4.6: Within 90 days of certification, the City will collaborate with BART to discuss the necessary steps for pursuing development of its Monument Boulevard site and determine if amendments to the Development Code are necessary to align with BART’s TOD Guidelines.

The City will complete any necessary amendments by December 2024. o Objective 11.2: Clarify that additional density is available through the Transit Station Overlay District, allowing an additional 25% density above and beyond the density provided by Government Code section 65915 et seq. (“Density Bonus Law”) without a minor use permit, by July 2026. o Objective 11.4: Amend the Affordable Housing Incentive Program to provide clarity on incentives offered, including ministerial review and to clarify that additional density and incentives are available above and beyond those provided by Density Bonus Law, by July 2026. o Objective 13.2: Provide financial or regulatory incentives and a density bonus in exchange for lot consolidation by December 2023.

Page 22 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
o Objective 22.1: Appropriate $5.4 million toward the development and implementation of the Strategic Plan to address homelessness. o Objective 22.2: Develop and implement a Strategic Plan to address homelessness by December 2024.

It should be noted that on page 14, the programs document omits the number of units and income levels anticipated for the BART-owned site on Monument Boulevard. As discussed in Appendix E (Sites Analysis), the sites inventory includes 671 above moderate-income units and 111 moderate-income units for this site. This information will be added to the programs document prior to submittal to HCD.
 Review of Fifth Cycle Programs (Appendix A):

California Government Code Section 65588(a) requires each jurisdiction to regularly review its housing element and evaluate the following:
o the appropriateness of the housing goals, objectives, and policies, and in contributing to the attainment of the state housing goal, o the effectiveness of the Housing Element programs in progress toward achieving the housing goals and objectives;
o the progress in implementation of the Housing Element; and o the effectiveness of the housing element goals, policies, and related actions to meet the community's needs, pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583.

As required by state law, Appendix A provides a detailed review of all 78 programs of the City’s 2014 - 2022 Housing Element. This review concludes that approximately 80 percent of the current programs were effective (at least in part) and should be continued into the HEU, but with clear, quantifiable objectives as required by state law. The programs proposed for deletion were either ineffective or, more commonly, have already been incorporated into the City’s routine practices through code amendments and no longer require a dedicated program.

In some cases, programs proposed for deletion are being addressed by a new program that covers the same topic.
 Housing Needs Assessment (Appendix B):

California Government Code Section 65583(a)(1&2) requires each jurisdiction to prepare a Housing Needs Assessment with detailed information on demographic characteristics and trends that influence supply and demand for various housing types in Concord, including population, income, age, race/ethnicity, housing condition, employment, and groups with special needs (e.g., older adults, persons with disabilities, and persons experiencing homelessness). This

Page 23 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
information helps to inform the goals, objectives, policies, programs, and activities proposed in the HEU.

Below are key findings of the Needs Assessment22:
o By 2035, Concord is expected to grow by 34.1 percent, roughly twice the rate of Contra Costa County (17.8 percent). Development of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station will contribute a large portion of this growth.
o The age group with the highest growth rate was older adults (65 and older), at 42.1 percent (from 11.3 to 15 percent of the total population). o Concord became increasingly diverse in terms of race/ethnicity, with all groups except White increasing in size and percentage of the total population.
o Unemployment decreased by approximately 38 percent, while the number of residents not in the labor force increased by approximately 20 percent (most likely primarily driven by the growing number of retirees). o Black/African American persons and persons of two or more races experienced the highest levels of unemployment, at 12.2 and 9.9 percent, respectively. These rates were substantially higher than the overall unemployment rate of 3.4 percent.
o Average household size remained roughly the same, at 2.75 persons (versus 2.67 persons in 2010).
o The number of owner-occupied units decreased slightly (by 1.5 percent) while the number of rental units increased substantially (by 11.8 percent). o The overall housing vacancy rate decreased from 6.6 to 3.4 percent. Five percent is commonly considered a “healthy” vacancy rate. o Over three quarters (76.3 percent) of Concord’s housing stock was built before 1980.
o Numbers in all categories of annual household income decreased as a percentage of total population, except for those earning less than $5,000 and those earning $75,000 or greater. The number of households earning $150,000 or more saw the largest increase, 88.6 percent. This data generally indicates that the working-class population of Concord has been declining, while the extremely low-income and middle- and upper-class populations have been increasing.
o Growth rates in median household income compared with housing prices provide an indicator of whether housing is becoming more or less 22 Data are from 2010 to 2019, unless noted.

Page 24 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
affordable. For owner-occupied units, median household income grew by

29.4 percent while median home sales price grew by 17.2 percent. For renter-occupied households this trend was reversed, with household income growing by 36.6 percent while median rents grew by 44.4 percent. o In 2017, approximately 38.9 percent of Concord households spent more than 30 percent of their income on housing and are therefore considered “cost burdened.” Approximately 17.4 percent of households spent more than 50 percent and are considered “severely cost burdened.” Hispanic/Latinx and Black/African American households have substantially higher rates of cost burden than the overall population, with 33.8 percent of Black households being severely cost burdened.
o The number of households qualifying as “overcrowded” (one to 1.5 occupants per room) increased by 41.3 percent (from 1,779, or 4 percent of total households, to 2,514, or 5.4 percent of total households), while the number qualifying as “severely overcrowded” (over 1.5 occupants per room) increased by 138.7 percent (from 509, or 1.1 percent of total households, to 1,215, or 2.6 percent of total households). o 160 unsheltered Concord residents were identified in the 2020 Point In Time (PIT) count. This represents about 31 percent of the unsheltered persons in Central Contra Costa County, and about 10 percent of the total unsheltered persons Countywide.
o The total count of persons in 2020 experiencing homelessness (both sheltered and unsheltered) was 252. This represents a 15.7-percent decrease from the 2015 count of 299 persons.
 Constraints and Zoning Analysis (Appendix C):

California Government Code Sections 65583(a)(5) and (6) require each jurisdiction to prepare an analysis of actual and potential governmental constraints for each of the following:
o Land use controls;
o Building codes and their enforcement;
o Site improvement requirements;
o Fees and other exactions;
o Local processing and permit procedures;
o Housing for persons with disabilities; and
o Transitional housing and supportive housing as a residential use of property and subject only to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone.

Page 25 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
The Constraints and Zoning Analysis identifies the following as constraints on housing production that should be addressed in Concord’s HEU programs:
o Requiring a discretionary (i.e., subjective) Design and Site Review process for various types of housing projects, including multi-family, manufactured housing on existing lots, transitional and supportive housing, Low-Barrier Navigation Centers, emergency shelters, group housing (single-room occupancy units or SROs), and large residential care facilities;
o Low-Barrier Navigation Centers are not identified as a use in the City’s Development Code (state law required this use to be permitted by right).

Concord follows this state law, but the zoning code does not reflect it at this time;
o Subjective criteria for large residential care facilities; o Subjective design standards throughout the City’s Development Code23; o Lack of clarity regarding review procedures for Minor and Major Hillside Development Permit;
o Requiring a Use Permit for multi-family in the CO, CMX, DMX, DP, and NC districts;
o Group housing parking requirements are too high relative to other residential uses; and
o Emergency shelter regulations are overly burdensome
The programs in the revised HEU address the above identified constraints as well as address HCD’s comments pertaining to governmental and zoning constraints.  Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Analysis (Appendix D):

The requirement for AFFH analysis was established by AB 686 in 2018. This bill requires “an assessment of fair housing practices, an analysis of the relationship between available sites and areas of high or low resources24, and concrete actions in the form of programs to affirmatively further fair housing.” Key findings of the HEU’s AFFH analysis are as follows:
o Disparities in access to housing opportunity can be seen for non-White households, which are more likely to be renters than Whites, due to renter 23 Under recent state law (SB 330), housing developments with two or more units cannot be denied based on subjective design standards. However, HCD is still requiring jurisdictions to amend their codes so that only objective standards are applied to housing developments. An effort to adopt objective design standards for Concord is already underway and has been included in Program 15 of the draft HEU. 24 See footnote 5.

Page 26 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
households seeing higher rates of cost burden. This indicates that non- White households are disproportionately burdened by the cost of housing. o With the exception of areas to the southeast, overall “access to opportunity” as defined by the Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) is “low” to “moderate” in much of Concord (see Attachment 4 for map).25 This further constrains affordable housing development in Concord, as access to opportunity is a key criterion in how TCAC awards tax credits, which are a primary funding source for affordable housing projects. o Displacement is an increasing concern for City residents. Local knowledge identified through public outreach is that affordable housing is being converted to market-rate housing at a relatively high rate. Although data is not available, this may include units that have never been subject to a deed restriction and are therefore not monitored. Based on analysis from UC Berkeley’s Urban Displacement Project, those at risk of displacement are more likely to be non-White households, particularly those residing in the southwest area where patterns of overcrowding and concentrated poverty exist.

As noted earlier, AB 686 requires “meaningful actions” to address the fair housing issues in the community, and the previous draft HEU includes several programs intended to meet this requirement. As discussed above in “HCD Comments and Program Revisions”, the attached HEU includes additional AFFH actions and enhancements to previously identified actions in order to address HCD’s comments on this topic.
 Sites Analysis (Appendix E):

California Government Code Section 65583(a)(3) requires jurisdictions to prepare an inventory of sites or parcels adequate to meet their Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The HEU’s Sites Analysis provides this inventory in table and map format. While many Bay Area jurisdictions are substantially built out and must rezone properties to create adequate capacity to meet their RHNA, Concord has adequate capacity not only to meet its RHNA without rezoning, but also to provide a “buffer” of 712 units (about 24.7 percent) for the lower- and moderate-income RHNA. Table 4 below summarizes the City’s capacity.

Table 4: Identified Housing Capacity
Category Lower-
Income
Moderate-
and Above
Moderate-
Income
Total
Vacant Site 769 267 1,036
25 See footnote 5.

Page 27 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
Category Lower-
Income
Moderate-
and Above
Moderate-
Income
Total
Capacity
Underutilized
Capacity
1,022 2,205 3,227
ADU
Projection
0 232 232
Pipeline
Projects26
274 350 624
Concord
Reuse
Project
027 300 300
Program 8
Rezone
1,000 0 1,000
Total
Capacity
3,065 3,054 6,419
RHNA 2,036 3,037 5,073
Buffer 1,029 317 1,346
Attachment 9 provides detailed maps of the proposed sites inventory. The inventory is required to identify sites that can meet the state’s criteria for lower- income and moderate-income projects. The lower-income site criteria includes a minimum density of 30 units per acre, and the available sites that meet this threshold are located almost entirely in the central and western portions of Concord, which have low resources and tend to be predominantly non-white.

Consequently, due to this concentration in order to satisfy AFFH requirements, the HEU includes a program to rezone sites in higher-resource, predominantly white areas to accommodate additional lower-income units.  Community Engagement Summary (Appendix F):

This document provides detailed information on the City’s efforts to gather public input for the HEU. See the “Community Engagement Process” section above for further discussion.
 Community Input and Council Actions on Displacement Since 2016 (Appendix G):
26 Pipeline projects includes projects that received Planning approval but are not anticipated to complete construction prior to June 30, 2022.
27 While a minimum of 25 percent affordable units is required for the Concord Reuse Project, no affordable units are assumed prior to 2031 to keep the HEU’s assumptions conservative.

Page 28 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
As discussed earlier, at the HED Committee meeting on February 28, 2022, community members provided input that previous testimony on displacement issues should be incorporated into the HEU process, and the HED Committee concurred with this request. To address the direction from the HED Committee, this appendix includes a detailed summary of public testimony received by the City Council since 2016, along with actions taken by the Council to increase tenant protections and reduce the risk of displacement.  Public Review (Appendix H):

This appendix provides all of the public comments received the during the 30-day public review periods, along with responses and changes made to the HEU in response to these comments. Many of the revisions made in response to HCD’s comments were also based on public input, including the revisions to the rezoning program and the addition of rent stabilization and just cause for eviction ordinances.

Approval Findings
As noted above, state law requires adoption of an HEU for 2023-2031. The attached final draft HEU is based on extensive community engagement and analysis regarding the City’s housing needs and satisfies the requirements of state housing element law, and a consensus of the City Council has preliminarily indicated support for the attached draft based on input provided on January 17, 2023. Staff anticipates that HCD will certify the attached draft or find it to be in substantial compliance with minor edits required.

The attached resolution includes the following findings in support of the recommended approval:

1. The 2023-2031 HEU is in the public interest of the citizens of the City of Concord and the surrounding regions because it will guide the City’s efforts to preserve existing housing stock, promote a variety of housing types and affordability levels, promote housing for special needs groups, and affirmatively further fair housing in Concord.

2. Pursuant to the consistency requirements of Government Code Section 65300 et seq. and Concord Municipal Code Section 18.455.070(A)(1), the 2023-2031 HEU is internally consistent with all other provisions and elements of the General Plan.

3. Pursuant to Concord Municipal Code Section 18.455.070(A)(3), the proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.

4. The 2023-2031 HEU has incorporated a comprehensive public participation process, including a survey, numerous workshops, study sessions, and public hearings to receive input from residents, businesses, and property owners.

Page 29 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023

5. The 2023-2031 HEU substantially complies with state law, including Article

10.6 (Housing Elements) of the Government Code, and contains, as required by Government Code Section 65583, the following:
(a) An assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints relevant to meeting these needs;
(b) A statement of the community’s goals, quantified objectives, and policies relative to the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing;
(c) A program that sets forth an 8-year schedule of actions to implement the policies and achieve the stated goals and objectives;
(d) Identification of adequate sites with appropriate zoning densities and infrastructure to meet the community’s need for housing, as reflected in the Regional Housing Needs Allocation for 2023-2031;
(e) The removal of governmental constraints to housing development where appropriate and legally possible;
(f) A summary of fair housing issues in the jurisdiction and an assessment of the jurisdiction’s fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity; and (g) 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, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs within the jurisdiction, including displacement risk.

Financial Impact
Adoption of the HEU in early 2023 commits the City to many new housing programs and actions over the next four years, which will require significant staff time and may require use of consultants. While the fiscal impacts of the HEU cannot be predicted at this time, it is clear that implementing the HEU will have a significant workload impact. It will consume significant amounts of time by City Planning and Housing staff, City Management, the City Attorney’s office, the Planning Commission and the City Council for the next four years. As these resources will be allocated to HEU implementation efforts, they will have very little capacity for other assignments.

Environmental Determination
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq., as amended and implementing state CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (collectively, “CEQA”), adoption of the HEU is exempt from further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines 15061(b)(3),

Page 30 of 256 ends

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a
March 14, 2023
because it is covered by the common sense exemption in that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.

Given that the HEU does not allow any specific development project or site specific rezoning, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the HEU may have a significant effect on the environment, and the HEU is not subject to CEQA.

Furthermore, in the event the HEU is subject to CEQA, the City has prepared an Initial Study and Negative Declaration (Attachment 1, Exhibit A) finding that the HEU will not have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, no further environmental review is required under CEQA.

Public Contact
The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website. Notification has been published in the East Bay Times at least 10 days prior to the public hearing, as required by state law and the Concord Municipal Code. This item has also been posted at City Hall and distributed to the HEU interested parties list and the City’s housing list at least 10 days prior to the public hearing.

Attachments

1. Resolution
Exhibit A – Initial Study/Negative Declaration
Exhibit B – 2023-2031 Housing Element Update
Exhibit C – Responses to HCD Letter dated November 14, 2022

2. HCD Letter dated November 14, 2022

3. Public Comments Not Included in HEU Appendix H

4. TCAC Opportunity Map

5. Summary of December 21, 2022 Meeting with CBOs

6. Racial/Economic Segregation Maps

7. HCD Memorandum Regarding AB 2339

8. Zoning District Map

9. Sites Inventory Maps

10. 2023-2031 Housing Element Update (redline/strikeout version)

Page 31 of 256 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 1

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CONCORD

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A Resolution Adopting the Initial Study/Negative
Declaration for the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update
(“2023-2031 HEU”); Finding the 2023-2031 HEU
Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15061(b)(3), the Common Sense Exemption; Finding the
2023-2031 HEU Substantially Complies with
Government Code Section 65580 et seq. (“Housing
Element Law”); Approving a General Plan Amendment
Repealing the 2014-2022 Housing Element and
Adopting the 2023-2031 HEU; Authorizing the City
Manager or Designee to Make Changes to the 2023-
2031 HEU to Achieve Internal Consistency or Address
Non-Substantive Changes or Amendments Requested
by the Department of Housing and Community
Development to Certify the 2023-2031 HEU (PL23013 –
GP); and Making other Related Findings and
Delegations as Appropriate
Resolution No. 23-XX
__/
WHEREAS, on October 2, 2007, the Concord City Council (“City Council”) adopted the current Concord 2030 General Plan (“General Plan”), including a Housing Element; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted its 2014–2022 Housing Element on January 6, 2015, and determined it would be the Housing Element of the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the California State Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) certified the most recent (2014-2022) Housing Element on January 20, 2015, and found the document in full compliance with state Housing Element Law applicable at the time; and WHEREAS, 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” (Government Code Section 65589.5); and Attachment 1

Page 32 of 256 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 2
WHEREAS, 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” (Government Code Section 65589.5); and WHEREAS, the Legislature recently adopted the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) which states that “In 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states in housing units per capita… California needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over 7 years”; and
WHEREAS, state Housing Element Law (Government Code Section 65580 et seq.) requires that the City Council adopt a Housing Element for the eight-year period 2023-2031 to accommodate the City of Concord (“City”) Regional Housing Needs Allocation (“RHNA”) of 5,073 housing units, comprised of 1,292 very-low income units, 744 low-income units, 847 moderate-income units, and 2,190 above moderate-income units; and WHEREAS, to comply with state Housing Element Law, the City has prepared the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update (“2023-2031 HEU”) and has identified sites that can accommodate housing units meeting the City’s RHNA; and
WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 65350 et. seq., adoption of the Housing Element constitutes a General Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, the preparation, adoption, and implementation of the Housing Element requires a diligent effort to include all economic segments of the community; and WHEREAS, on June 22, 2021, the City Council directed staff to solicit input from community-based organizations (“CBOs”) in Concord and prepare a community engagement plan for the 2023-2031 HEU based on this input; and
WHEREAS, on July 21 and 22, 2021, the City held six “listening sessions” with representatives from over 25 CBOs to seek their input regarding effective methods of community engagement for the 2023-2031 HEU; and

Page 33 of 256 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 3
WHEREAS, on August 24, 2021, the City Council approved a community engagement plan incorporating the input from the listening sessions; and WHEREAS, on October 16 and 19, 2021 and March 15 and 27 and June 4 and 8, 2022, the City held six “town hall” meetings (three in person and three via Zoom) to provide information on the 2023-2031 HEU and solicit public input on housing issues from affordable and for-profit housing developers, community stakeholders, residents, property owners, and other interested parties; and
WHEREAS, on September 30, October 12, and December 11, 2021, and June 13, 15 and 16, 2022, the City held six “pop-up” events at various public venues through the City to provide further opportunities for community engagement on the 2023-2031 HEU; and WHEREAS, to promote diverse stakeholder engagement, the City provided Spanish translation at the “town hall” meetings and “pop-up” events, notified CBOs and other interested parties of these events via e-mail and social media, and included information on the 2023-2031 HEU in a citywide mailer; and
WHEREAS, between December 15, 2021, and March 31, 2022, the City made available an online survey in both English and Spanish to solicit feedback on housing issues within Concord; and
WHEREAS, through its outreach and engagement efforts, the City had nearly 1,500 contacts with individual community members; and
WHEREAS, on February 28, March 21, and May 4, 2022, the Housing and Economic Development Committee of the City Council received updates and public testimony on various components of the 2023-2031 HEU and provided input to staff for the document; and WHEREAS, on May 27, 2022, in accordance with Government Code Section 65585(b), the City posted the first public draft of the 2023-2031 HEU and requested public comment for a 30-day review period; and
WHEREAS, on June 21, 2022, the City Council considered this draft, received public testimony, and provided input for a revised draft; and

Page 34 of 256 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 4
WHEREAS, on August 8, 2022, the City released a revised draft for a 7-day public review period; and
WHEREAS, on August 16, 2022, after responding to all public comments received on the previous draft and incorporating the City Council’s input, the City submitted a revised draft of the 2023-2031 HEU to HCD for review; and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2022, HCD provided a letter to City staff with comments on the revised draft, noting that further revisions would be necessary to comply with state Housing Element Law; and
WHEREAS, on November 30, 2022, City staff and the City’s consultant met with HCD’s assigned reviewer to discuss their comments and based upon this, the 2023–2031 HEU was revised to include additional information and data; and WHEREAS, at a meeting that began on January 10 and continued to January 17, 2023, the City Council accepted public testimony and provided input regarding further revisions to address HCD’s comments; and
WHEREAS, HCD requested the City make findings to demonstrate the likelihood of the development or redevelopment on non-vacant sites with lower income housing units; and WHEREAS, Appendix E, Adequate Sites Analysis of the 2023-2031 HEU provides substantial evidence of the likelihood of the development or redevelopment on non-vacant sites with lower income affordable housing units; and
WHEREAS, in particular the Vacant and Underutilized Sites - Capacity Analysis and Realistic Capacity sections of Appendix E and the Programs section of the 2023-2031 HEU provide recent examples of non-vacant sites redeveloped for higher-density residential uses, statistics on the status of the sites selected, and programs to remove barriers to, and incentivize the development of market-rate and affordable housing; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., as amended, and implementing State CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (collectively, “CEQA”),

Page 35 of 256 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 5
Public Resources Code Section 21067 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15051, the City is the lead agency for the 2023-2031 HEU; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, on behalf of the City, Dudek prepared a draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the 2023-2031 HEU (“IS/ND”; State Clearinghouse #2023010598; attached hereto as Exhibit A) which concluded that the 2023-2031 HEU would not have significant impacts on the environment; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073, a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration was circulated for public review for a period of 30 days, beginning on January 28, 2023 and ending on February 27, 2023; and
WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Sections 65352 – 65352.5 the City referred the 2023-2031 HEU to all California Native American tribes on the contact list provided by the Native American Heritage Commission and to other entities listed; and WHEREAS, no California Native American tribe requested consultation; and WHEREAS, on February 24, 2023, the City released a revised draft of the 2023-2031 HEU responding to HCD’s comments and incorporating the City Council’s input for public review (attached hereto as Exhibit B); and
WHEREAS, on February 27, 2023, the Planning Commission, after giving all public notices required by state law and the Concord Development Code (“CDC”), held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the IS/ND for the 2023-2031 HEU and the 2023-2031 HEU; and WHEREAS, at such public hearing the Planning Commission considered all oral testimony and written comments received during the public review process, the testimony and information received at the public hearing and the oral and written reports from City staff dated February 27, 2023, exhibits presented, pertinent plans and documents, the IS/ND, and other documents contained in the record of proceedings relating to the 2023-2031 HEU, which are maintained at the offices of the City of Concord Planning Division (hereinafter referred to as “Planning Commission Project Information”); and
WHEREAS, on February 27, 2023, the Planning Commission, after consideration of the

Page 36 of 256 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 6
Planning Commission Project Information and all other pertinent plans, documents and testimony, adopted Resolution No. 23-03PC recommending that the City Council adopt the IS/ND for the 2023-2031 HEU; finds the 2023-2031 HEU exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption; find that the 2023-2031 HEU substantially complies with Government Code Section 65580 et seq. (“Housing Element Law”); approve a General Plan Amendment repealing the 2014-2022 Housing Element and adopting the 2023- 2031 HEU; and authorize the City Manager or designee to make changes to the 2023-2031 HEU to achieve internal consistency or address non-substantive changes or amendments requested by HCD to certify the 2023-2031 HEU (PL23013-GP); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CDC Section 18.455.050(B) and Government Code Section 65857, after consideration of the Addendum to the 2012 SEIR and the Proposed Project at its February 27, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission forwarded its recommendation to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2023, the City Council, after giving all public notices required by state law and the Concord Development Code (“CDC”), held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the IS/ND for the 2023-2031 HEU and the 2023-2031 HEU; and WHEREAS, the development, conservation, and rehabilitation of housing for households of all income levels residing within the City of Concord will be enhanced through the adoption of the 2023-2031 HEU; and
WHEREAS, at such public hearing the City Council considered all testimony and information received at the public hearing, the oral and written reports from City staff dated March 14, 2023, exhibits presented, pertinent plans and documents, the Planning Commission Project Information, and other documents contained in the record of proceedings relating to the 2023-2031 HEU, which are maintained at the offices of the City of Concord Planning Division (collectively, “City Council Project Information”); and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2023, the City Council, after consideration of the City Council Project Information and all other pertinent plans, documents and testimony, declared its

Page 37 of 256 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 7
intent to adopt the IS/ND for the 2023-2031 HEU; finds the 2023-2031 HEU exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption; finds that the 2023-2031 HEU substantially complies with Government Code Section 65580 et seq. (“Housing Element Law”); approves a General Plan Amendment repealing the 2014-2022 Housing Element and adopting the 2023-2031 HEU; and authorizes the City Manager or designee to make changes to the 2023-2031 HEU to achieve internal consistency or address non-substantive changes or amendments requested by HCD to certify the 2023-2031 HEU (PL23013-GP).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CONCORD DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference.

The recitals constitute findings in this matter, and together with the City Council Project Information, serve as an adequate and appropriate evidentiary basis for the findings and actions set forth in this Resolution.

Section 2. CEQA

1. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, Public Resources Code Section 21000, et. seq., as amended and implementing State CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (collectively “CEQA”), adoption of 2023-2031 HEU is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), because it is covered by the commonsense exemption in that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.

Given that the 2023-2031 HEU does not allow any specific development project or site-specific rezoning, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the 2023-2031 HEU may have a significant effect on the environment, and the 2023-2031 HEU is not subject to CEQA.

2. Although not required by CEQA based on the previous finding, in the event the 2023-2031 HEU is subject to CEQA, the City has prepared and circulated an IS/ND pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, which further confirmed that the 2023-2031 HEU would not have a significant effect on the environment; and there is no substantial evidence in light of the

Page 38 of 256 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 8
whole record before the City Council of the City of Concord that the 2023-2031 HEU would have a significant effect on the environment.

3. The environmental documents for the 2023-2031 HEU have been prepared, published, and reviewed in accordance with CEQA.

Section 3. The City Council has reviewed, considered, and evaluated all of the City Council Project Information and all other pertinent plans, documents and testimony.

Section 4. The IS/ND, attached as Exhibit A, reflects the independent judgement and analysis of the City as the lead agency for the 2023-2031 HEU.

Section 5. 2023-2031 Housing Element Update

2. Pursuant to the consistency requirements of Government Code Section 65300 et seq. and CDC Section 18.455.070(A)(1), the 2023-2031 HEU is internally consistent with all other provisions and elements of the General Plan.

3. Pursuant to CDC Section 18.455.070(A)(3), the proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.

5. The 2023-2031 HEU substantially complies with, and contains all provisions required by, state Housing Element Law, as provided in Government Code 65580 et seq., and, as shown in Exhibit A to this resolution, incorporated herein. Such provisions include, but are not limited to:
(a) An assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints relevant to meeting these needs;

Page 39 of 256 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 9
(b) A statement of the community’s goals, quantified objectives, and policies relative to the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing; (c) A program that sets forth an 8-year schedule of actions to implement the policies and achieve the stated goals and objectives;
(d) Identification of adequate sites with appropriate zoning densities and infrastructure to meet the community’s need for housing, as reflected in the Regional Housing Needs Allocation for 2023-2031;
(e) The removal of governmental constraints to housing development where appropriate and legally possible;
(f) A summary of fair housing issues in the jurisdiction and an assessment of the jurisdiction’s fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity; and (g) 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, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs within the jurisdiction, including displacement risk.

Section 6. Based on the substantial evidence and information provided in the record, including Appendix E of the 2023-2031 HEU, that non-vacant sites with identified capacity for lower income housing are likely to either discontinue their existing use and develop for residential use or develop with residential use in addition to the existing use during the 2023- 2031 planning period, and therefore do not constitute an impediment to planned residential development on the site during the planning period.

Section 7. As required by Government Code Section 65585(e), the City Council has considered the findings made by HCD in its letter to the City dated November 14, 2022, consistent with Government Code Section 65585(f), and as described in Exhibit C to this resolution, incorporated herein, the Housing Element has been revised in response to the findings of the Department to substantially comply with the requirements of state Housing Element Law as interpreted by HCD.

Page 40 of 256 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 10
Section 8. The City Council does hereby adopt the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the 2023-2031 HEU; finds the 2023-2031 HEU exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the commonsense exemption; and finds the 2023-2031 HEU substantially complies with Housing Element Law.

Section 9. The City Council does hereby approve a General Plan Amendment repealing the 2014-2022 Housing Element and adopting the 2023-2031 HEU (PL23013 – GP).

Section 10. The City Council does hereby authorize the City Manager or designee to file all necessary material with HCD for HCD to certify the 2023-2031 HEU and authorizes and directs the City Manager or designee to make all non-substantive changes to the 2023-2031 HEU to make it internally consistent or to address any non-substantive changes or amendments requested by HCD to achieve certification.

Section 11. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//

Page 41 of 256 ends

Res. No. 23-XX 11
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Concord on March 14, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 23-XX was duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Concord March 14, 2023 Joelle Fockler, MMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Susanne Meyer Brown
City Attorney
Attachments: Exhibit A - Negative Declaration
Exhibit B – 2023-2031 Housing Element Update dated February 24, 2023 Exhibit C – Responses to HCD Comment Letter dated November 14, 2022

Page 42 of 256 ends

DRAFT Initial Study/Negative Declaration
City of Concord General Plan
Amendment: 6th Cycle Housing
Element Update
JANUARY 2023
Prepared for:

CITY OF CONCORD
1950 Parkside Drive
Concord, California 94519
Prepared by:
1630 San Pablo Avenue
Oakland, California 94612
Attachment 1 - Exhibit A

Page 43 of 256 ends

Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material. Page 44 of 256 13039.01 III
JANUARY 2023
Table of Contents

SECTION PAGE
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................... ........... ..............................................III. 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ ...........................................................1

1.1 Project Overview .....................................................................................................................................1

1.2 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance ................................................................................1

1.3 Proejct Planning Setting ......................................................................................................................1 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4

2.1 Background ............................................................................................................................................. 4

2.2 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) ..................................................................................... 4

2.3 Sites Analysis and Inventory .................................................................................................................. 5

2.4 RHNA Approach ...................................................................................................................................... 5

2.5 Housing Element Programs .................................................................................................................. 6

2.6 Scope of Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 19 3 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 18

3.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................................ 24

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................................................................................... 25

3.3 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................................. 26

3.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................................... 28

3.5 Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................................. 30

3.6 Energy .................................................................................................................................................. 32

3.7 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................................ 33

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................................ 36

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................................................................................... 37

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................................... 39

3.11 Land Use and Planning ....................................................................................................................... 41

3.12 Mineral Resources .............................................................................................................................. 42

3.13 Noise .................................................................................................................................................... 43

3.14 Population and Housing ...................................................................................................................... 44

3.15 Public Services .................................................................................................................................... 45

3.16 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................ 46

3.17 Transportation ..................................................................................................................................... 47

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................... 48

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems .............................................................................................................. 50

3.20 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................................. 51

3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................................................................... 53 4 REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 54

Page 45 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 IV
JANUARY 2023

4.1 References Cited ................................................................................................................................. 56 TABLES
1 Capacity ............................................................................................................................................................... 6

Page 46 of 256 ends

13039.01 V
JANUARY 2023 Page 47 of 256
13039.01 1
JANUARY 2023
1 Introduction

1.1 Project Overview
The purpose of the Housing Element Update (HEU) is to provide an update to the Housing Element of the City of Concord’s (City’s) General Plan. The intent of the HEU is to address the comprehensive housing needs of the City. State law requires jurisdictions to update their Housing Element every eight years to outline their existing and projected housing needs, to discuss barriers to providing that housing, and to propose actions to address housing needs and barriers. The programs proposed in the HEU are intended to be implemented over an eight-year planning horizon (2023-2031). The primary focus of the Housing Element is to ensure decent, safe, sanitary, and affordable housing for current and future residents of the City of Concord, including those with special needs. The City is required to ensure the availability of residential sites, at adequate densities and with appropriate development standards, to accommodate its fair share of the regional housing need, also known as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation.

1.2 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a statewide environmental law described in California Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq., applies to most public agency decisions to carry out, authorize, or approve actions that have the potent ial to adversely affect the environment. The overarching goal of CEQA is to protect the physical environment. To achieve that goal, CEQA requires that public agencies identify the environmental consequences of their discretionary actions and consider alternatives and mitigation measures that could avoid or reduce significant adverse impacts when avoidance or reduction is feasible. It also gives other public agencies and the public an opportunity to comment on the information. If significant adverse impacts cannot be avoided, reduced, or mitigated to below a level of significance, the public agency is required to prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) and balance the project’s environmental concerns with other goals and benefits in a statement of overriding considerations.

The City’s Community Development Department directed and supervised the preparation of this Initial Study (IS)/ Negative Declaration (ND). Although prepared with assistance from the consulting firm Dudek, the content contained within and the conclusions drawn by this IS/ND reflect the independent judgment of the City.

1.3 Project Planning Setting
Dudek, under the City’s guidance, prepared the project’s Environmental Checklist (i.e., IS) per CEQA Guidelines Sections 15063–15065. The CEQA Guidelines include a suggested checklist to indicate whether a project would have an adverse impact on the enviro nment. This checklist is found in Section 3 of this document. Following the Environmental Checklist, Sections 3.1 through 3.21 include an explanation and discussion of each significance determination made in the checklist for the project. For this IS/ND, the following four possible responses to each individual environmental issue area are included in the checklist:

Potentially Significant Impact
Less-t han -Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less-t han -Significant Impact
No Impact

Page 48 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 2
JANUARY 2023
The checklist and accompanying explanation of checklist responses provide the information and analysis necessary to assess relative environmental impacts of the project. In doing so, the City will determine the extent of additional environmental review, if any, for the project.

Page 49 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 3
JANUARY 2023
INT

ENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 50 of 256 ends

13039.01 4
JANUARY 2023
2 Project Description
The HEU proposes an update to the City’s General Plan. Under the HEU, the General Plan would be amended with a comprehensive update to the Housing Element, as detailed below.

2.1 Background
Since 1969, the State of California has required all local governments to adequately plan to meet the housing needs of everyone in the community. California’s local governments meet this requirement by adopting a housing plan as an element of their general plan. The law mandating that housing be included as an element of each jurisdiction’s general plan is known as “housing element law.” The HEU represents the City’s effort in fulfilling the requirements under State Housing Element law. The California State Legislature has identified the attainment of a decent home and suitable living environment for every Californian as the s tate’s major housing goal. Recognizing the important role of local planning and housing programs in the pursuit of th is goal, the Legislature has mandated that all cities and counties prepare a Housing Element as part of the comprehensive General Plan.

Pursuant to s tate law, the Housing Element must be updated periodically according to statutory deadlines. The proposed Housing Element Update (HEU) covers the period of 2023 to 2031, also known as the 6 th cycle.
state law requires that the Housing Element include the following components:
 An evaluation of the efficacy of the previous Housing Element’s progress in plan impl ementation and the appropriateness of its goals, policies, and programs.
 An analysis of the City’s population, household, and employment base, and the characteristics of the housing stock.
 A summary of the present and projected housing needs of the City’s households.  A review of potential constraints to meeting the City’s identified housing needs.  An evaluation of Fair Housing to identify disproportionate housing needs.  A statement of the Housing Plan to address the identified housing needs, including housing goals, policies, objectives, and programs.

The City’s Housing Element is being updated at this time in conformance with the 2023-2031 cycle for jurisdictions in the Association of Bay Area Governments ( ABAG) region. The HEU builds upon the other General Plan elements and is consistent with the policies set forth by the General Plan, as amended. As portions of the General Plan are amended in the future, the Plan (including the Housing Element) will be reviewed to ensure that internal consistency is maintained.

2.2 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)
The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is required to prepare a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for each Council of Governments in the s tate that identifies projected residential dwelling units (“units”) needed for all economic segments based on Department of Finance population estimates. The ABAG is the Council of Governments for Contra Costa (County) (as well as Alameda, Marin, Napa,

Page 51 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 5
JANUARY 2023
San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties) and allocates to the nine counties and 101 cities their fair share of the total RHNA housing needed for each income category. Each local government must demonstrate that it has planned to accommodate all of its regional housing need allocation in its Housing Element.

The City has been assigned a 6 th Cycle RHNA allocation (RHNA allocation) of 5,073 units for the 202 3–2031 Housing Element (proposed Housing Element) , divided up as follows: 1,292 very low income units, 744 lower income units, 847 moderate income units, and 2,190 above-moderate income units (ABAG 2021). According to the Sites Analysis of the proposed Housing Element, the City has identified adequate capacity for a total of 4,609 units through vacant sites, underutilized sites, and projected accessory dwelling units (ADU). Additionally, the City has identified 624 total units in the development permit pipeline to be credited toward the RHNA. Further, 300 units of capacity have been identified on the former Concord Naval Weapons Station (CNWS) through the Concord Reuse Project Area Plan (CRP), which will assist the City with providing a sufficient buffer to ensure there is adequate remaining capacity throughout the planning period.
1 2.3 Sites Analysis and Inventory
State law requires that jurisdictions demonstrate in the Housing Element that the land inventory is adequate to accommodate that jurisdiction’s share of the regional growth. The Sites Analysis for the Housing Element identified capacity through several methods, including currently vacant sites; underutilized sites with realistic development potential; housing that is underway and will have Certificates of Occupancy issued within the planning period; potential ADUs and junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs); and housing unit production that will be realized through the Concord Reuse Project (CRP) Area Plan. Through the Sites Analysis, the City has identified adequate capacity for 4,609 units through vacant sites, underutilized sites, and projected ADUs. Additionally, the City has identified 624 total units in the development permit pipeline to be credited toward the RHNA. Furthermore, 300 units have been identified as a conservative estimate of units to be delivered during the 6th Cycle on the former Concord Naval Weapons Station (CNWS) through the CRP Area Plan. These units will help provide a sufficient buffer to ensure that there is adequate remaining capacity throughout the planning period.

2.4 RHNA Approach
City staff reviewed the inventory of vacant and underutilized sites, ADU projections , permit pipeline projects, and sites within the CRP Area Plan that can accommodate the current RHNA allocation for the 202 3-2031 Housing Element Update. It was found that the number of sites identified for the lower -income group was more than adequate. Table 1 , Capacity Identified , shows the breakdown of all capacity identified and credits to be counted toward the RHNA, as detailed throughout analysis in the Housing Element. As demonstrated in Table 1 the City has adequate capacity and credits to accommodate the RHNA at all income levels and has a total buffer of 460 units, of which 160 units qualify to meet the lower- and moderate-income RHNA. In conclusion, t he City has identified adequate capacity for its RHNA requirement for the planning period and no rezoning is required as part of the HEU in order to meet the RHNA.
1 The capacity to accommodate an additional “buffer” for the RHNA allocation is recommended by HCD to ensure sufficient capacity e
xists to accommodate the RHNA allocation throughout the eight year planning period and comply with the provisions of Senate Bill (SB -) 166 (2017). SB -166 requires a city, county, or city and county to ensure that its housing element inventory can accommodate its share of the regional housing need throughout the planning period.

Page 52 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 6
JANUARY 2023
Table 1. Capacity Identified
Lower-Income Units
Moderate- and Above
Moderate-Income Units Total
RHNA 2,036 3,037 5,073
Vacant & Underutilized Capacity 3,290 1,087 4,377
ADU Projection 0 232 232
Permit Pipeline Projects 274 350 624
Concord Reuse Plan 0 300 300
Total 3,564 1,669 5,533
Buffer +460

2.5 Housing Element Programs
As required by state Housing Element law, the HEU includes Programs to facilitate and encourage the provision of housing consistent with the RHNA allocation. The goals, objectives, policies, and implementing programs of the HEU emphasize: methods of encour aging and assisting in the development of new housing for all income levels; providing and maintaining adequate capacity to meet the housing need; removing government constraints to development, where feasible and legally possible; conserving and improving existing housing; providing increased opportunities for home ownership; reducing impediments to fair housing choice; and monitoring and preserving units at risk of converting from affordable to market rate. The Housing Element Programs also include numerous policies to better guide decisions and achieve desired outcomes related to the development, improvement, preservation, and maintenance of housing.

The following summarizes key considerations of the programs that would be included in the City’s proposed HEU .

For full descriptions of the programs in more detail, please refer to HEU available at:
https://concordhousingelement.org/
Program 1: Accessory Dwelling Unit s
The City has amended its ordinance establishing standards and regulations for accessory dwelling units (ADU) and junior accessory dwelling units (JADU), consistent with and in certain instances more permissive than s tate law (Government Code Section 65852.2). The City submitted the updated ordinance to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) in July 2021 for its review, is still awaiting HCD’s comments, and will incorporate amendments, as required by HCD, upon receipt of comments. Further, the City will develop and adopt a program that incentivizes and promotes the creation of ADUs that can be offered at an affordable rent for extremely low-, very low-, low-, or moderate-income households or households with special housing needs ( Assembly
Bill [AB] 671, 2019).

In addition, the City reviews, approves, and tracks the timely review of ADU building permit applications. The Community Development Department collects data annually on building permit issuance and construction of ADUs for the Housing Element Annual Progress Report. As part of this program, the Community Development Department commits to continued monitoring of ADU development, including approved affordability of each unit.

Further, the City will develop a web -based “ADU Toolkit” which will include Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs), development standards, financial/regulatory incentives (once adopted), an overview of the permit process, required

Page 53 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 7
JANUARY 2023
forms, and permit-ready ADU construction-level drawings to allow for “off-the shelf” ADUs. The ADU Toolkit will assist with the promotion and streamlining of the production of ADUs by providing information in one location along with guidance on navigating the permit process. Permit ready plans will encourage the construction of ADUs by reducing the cost through the availability of a selection of pre-approved ADU building plans that will be available on the City’s website free of charge. The City will conduct robust outreach by promoting to the community in both English and Spanish the availability of the pre-approved ADU plans through social media, the newspaper, the City’s website and e-newsletter with more than 10,000 subscribers, notification to housing groups/advocates, a freeway oriented digital reader board, and meetings with the various business groups (e.g. Chamber of Commerce) and local lumber and hardware stores.

The City will also conduct outreach and education to ADU owners and SB 9 applicants regarding compliance with fair housing and tenant protection laws, including Senate Bill (SB) 329 and SB 222, which prohibit d iscrimination against tenants using Housing Choice (Section 8) vouchers to pay rent. The City will include resources on these topics in the ADU Toolkit and at the Permit Counter.

Program 2: Addressing Constraints to Development
Constraints to providing a variety of housing types have been identified in Appendix C of the Housing Element Update. The City will further address constraints to the development of housing, including housing for extremely low-income households and housing for persons with disabilities. This will include amendments and clarifications to the City’s Development Code related to how manufactured housing is permitted, the inclusion of objective criteria to determine when a Neighborhood Meeting is required, and clarifying language related to hillside development permits. Further, the City will remove barriers to housing, especially for vulnerable populations and those with special housing needs, through targeted amendments to the City’s Development Code such as but not limited to simplifying the definition of a “family” so that it does not pose a constraint.

Program 3: Affordable Housing Development Toolkit
The City will actively work with the development community to assist in the development of affordable housing, especially housing for extremely low-income households and households with special housing needs. The City will develop an Affordable Housing Toolkit that will provide details on available resources to assist the development community in affordable housing production. These resources will include guidance on navigating development permit processes, available affordable housing incentives, a map of available underutilized and vacant sites, and notices of City funding available to provide financial assistance in affordable housing development.

Program 4: Annual Progress Reports
The City will continue to report annually on the City’s progress toward implementation of the programs identified in the Housing Element and toward its eight- year RHNA housing production targets, including units that have been substantially rehabilitated, preserved or acquired, consistent with the standards set forth in Govern ment Code section 65583.1, subdivision (c) (
AB 879, 2017). City staff will present the Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APR) to the City Council for review through an annual housing forum before submitting to the California Housing and Community Development Department, in accordance with the requirements of Government Code Section 65400. Through the annual housing forum, the City will invite local housing advocacy groups, developers, and other interested parties to engage in a discussion on housing needs, resources, and ideas.

Page 54 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 8
JANUARY 2023
Further, the City will identify and prioritize local surplus lands available for housing development affordable to lower- income households and report on these lands annually through the APR. ( AB 1255, 2019; AB 1486, 2019 ). The City will conduct annual outreach to local affordable housing developers to establish a notification list, which will ensure interested developers are notified of the availability of surplus lands.

Program 5: Affordable Housing Streamlining
To further assist in the development of housing for extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income households, the City provides a streamlined approval process in accordance with s tate requirements for qualifying affordable housing development proposals (SB 35 )2, and will continue to report on such proposals in the Housing Element Annual Progress Report. Further, the City will continue to update its SB 35 application forms and procedures based on any future changes to s tate law. Although the City is already implementing SB 35, the Development Code has not been updated to be consistent with SB 35; therefore, the City will amend its Development Code to include the state law requirements and will continue to update to remain consistent with s tate law. The City will c ontinue to implement the provisions of SB 35 throughout the planning period and will process 100% of qualifying projects ministerially.

Program 6: By-Right Development
The City will allow developments by -right pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(i) when 20 percent or more of the units are affordable to lower-income households on vacant or underutilized sites identified in the Sites Inventory to accommodate the lower- income RHNA that were previously identified in past Housing Elements in accordance with Government Code Section 65583.2(c) and Housing Element law. Previously identified sites that may qualify for by-right development are identified in Exhibit A, Electronic Sites Inventory Form, of Appendix E of the Housing Element Update. Further, as als o described in Program 15, the City will establish objective design standards for residential and mixed-use development.

Program 7: Code Enforcement
The City’s Building Division has a robust Multi-Family Rental Housing Inspection and Maintenance Program (MFIP) to address tenant complaints, Building Code and Housing Code violations, and to enhance the quality of life for residents living in multifamily units. This program is implemented by proactively identifying deteriorated housing stock, responding to complaints, and assisting property owners with compliance to promote the rehabilitation of housing in accordance with minimum local and/or state building, housing, and health and safety standards.

The MFIP applies to all residential rental buildings with four or more units, including rooming houses with four or more rental spaces (units or rooms), with exceptions for subsidized residential rental buildings where 100 percent of the units are restricted by federal, state or local programs, or for the first five years following construction of a new development. The program operates on a two -year cycle during which all rental dwelling units and common areas on the property are inspected. The inspection determines whether the property complies with Building and Housing Codes and identifies any substandard maintenance conditions that do not meet the minimum standards established by local and state laws. Properties that do not comply, are required to be altered or repaired to obtain

2 Under Government Code Section 65913.4 (commonly referred to as “SB 35”), multifamily housing developments that satisfy objective planning standards —among other requirements —may be approved through a streamlined, ministerial approval process in certain jurisdictions, including the City of Concord. Developments approved through the streamlined approval process are not subject to a Conditional Use Permit or to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Page 55 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 9
JANUARY 2023
the required level of compliance, and a re -inspection of the property is required to verify compliance. If any rental unit is found to be unsafe to occupy, the owner is responsible for the costs and expenses for the relocation of any tenant from that unit.

As part of the MFIP, the City also offers a Self-Certification Program for well-maintained properties that do not have previously identified and uncorrected violations, do not have outstanding payments associated with the MFIP Self- Certification Program; and whose owner has a current business license for the facility. If the property is found ineligible to participate in the Self-Certification Program, the property is subject to the standard MFIP requirements and inspections. For qualifying properties, owners must submit an application packet certifying that conditions at the property achieve the rental unit and property standards listed on the MFIP’s Self -Certification Checklist.

Properties in the Self Certification Program have 25% of all rental units inspected on a random basis in the first year of their two-year program cycle.

The City also provides an online portal through the Building Division’s MFIP webpage, where residents c an submit a complaint for health, safety or maintenance issues that landlords have failed or refused to resolve. Staff members from the MFIP then notify the landlord of any required actions or repairs that must be taken. After repairs are made, the City co ntacts the tenant to confirm the issues have been resolved. Additionally, the City’s website clearly provides code enforcement resources and technical assistance for residents.

The City will continue to ensure the safety of residential buildings through enforcement of building codes on both complaint-driven and proactive bases, and through administration of the MFIP for rental housing enforcement conditions/ inspections. In addition, the City will ensure its website remains up to date with code enforcement and substandard housing resources.

Program 8: Fair Housing
The City seeks to expand the range of housing opportunities, including for residents with low and moderate incomes, older adults, people with disabilities, large families, female- headed househol ds with children, and people experiencing homelessness. To make adequate provision for the housing needs of all segments of the community, the City must ensure equal and fair housing opportunities are available to all residents. The City will continue to advance fair housing through continued implementation of the following actions:
• Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice – As part of the Contra Costa County Consortium, the City participates in the regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Cho ice. The City will continue to collaborate in the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice for the Contra Costa County Consortium and continue to work with the Contra Costa CDBG/HOME Consortium to reduce impediments to fair housing choice.
• Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity (ECHO) Fair Housing – The City contracts with ECHO Fair Housing (ECHO) for fair housing services. Services provided by ECHO include fair housing testing and counseling.

Additionally, ECHO operates a rent review and eviction ha rassment program for the City. The City will continue to contract with ECHO to provide fair housing, tenant- landlord counseling, mediation, education, and outreach services.

The City makes information available on fair housing services in both English and Spanish, and will continue to distribute resources to residents.

Page 56 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 10
JANUARY 2023
In addition to continuing those fair housing programs that the City already participates in, the City is committed to additional actions to affirmatively further fair housing, which include searching for funding sources such as regional land trust and community land trust opportunities; and increasing opportunity for new housing choices, affordability and upward mobility through a continued analysis of impediments to fair housing and a future rezoning program.

Program 9: Middle Density
To ensure an efficient use of land and more walkable neighborhoods, the City provides standards for small lot subdivisions in its low density (single-family) and medium density residential zoning districts for both attached and detached product types. To further facilitate the production of housing that may provide homeownership options and to increase opportunities for an efficient use of land in single family zones, the City will create a ministerial process by which single-family zoned lots can be subdivided to accommodate additional single- family units and duplexes, consistent with the requirements of SB 9.

Program 10: Household Assistance
The City will continue to offer and support the following programs to provide assistance for maintaining and achieving homeownership:

First T ime Home Buyer (FTHB) Program
Through the FTHB program, the City provides loans of up to $40,000 to assist qualified lower- and moderate-income FTHB households with down payments and closing costs. Bay Area Affordable Homeownership Alliance (BAAHA), a non-profit organization, assists the City in administering the program, including monitoring compliance of ownership units that are regulated and/or funded by the City.

The City will continue to provide loans to first time home buyers and will continue to work with BAAHA (or another qualified service provider) to monitor compliance of regulated ownership units.

Below Mar
ket Rate (BMR) Homeownership Program
Through its Inclusionary Housing Program (see Program 12 below), the City makes possible BMR homeownership units affordable to house holds earning 120 percent or less of area median income. BMR homes are specific dwellings where eligibility is based on income and household size. The program also assists current BMR homeowners in selling, refinancing or making capital improvements to their home. The program is designed to serve lower- and moderate-income households. BAAHA assists the City in administering the program, including ensuring compliance with affordability requirements and monitoring compliance of ownership units that are regulated and/or funded by the City.

To facilitate the production of BMR affordable homeownership units, the City will establish inclusionary requirements for condominium developments through an amendment to its Inclusionary Housing Program.

Mortgage C
redit Certificate (MCC) Program
The MCC program is administered by the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development and is a homebuyer assistance program designed to help lower ‐income families afford homeownership. The program allows homebuyers to claim a dollar‐for‐dollar tax credit for a portion of mortgage interest paid per year.

Page 57 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 11
JANUARY 2023
The City will promote the availability of this program to homeowners and families through informational resources found on the City’s website.

Program 11: Incentives to Assist in Development
The City will continue to provide financial and regulatory incentives to proactively encourage and facilitate the development of affordable housing for lower-income households, particularly those with extremely low incomes and special housing needs including large households, older adults, and persons with physical or developmental disabilities. Incentives include streamlined ministerial approval, reduced fees, parking reductions, and direct financial allocations to assist in the development of housing. The City will continue to promote the availability of development incentives through email notifications to the development community and interested parties, and will update its website within 60 days of ordinance revisions or program development.

Program 12: Inclusionary Housing
The City’s Inclusionary Housing Program requires the inclusion of a minimum percentage of affordable housing units in all projects with five units or more. The City will further advance this pr ogram through the removal of the 600-unit threshold and by providing an option for moderate-income rental units to satisfy inclusionary requirements.

The City will continue to promote the availability of this program through email notifications to the deve lopment community and interested parties, and will update its website within 60 days of any revisions.

Program 13: Lot Consolidation Incentive
To facilitate affordable housing development on smaller parcels, the City currently offers technical assistance in the parcel merge process to streamline the process in a timely manner. To further incentivize lot consolidation to facilitate housing production, especially for lower-income households, the City will provide financial or regulatory lot consolidation incentives which may include priority processing, fee deferments and waivers, and the modification of site development standards.

In ad
dition, the City will continue to facilitate lot consolidation and development of smaller parcels through the following actions:
• Publ
icize the lot consolidation program on the City’s website, outreach to the development community, and through preliminary meetings with prospective project applicants. • Assist affordable housing developers in identifying opportunities for lot consolidation using the City’s GIS Map Portal and property database.

Program 14: No Net Loss
The City will use its development permit data to monitor development activity, propo sed rezones, and identified capacity to ensure adequate remaining capacity is available to meet any remaining unmet share of the RHNA for all income levels throughout the entirety of the planning cycle, consistent with no net loss requirements. The City

Page 58 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 12
JANUARY 2023
will develop and implement a monitoring procedure pursuant to Government Code Section 65863, and will make the findings required by that code section to demonstrate whether or not remaining sites identified in the housing element are adequate to accommodate the City’s remaining share of the RHNA if a site is proposed for development with fewer units or at a different income level than shown in the Housing Element.

If, at any time during the planning period, a development project results in fewer units by income category than identified in the Sites Inventory (Appendix E) for that parcel and the City cannot find that the remaining sites in the Housing Element are adequate to accommodate the remaining RHNA by income level, the City will, within 180 days, identify and make available additional adequate sites to accommodate the remaining RHNA. Any site identified to be upzoned to meet “no net loss” requirements will satisfy the adequate site requirements of Section 65583.2 and will be consistent with the City’s obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. (SB 166, 2017)
Ad
ditionally, the City will continue to implement minimum densities in multifamily zones and zones that permit mixed-use development. This will help the City ensure an efficient use of land that is available for development.

Program 15: Objective Design Standards
The City will increase transparency and certainty in the development process through objective design standards.

The City will monitor Development Code amendments to ensure any new d esign standards applicable to housing developments are objective ( i.e., without involvement of personal or subjective judgment by a public official, and uniformly verifiable by reference to the City’s regulations), in accordance with the requirements of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330, 2019; SB 8, 2021) and related state housing law.

Furthe
r, to remove constraints to development associated with the City’s Design and Site Review process and to facilitate the development of housing on the sites ident ified to accommodate the RHNA, the City will create and adopt objective design standards to provide ministerial (by -right) processing for multifamily and mixed -use developments.

Program 16: Parking Reductions
Large parking lots owned by religious institutions provide opportunities to facilitate the development of housing for vulnerable populations. The City will amend the Development Code in accordance with state law, to identify a process by which parking requirements for religious institutions can be reduced in order to accommodate housing developments. (AB 1851)
Program 17: Preservation and Housing Rehabilitation
The City makes special efforts to help preserve affordable housing and maintain Concord’s older housing stock.

Where p ossible, the City utilizes public funds to provide assistance in the rehabilitation and conservation of deteriorated multifamily developments, single-family homes, and mobile homes. Through these programs, the City will continue to help preserve and rehabilitate housing for tenants and homeowners in extremely low -, very low -, and low-income households, households with disabilities, and older adults.

Page 59 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 13
JANUARY 2023
Program 18: Preservation of At -Risk Affordable Housing Units The City will continue to monitor affordable units under a City Regulatory Agreement and affordable units identified as being at-risk of conversion to market-rate housing. This will include collaboration on the identification of financial resources and establishing cooperative partnerships with affordable housing developers and/or property owners willing to maintain units as affordable to lower-income households, including extremely low-income households. For those properties under current City Regulatory Agreements, the City will work directly with property owners to negotiate potential term extensions, as funding allows. Preventing the conversion of at -risk units to market -rate housing will ensure tenants are not displaced and that affordable units are not lost from the City’s housing stock.

The extension of existing project-based rental assistance covenants, or utilization of other funding sources, will help preserve and/or extend affordability.

Ad
ditionally, the City contracts with Compliance Services, LLC to assist staff with monitoring and managing affordability compliance for multifamily complexes that are utilizing City funds. The City will work toward maintaining the rent restrictions of at-risk developments by monitoring any changes in ownership, management, and status of deed restrictions. Further, the City will work with the owners of these developments to retain the units and, where feasible, provide technical assistance to property owners and/or organizations interested in purchasing and maintaining the properties should the current owners be interested in selling.

Program 19: Replacement Requirements
Consistent with the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (Government Code Section 66300(d)) and related State housing law, the City requires that housing development projects provide at least the same number of dwelling units as any units demolished to build the project, including any units existing on the site within the past five years. Government Code Section 66300(d) and the City further require that f or demolished units subject to certain affordability restrictions or occupied by low- or very low -income households, the project meet applicable requirements for affordability, relocation benefits, and right of first refusal for existing occupants. The Cit y will work with tenants of units that could be redeveloped and provide them with linguistically appropriate educational materials regarding tenant rights and resources.

Program 20: Residential Tenant Protections
Rental Tenant Protection Program
In July 2 020, the City Council adopted the Residential Tenant Protection Program (RTPP) (Chapter 19.40 of the Municipal Code) which requires, among other things that a tenant be provided a written lease with specified minimum lease terms and relocation assistance f or no-fault evictions. This data can be used to identify potential fair housing or rent related issues. The data will further inform decision making on City housing policies and programs related to the impact of rents and/or potential fair housing and rent disparities or issues in the local housing market.

Residential Tenant Anti-Ha rassment Protection Ordinance The City has recently taken action to further Fair Housing practices in the City by prohibiting discrimination, violations of tenants’ rights to privacy, and landlord retaliation through a Residential Tenant Anti -Harassment Protection (RTAHP) Ordinance.

Page 60 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 14
JANUARY 2023
The City is and will continue working with local housing advocacy groups to develop and distribute linguistically appropriate educational materials pertaining to the RTPP and the Residential Tenant Anti -Harassment Protection Ordinance to property owners, apartment managers, and tenants, with more intensive bilingual outreach efforts in the City’s R/ECAP along Monument Boulevard.

Tenant/Community Opportunity to Purchase Act
With adequate funding, a Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA) can provide long -term anti -displacement benefits by giving tenants increased options to have secure housing when the property they rent goes up for sale.

A Community Opportunity to Purchase Act (COPA) is a similar policy geared toward non -profit affordable housing providers, community land trusts, and similar entities, who may purchase a property to maintain affordability and prevent displacement of current tenants. While TOPA programs typically require tenants to purchase a property in order to retain occupancy, adequately funded COPA programs can allow affordable housing providers to acquire and continue operating at- risk rental properties, thereby providing long -term housing security to tenants without their having to purchase the property.

Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for Eviction
To further protect tenants from displacement, increase household stability, and preserve housing that is affordable to lower-income earning households, the City will adopt ordinances to establish regulations for rent stabilization and just cause for eviction. These ordinances will include additional protections for residents, above and beyond those provided under s tate law. The City will continue to work closely with community -based organizations and interested stakeholders to ensure that the ordinances will provide the regulations necessary to protect residents from displacement without constraining new housing development.

Program 21: Special Housing N eeds
The City will provide assistance for those with special housing needs including older adults, large families, female- headed households, and persons with disabilities through the following methods:
• Home Match Contra Costa - This program provides matching services for older adults that would like to share their homes for companionship, extra income, or assistance with home maintenance. This service includes applicant screenings, home visits, interviews, on- going mediation, outreach, and written agreements for living arrangements.
• Increased Accessibility - The City will promote increased accessibility by connecting developers and residents to resources on design features that are accessible and safe to all people regardless of age, size, ability, or disability. This can include guidance on home retrofits for increased accessibility and referrals to independent living centers.
• The City will coordinate with the Regional Center of East Bay to implement an outreach program that informs families within the City on housing and services available for persons with disabilities.

Additionally, the City will continue to support the special housing needs of large families and female- headed households through development fees on new on-residential construction and tenant improvements to provide continued funding for the Concord Child Care Program.

Page 61 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 15
JANUARY 2023
Program 22: Support for People Experiencing Homelessness The City will provide processes that facilitate the production of housing to meet the needs of those experiencing homelessness. Through this program the City will:
• Amend the Development Code to allow supportive housing by -right in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses, consistent with State requirements. Supportive housing shall be permitted in accordance with California Government Code Section 65651 (
AB 2162, 2018).
• Amend the Development Code to ensure that Emergency Shelters are not subject to the Design and Site Review process and to ensure that the staff parking requirement is calculated based on the demonstrated demand to accommodate staff (
AB 139, 2019).
• Amend the Development Code to ensure that Single Room Occupancy (SRO) or Group Housing are not subject to the Design and Site Review process.
• Amend the Development Code to permit the development of Low -Barrier Navigation Centers as a use by - right, without requiring a discretionary action, in mixed-use and non-residential zones that permit residential uses ( AB 101, 2019 ). Low -Barrier N avigation Centers are housing first, low -barrier, service- enriched shelters focused on moving people into permanent housing that provides temporary living facilities while case managers connect individuals experiencing homelessness to income, public benefits, health services, shelter, and housing.

Further, the City provides case management services to assist in outreach and connect those experiencing homelessness to available resources. The City will continue to provide this service throughout the planning period.

Program 2 3: Water and Sewer Priority for Affordable Housing Pursuant to Chapter 727, Statutes of 2005 (SB 1087), the City is required to deliver its adopted Housing Element and any amendments thereto to local water and sewer service providers. This legislation allows for coordination between the City and water and sewer providers when considering approval of new residential projects. The Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) is responsible for providing water service to the City, and the City oversees wastewater collection and conveyance. As such, the City will distribute a copy of the adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element to CCWD, the area water provider, and coordinate internally with the Public Works Department for review and consideration when reviewing new residential projects to ensure adequate water and sewer capacity is available to accommodate housing, especially housing for lower-income households.

The current 2020 CCWD Regional Urban Water Management Plan acknowledges the requirements and incl udes the projected water use for single -family and multifamily housing needed for lower income households. The Community Development Department will coordinate with the area water provider and with Public Works to prioritize proposed developments with housing affordable to lower-income households, including extremely low- and very-low income by providing copies of subsequent updates or amendments to the Housing Element, if any. The coordination efforts will further support the prioritization of water and sewer services for future residential development, including units affordable to lower-income households, as a public agency or private entity providing water or sewer services must adopt written policies and procedures that grant a priority of service to housing units affordable to

Page 62 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 16
JANUARY 2023
lower income households and shall not deny or condition the approval of an application for services without specific written findings in accordance with state law.

Program 2 4: Short Term Rentals
A short-term rental is typically defined as a dwelling unit, or portion thereof, that is offered or provided to a guest by a short-term rental owner or operator for fewer than 30 consecutive nights. Such rentals are also commonly referred to as vacation rentals.3 While short-term rentals can provide a positive economic impact to a city with an additional income through tax revenues, they can also reduce the available housing supply, often impacting residents who depend on affordable housing, contributing to increasing housing and rental prices.

The Concord community has expressed concern over displacement of tenants through conversion of conventional rental dwelling units to short-term rentals (e.g., AirBnB and VRBO units). Through this program, the City will evaluate the development of regulations to address this issue.

Program 2 5: Advocacy for State Housing Legislation, Policies and Funding The City continually monitors pending State housing legislation, policies, and funding, and advocates for changes that will increase affordability, homeownership opportunities, and to reduce the risk of displacement and homelessness in Concord. As an example of such advocacy, on May 9, 2022, the City Council sent a letter to the Assembly Appropriations Committee supporting AB 2170, a pending bill that would promote homeownership by giving owner-occupants and public entities a “First Look” at purchasing bank-owned properties and prohibiting “bulk sales” of foreclosed homes.

Through this program, the City will continue to advocate for changes at the St ate level that will help address Concord’s housing needs, including changing the methodology for allocation of Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs), which makes it difficult for affordable housing projects in Concord to obtain LIHTCs.

Program 2 6: Place -Based Strategies
In an effort to revitalize areas with low resources and opportunities, the City will work to conserve and improve assets through targeted investments. Investments would include future public and infrastructure investments, economic vitality, workforce development, grant pursuits to fund future urban greening projects, and annual events to support local businesses. Further, the City will conduct targeted outreach in these areas.

2.6 Scope of Analysis
The project being evaluated within this document is the HEU, which is a policy document that conceptualizes how the City will provide the capacity for a total of 5,073 housing units, as assigned by ABAG during the 6th Cycle RNHA, during the period of 2023 through 2031. As detailed in Table 1, based on the City’s current general plan land use and zoning, the City has the realistic capacity to accommodate 5,533 net new housing units. The HEU includes programs that conceptualize how the City will provide the capacity for these additional housing units.

No development is currently proposed under the HEU; however, implementation of the HEU is designed to facilitate construction of 5,533 new units throughout the City. Additionally, the HEU includes programs that support the

3 Law Insider. https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/short-term-rental

Page 63 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 17
JANUARY 2023
existing and future resid ents of the City. Given the developed and built out nature of the City, new housing units constructed throughout the City may ultimately qualify for one or more categorical exemptions under CEQA (such as Class 3, Small Structures or Class 32, Infill Develo pment Projects) or for other CEQA Streamlining provisions, and with s tate laws to promote the development of infill affordable housing. As appropriate , the checklist below addresses the potential physical impacts associated with implementation of the HEU.

Page 64 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 18
JANUARY 2023
3 Initial Study Checklist

1. Project title:

City of Concord General Plan Amendment: 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2. Lead agency name and address:

City of Concord
1950 Parkside Drive
Concord, California 94519

3. Contact person and phone number:

Aaron Sage, Principal Planner
925-671-3465

4. Project location:

Citywide

5. Project sponsor’s name and address:

City of Concord
1950 Parkside Drive
Concord, California 94519

6. General plan designation:

Not applicable for adoption of a Housing Element Update

7. Zoning:

Not applicable for adoption of a Housing Element Update

8. Description of project. (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary):

The purpose of the HEU is to provide an update to the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan. The HEU involves an amendment to the General Plan in order to adopt, as required by state law, an updated Housing Element. The intent of the HEU is to address the comprehensive housing needs of the City. State law requires jurisdictions to update their Housing Elements every eight years to outline their existing and projected housing needs, to discuss barriers to providing that housing, and to propose actions to address housing needs and barriers. The programs proposed in the HEU are intended to be implemented over an eight-year planning horizon (2023-2031). See Section 2 for a detailed project description.

Page 65 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 19
JANUARY 2023

9. Surrounding land uses and setting (Briefly describe the project’s surroundings):

The City of Concord is located in the northern-central region of Contra Costa County, approximately 20 miles east of the City of San Francisco and 40 miles southwest of the City of Sacramento. The City encompasses approximately 19,840 acres (31 square miles), which is approximately 4% of the total land in Contra Costa County. An 8 square-mile portion of the City consists of the Concord Naval Weapons Station (CNWS). The City is situated in a valley that is framed by the Suisun Bay to the north and rolling hillsides to the east and south; neighboring cities include Clayton, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, and Walnut Creek. Primary citywide land uses include residential, commercial, mixed- use, public/quasi- public, and industrial. The 8 -square mile CNWS is zoned as a Study District (S).

Major transportation routes that transect the City include State Route 4, State Route 242, and Interstate 680. There are two Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART ) stations within the City that connect Concord to other East Bay cities and San Francisco, including the North Concord/Martinez Station and Downtown Concord Station. Also, the Buchanan Field Airport, one of two Contra Costa County airports, is located northwest of the City, just beyond the City limits. The C ity limits extend to Mallard Reservoir in the north and beyond Ygnacio Valley Road to the City of Walnut Creek in the south; Interstate 680 borders the City to the west and the eastern boundary is defined by the former CNWS and the City of Clayton.

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement):

Approval from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environme ntal review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (Public Resources Code section 21080 .3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

On September 21, 2022, in accordance with Assembly Bill 52 (Public Resources Code § 21080.3(b)), and Senate Bill (SB) 18, the City sent a notice about the project via certified mail to inform all California Native American tribes that have requested such notice of a project application within a particular geographic area for which the tribe is traditionally and culturally affiliated. The notice included project information and information on how to formally request consultation. Pursuant to SB 18 timelines, the California Native American tribes had 90 days from the date of th e notice (September 21,2022 to December 20, 2022) to request consultation with the City regarding the project. No tribes requested consultation.

Page 66 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 20
JANUARY 2023
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agriculture and
Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and
Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise Population and
Housing
Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance

Page 67 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 21
JANUARY 2023
Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Signature

Date

1/27/2023

Page 68 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 22
JANUARY 2023
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from “Earlier Analyses,” as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).

Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “ Less T han Significant With Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinanc es). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used o r individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance

Page 69 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 23
JANUARY 2023
Impact Evaluation Methodology and Assumptions
Based on information available to the City at the time of preparation of this draft IS /ND, the following sections evaluate the 6th Cycle Housing Element’s reasonably foreseeable direct and indirect impact on the environment.

The HEU is a policy document, consisting of housing program s; no actual development is proposed as part of the update. Therefore, its adoption would not, in itself, produce environmental impacts. Implementation of the programs contained in the document would accommodate development required to meet the City’s 6th Cycle RHNA allocation. Although implementation of the programs contained in the document would facilitate residential development required to meet the City’s 6 th Cycle RHNA allocation, any proposed land use changes would follow the adoption of the proposed HEU and would be subject to future environmental review, as required, under CEQA, once sufficient project-specific information is made available. Although Program 8 includes an objective to rezone sites to increase multifamily residential options in moderate- and high -resource, racially segregated areas , no specific sites or other geographic areas have been identified for this conceptual rezoning, as this effort will require further analysis and community discussion. Therefore, no site-specific rezoning or land use changes are occurring as a result of adoption of the HEU . All future projects would also be required to adhere to r elevant development standards and design guidelines contained in the City’s Municipal Code and other applicable regulatory requirements governing the nature and quality of development within the City.

Due to the programmatic nature and phased implementati on strategy of the proposed Housing Element, it is anticipated that the HEU as currently described would not result in a significant impact to the environment. Many future development projects facilitated by the HEU would qualify as “infill” as defined in Section 21061.3 of CEQA.

As infill, certain projects may be eligible for existing or proposed streamlining efforts and/or a categorical exemption (CE) under CEQA. However, as with any “project” level development, the precise nature of review required would be assessed by the City on a case-by-case basis, and certain projects accommodated by the HEU would still require project level CEQA review and be subject to discretionary approval . In addition, regardless of whether the review process is discretionary or ministerial, any project proposed in the City would still be subject to all applicable ordinances, policies, and standards in effect as of the date of the developer agreement.

In addition, the California Legislature has recently passed a large number of laws related to housing production.

These laws include Senate Bill (SB) 9 (by-right duplexes), SB 10 (allowing jurisdictions to upzone for up to ten units in certain locations), SB 290 (reforms to State Density Bonus Law), and SB 478, which limits floor area ratio (FAR) and lot coverage standards that limit multifamily housing. This trend of laws aimed at addressing the State ’s housing affordability crisis is expected to continue into the 2023 legislative session and beyond and will likely result in the facilitation of further streamlining efforts and removal of “barriers” to housing development (including discretionary review requirements).

Further, the precise language of the HEU programs would generally allow for a streamlined review process only under a limited and defined set of circumstances , where the primary objective is the achievement of measurable progress towards meeting the City’s 6
th Cycle RHNA allocation, as required by s tate law. In addition, when unique situations present themselves, housing projects would likely undergo a more comprehensive environmental review, where any impacts identified with the project would be addressed through mitigation specific to the impact.

Page 70 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 24
JANUARY 2023

3.1 Aesthetics

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
I. AESTHETICS – Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?

c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that
are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict
with applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality?

d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?

Explanation of Checklist Judgements:
a-d: No Impact.

The HEU is a policy document and adoption of th is element alone would not produce environmental impacts. The HEU consists of an updated suite of housing program s; for which, no actual development or site-specific rezoning is proposed as part of adoption of the HEU. Implementation of the programs contained in the document would accommodate development required to meet Concord’s 2023-2031 RHNA allocation, which specifies a need for the construction of 5,073 housing units. To accommodate this RHNA allocation, City staff reviewed the inventory of vacant and und erutilized sites and identified ADU projections, permit pipeline projects, and sites within the CRP Area Plan that can accommodate the RHNA allocation for the 2023 -2031 Housing Element Update. Within the identified sites, 5,073 RHNA allocation will be accommodated as well as an additional 460 buffer units for a total capacity of 5,533 units. Of this total, the City has identified 624units currently that are in the development permit pipeline.

Because the City lacks a substantial amount of vacant land, the majority of residential projects completed during this period are expected to be located on infill sites within existing urbanized areas. This type of development is more likely to improve rather than degrade the aesthetics of a neighborhood because it wo uld add architectural features and elements on otherwise underutilized and/or deteriorating sites. Furthermore, any such development would be expected to conform to existing General Plan policies, municipal code, and zoning code development

Page 71 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 25
JANUARY 2023
standards. As such, the adoption of the General Plan Amendment and the HEU would not degrade the visual character or quality, scenic resources, or generate light and glare impacts.

The HEU do es not propose actual development or construction, nor do es it provide any design guidelines for structures. The proposed element update will not change or affect the way projects are designed. It will not provide any goals, policies, or programs that would significantly degrade the scenic quality of the City. Existing development standards and design guidelines will remain in place after adoption of the HEU . Therefore, n o aesthetic impacts would occur from the adoption of this policy document.

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES – In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:

a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?

d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

Explanation of Checklist Judgements:
a-e: No Impact.

Page 72 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 26
JANUARY 2023
The HEU is a policy document, consisting of a suite of housing programs, and its adoption would not, in itself, produce environmental impacts, because no actual development or site- specific rezoning is proposed as part of the update. Although implementation of the programs contained in the document would acco mmodate development required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation, such development would not impact agricultural resources. The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) maps identify land for the City of Concord primarily as Urban and Built-Up Land. The City contains two primary areas not classified as Built-Up Land; these two areas are classified by the State Department of Conservation (DOC) as Grazing Lands and cover the inland portion of the Concord Naval Weapons Station (CNWS) and the Lime Ridge Open Space Preserve (DOC 2018). Additionally, a portion of the CNWS located adjacent to Willow Pass Road and Olivera Road is designated as Farmland of Local Importance. Patches of Unique Farmland that are designated as a combination of vacant and single -family residential, are located near the southern border of the City limits. Overall, Concord’s Planning Area per the City’s General Plan EIR, contains 10,299 acres of Grazing Land, 466 acres of Farmland of Local Importance, and 28 acres of Unique Farmland (City of Concord 2006).

However, there would be no impacts to important farmland from implementation of the HEU which does not change any boundaries or the potential for agricultural activities. There are also no programs that would conflict with existing agricultural zoning or a Williamson Act contract. In addition, because the City does not contain forest land, there is no rezoning or development proposed on forest land, or land or timber property zoned as Timberland Production. Furthermore, because the City lacks a substantial amount of vacant land, the majority of residential projects completed to meet the RHNA allocation are expected to be located on infill sites within urbanized areas not currently used for agricultural purposes nor zoned to allow future agricultural operations. For these reasons, the HEU would have no impact on agricultural and forestry resources.

3.3 Air Quality

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
III. AIR QUALITY – Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard?

c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?

Page 73 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 27
JANUARY 2023
The City lies within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB); the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is the regional air quality agency which has jurisdiction over the SFBAAB. Therefore, the City is subject to the rules and regulations enforced by the BAAQMD, as well as ambient air quality standards adopted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and national air quality standards adopted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).

In June 2010, the BAAQMD adopted thresholds of significance to assist lead agencies in the evaluation and mitigation of air quality impacts under CEQA. The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines were re- released in May 2017 and include the same thresholds as in the 2010 Guidelines for criteria air pollutants, toxic air contaminants (TACs), and greenhouse gases (GHGs) (BAAQMD 2017a).

In general, the BAAQMD significance thresholds for reactive organic gases (ROG), oxides of nitrogen (NO x),
particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM10), particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5), and carbon monoxide (CO) address the first two air quality significance criteria incorporated in the initial study checklist questions above. According to the BAAQMD, these thresholds are intended to maintain ambient air quality concentrations of these criteria air pollutants below state and federal standards and to prevent a cumulatively considerable contribution to regional nonattainment with ambient air quality stand ards. The TAC thresholds (cancer and noncancer risks) and local CO thresholds address the third significance criterion incorporated in the initial study checklist questions, and the BAAQMD odors threshold addresses the fourth.

An area is designated as “in attainment” when it is in compliance with the federal and/or state standards. These standards are set by the USEPA or CARB for the maximum level of a given air pollutant that can exist in the outdoor air without unacceptable effects on human health or publ ic welfare with a margin of safety. The SFBAAB is designated non-attainment for the federal 8 -hour O
3 and 24-hour PM2.5 standards. The area is in attainment or unclassified for all other federal standards. The area is designated non -attainment for state standards for 1 -hour and 8-hour O3, 24-hour PM10, annual PM10, and annual PM2.5.

The BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan provides a regional strategy to protect public health and protect the climate. To protect public health, the 2017 Clean Air Plan includes all feasible measures to reduce emissions of O3 precursors (ROG and NOx) and reduce O3 transport to neighboring air basins. In addition, the 2017 Clean Air Plan builds upon the BAAQMD efforts to reduce fine particulate matter (PM) and TACs. To protect the climate, the plan defines a vision for transitioning the region to a post-carbon economy needed to achieve ambitious GHG reduction targets for 2030 and 2050, and provides a regional climate protection strategy that will put the Bay Area on a pathway to achieve those GHG reduction targets.

Explanation of Checklist Judgements:
a-d: Less than Significant Impact.

Page 74 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 28
JANUARY 2023
The HEU would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the BAAQMD guidelines or Clean Air Plan . The HEU would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, nor would it result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Lastly, because the HEU does not affect land uses that are typically associated with the creation of objectionable odors (such as rendering plants, landfills, treatment plants, etc.), its adoption would have no impact from odors. Based on the above, the HEU would have a less than significant impact on air quality.

3.4 Biological Resources

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or
by the California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?

d) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?

e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?

Page 75 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 29
JANUARY 2023
Explanation of Checklist Judgements:
a-d: Less than Significant Impact.

The HEU is a policy document, consisting of a suite of housing program s; no actual development or site-specific rezoning is proposed as part of the update. Therefore, its adoption would not, in itself, produce environmental impacts. Implementation of the programs contained in the document would accommodate development required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation. Future residential development to meet the RHNA allocation is expected to be located largely on infill sites within urbanized areas where little or no native vegetation exists and where little potential exists for the occurrence of sensitive species habitat, riparian habitat, a sensitive natural community, federally protected wetlands, or wildlife corridors or nursery sites. Furthermore, the proposed HEU does not include any site- specific design or development proposal that would have the potential to adversel y affect biological resources. As such, the HEU would have no direct impact on biological resources. At the time a future residential project is proposed, the City would conduct subsequent environmental review pursuant to CEQA prior to approval of the proj ect or issuance of building permits. Future residential projects would also be required to comply with federal and s tate laws, including but not limited to the Clean Water Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Federal and California Endangered Species Act, and California Native Plant Protection Act.

The 2030 Concord General Plan contains policies related to protection and preservation of sensitive biological resources. Pertinent goals and policies related to sensitive biological resources are listed below. • Policy POS -3.1.3: Require adequate building setbacks for development adjacent to creek banks and major drainage ways to protect neighboring properties from erosion and flooding. • Policy POS -3.4.1: Conserve wildlife habitat and wildlife corridors, inclu ding seasonal migration routes, and require appropriate mitigation in the even such areas impacted by development. • Policy POS-3.4-2: Protect rare, threatened, or endangered species and their habitats through the environmental review process and in accordance with State and Federal law. • Policy POS-3.4-3: Retain significant vegetation, including native vegetation and heritage trees, where feasible, and require replacement plantings as appropriate for mitigation. • Policy POS -3.4-6: Avoid construction- related activities during breeding and nesting seasons for special status species.

The proposed HEU does not alter any local, regional, State, or f ederal biological protection standards, nor would they alter the City’s existing general plan policies related to protection and preservation of sensitive biological resources. Although the policies and objectives of the HEU encourage housing, any new hous ing would have to comply with all current biological preservation policies, standards, and regulations. The proposed H EU does not encourage housing or development to be located in stream corridors, wetlands, riparian areas, or any other type of habitats for endangered or threatened species. Therefore, the HEU would have a less than significant impact on biological resources criteria a through d.
e-f: No Impact.

Page 76 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 30
JANUARY 2023
The City’s Municipal Code includes policies and standards protecting creek and riparian habitat as well as tree preservation. The proposed HEU would not change or conflict with these existing development standards. The City is not within the boundaries of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or other local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. For these reasons, the proposed project would have no impact on biological resource criteria e through f.

3.5 Cultural Resources

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource
pursuant to §15064.5?

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?

c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?

Explanation of Checklist Judgements:
a–c: Less than Significant Impact.

The Housing Element Update is a policy document, consisting of a suite of housing program s; no actual development or site-specific rezoning is proposed as part of the update. Therefore, its adoption would not, in itself, produce environmental impacts. Implementation of the programs contained in the document would accommodate development required to meet Concord's RHNA allocation.

A review of the City’s planning area conducted in 2003 and 2004 by the Northwest Information Center found 12 recorded Native American archaeological resources and 7 historic -period archaeological resources listed with the State Historical Resour ces Information System. It was determined during this review that many of the historic resources in Concord date back its founding, and are located near Todos Santos Plaza (City of Concord 2006).

Furthermore, the City contains two National Register of Historic Places sites as well as 33 additional sites and structures which are designated local historical landmarks as important local historic resources. These known cultural resources are not anticipated to be impacted by potential future development facilitated under the HEU.

Future residential projects would be required to comply with federal and state laws described below.

The 2030 Concord General Plan contains policies for the protection and preservation of cultural resources, and all new development must be consistent with these policies. Pertinent policies related to sensitive cultural resources are listed below.

Page 77 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 31
JANUARY 2023
• Policy POS -4.1.1: Preserve all City, state, and federally designated historic sites and structures to the maximum extent feasible.
• Policy POS-4.1.2: Consult with the State Office of Historic Preservation with respect to managing impacts of development and land use on historic and archaeological resources. • Policy POS-4.1.3: Preserve important historic and archaeological sites during new development, reuse, and intensification.
• Policy POS-4.1-4: In identified sensitive areas, require archaeological studies as part of the development review process.
• Policy LU-1.1.10: Ensure that new development in historic neighborhoods is compatible in scale and style to the character of the neighborhood, encourage retention of historic buildings through flexible reuse provisions.
• Policy LU-4.2.4: Encourage new and redevelopment projects to include amenities for public benefit, such as affordable housing, pedestrian-oriented facilities, and historic preservation. • Policy LU-4.2.8: Encourage preservation of historic buildings to the maximum extent possible.

Additionally, Assembly Bill (AB) 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18 require early consultation with culturally affiliated tribes in the area. As future projects are planned and developed, they must adhere to these General Plan policies, AB 52, and SB 18 as it pertains to historical and culturally sensitive resources.

All future development facilitated by the HEU would be in accordance with s tate laws pertaining to the potential discovery of human remains. In the event that human remains are discovered, then the provisions set forth in California Public Resources Code section 5097.98 and State Health and Safety Code section 7050.5 would be implemented in consultation with the assigned Most Likely Descendant as identified by the N ative American Heritage Commission (NAHC). No further construction activities would be permitted until the coroner is contacted, as well as any applicable Native American tribes. The City shall be required to comply with the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (2001), the federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990), as well as AB 52 and SB 18 early consultation requirements. On September 21, 2022, in accordance with AB 52 and SB 18, the City sent a notice about the project via certified mail to inform all California Native American tribes that have requested such notice of a project application within a particular geographic area for which the tribe is traditionally and culturally affiliated. The notice included project information and information on how to formally request consultation. Pursuant to SB 18 timelines, the California Native American tribes had 90 days from the date of the notice (September 21,2022 to December 20, 2022) to request consultation with the City regarding the project. No tribes requested consultation. Also, as regulations are in place to treat any inadvertent uncovering of human remains during grading, impacts to human remains would be less than significant.

The HEU would not change or alter policies to protect and/or review cultural resources. For these reasons, impacts are less than significant.

Page 78 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 32
JANUARY 2023

3.6 Energy

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VI. Energy – Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?

b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency?

Explanation of Checklist Judgements:
a–b: Less than Significant Impact.

Future residential development projects envisioned under the HEU would increase the demand for electricity, natural gas, and petroleum during both construction and operations. Energy use during construction associated with new development projects under the HEU is anticipated to be in the form of fuel consumption (e.g., gasoline and diesel fuel) to operate heavy equipment, light-duty vehicles, machinery, and generators for lighting. In addition, temporary grid power may also be provided to construction trailers or electric construction equipment. Energy use during the construction of individual projects would be temporary in nature, and equi pment used would be typical of construction projects in the region. Construction activities associated with residential development under the HEU would be required to utilize fuel -efficient equipment consistent with State and federal regulations and would comply with State measures to reduce the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy.

Long-term operation of new development projects under the HEU would require electricity and natural gas service to power internal and exterior building lighting, and heating and cooling systems. As previously discussed, given the already built-out nature of the City and lack of substantial vacant land, future residential projects are expected to be located on infill sites, which are already served by energy providers. The HEU would also include incentives to prioritize future development projects close to high quality transit areas and existing commercial/retail, recreational, and institutional land uses, which would reduce trip distances and encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation such as bicycling and walking; refer to Program 11 in the HEU. This would help reduce new development projects consumption of petroleum.

Page 79 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 33
JANUARY 2023
New development projects envisioned under the HEU would be subject to the energy conservation requirements of the California Energy Code (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations, California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings) and the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen, Title 24, Part 11 of the California Code of Regulations). The California Energy Code provides energy conservation standards for all new and renovated commercial and residential buildings constructed in California.

CALGreen sets targets for energy efficiency; water consumption; plumbing systems; diversion of construction waste from landfills; and use of environmentally sensitive materials in construction and design.

During both construction and operation, future residential projects would comply with all state regulations related to solid waste generation, storage, and disposal, including the California Integrated Waste Management Act. During construction, all waste generated would be recycled to the maximum extent possible. Additionally, the City adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2013, which outlines energy strategies for Citywide energy reductions, including a green building ordinance, zero net energy standards, energy audits, demand response programs, efficient appliances, and construction energy use (City of Concord 2013). The HEU, as a policy document, along with any future residential development, would not conflict with these strategies.

Based on the above, the HEU would result in less than significant impacts associated with energy.

3.7 Geology and Soils

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for
the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
a result of the project, and potentially result
in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

Page 80 of 256 ends

CITY OF CONCORD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT: 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE / INITIAL

STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
13039.01 34
JANUARY 2023
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
Explanation of Checklist Judgements:
a-f: Less than Significant Impact.

The HEU is a policy document, consisting of a suite of housing programs; no actual physical development or site- specific rezoning is proposed as part of the update. Therefore, adoption would not, in itself, produce environmental impacts. Implementation of the programs contained in the HEU would accommodate development required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation.
a: As Concord lies within a region known to be seismically active, the potential exists for people and structures associated with new residential projects to be exposed to strong ground shaking, ground failure, and soil instability.

The Concord Fault is located within the City limits and the Hayward fault is located approximately 15 miles west of the City. Given the close proximity of these faults to the City, a strong earthquake on this fault could produce severe ground shaking in the City. Despite the potential of the se fault systems to produce severe ground shaking in the City, no significant impact regarding fault hazards would occur, because the HEU would be consistent with the other elements of the General Plan, including the Chapter Safety and Noise Element. This Element contains several policies that would minimize potential seismic hazards; future residential development facilitated under the HEU would be subject to project-specific review and these General Plan policies. Additionally, the potential for significant adverse impacts to result from these phenomena would be substantially reduced through adherence to requirements specified in the Alquist–Priolo Act, the Uniform Building Code, Title 24 of the California Building Code, and all development regulations of the City. Compliance with these building standards would minimize impacts associated with seismic hazards.
b–e: Most lowland areas with r elatively level ground surface are not prone to landslides. Other forms of slope instability are also unlikely to occur except along stream banks and terrace margins. Highland areas are more susceptible to slope instability and landslides, especially in the upland areas along the outskirts of Concord (City of Concord 2006). The strong ground motion that occurs during earthquakes is capable of inducing landslides and debris flow (mudslides). These types of failure generally occur where unstable slope conditions already exist. The City has geologic review procedures and General Plan policies in place to address these hazards. Hillside areas

Page 81 of 256 ends

Concord City CouncilMarch 14, 2023

Concord City Council
March 14, 2023