Concord City Council
January 23, 2024

-

"







&


 
'






(
















#)
*
#



#
'






$
#




#


#
')


-

"



)

*
+
,!







 




#



 
'
+
.

"

"
-

"














'

'%
/
 

!

$








"(

(






%
/
 

&




, 


-

"














 
'(



'
-






01 "

"

 
!


%

"

 "

"
-

"










'

, 









(
(

(

(


'
.
(




, 

(






'(

/
$
#

-




 



"
-

"



)

*
+
,!



!









 






0 '

%
0!"2!
!


"



01
2

!

 "1 
0
"1!

 "

"

!","
13
 

4 
 .







*

'
'


5  
"&%
,"

+ 
!,!

'






,
*


/0


*

'

"






0! +


!!


%


1
21!
!
"
*


1
*




&2
*3

-

"







0


"%
 

%

"

6



"




1  "!
!%"

%!
"%
 
"

+
"!



"30
%"


" 
%

7! 0  

"
%!


%

"

 "

!

,
8

"3



'
#

1#
'


&






$
'

,




'
'




'

&

$
#'


'



*



 

)
0,

9





'

4

 

1


5

)
!
*



 

Staff Report
Date: January 23, 2024
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Reviewed by: Kevin Marstall, PE, Director of Community Development Carlton Thompson, PE, City Engineer
Prepared by: Bruce Davis, PE, Senior Civil Engineer
[email protected]
(925) 671-3470
Subject: Considering adoption of a Resolution accepting the Development Impact Fee Report for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 and making findings in compliance with AB 1600. (Government Code Section 66000 et. seq.)
CEQA: Not a project/exempt pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065, CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060,
15061(b)(3), 15262, 15273, and/or 15378.

Report in Brief
The Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Section 66000 et. seq.) requires each local agency to make public a report on developer fees within 180 days after the close of each fiscal year. The City of Concord (City) completed its year-end audit and posted the required AB1600 report to the City’s website on December 27, 2023. Section 66006(b)(2) requires each local agency to review the report at a regularly scheduled public meeting not less than 15 days after the information is made available to the public. The City collects several development fees and in-lieu fees subject to the Mitigation Fee Act’s reporting requirements1.
1 Generally, development fees are imposed on development projects to defray the cost of new or additional public facilities that benefit the development, whereas, in-lieu fees are typically paid by a developer as an alternative to complying with a requirement of the code otherwise applicable to the development.

5.e5.e5.e5.e5.e

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 5.e
January 9, 2024
In addition to the annual reporting, at least every five years, the City must also (A) identify the purpose to which the fee is to be put, (B) demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged, (C) identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing in incomplete improvements identified when the fee was established or increased, and (D) designate the approximate dates when the anticipated funding will be secured to complete the identified improvements. This report and attached resolution satisfies the annual reporting requirement and makes the aforementioned findings.

Recommended Action
Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) accepting the report of development impact fees and expenditures for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2023, and adopt the findings in compliance with AB 1600.

Background
AB 1600 (Statutes of 1998, Mitigation Fee Act), codified as Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. governs how public agencies collect, maintain, and spend impact fees imposed on developers for the purpose of defraying costs of public facilities. AB 1600 sets forth requirements that local agencies must follow if they exact fees from developers to defray the cost of constructing public facilities related to development projects, and mandates reporting requirements for these fees. The annual required report consists of a brief description of the fee type in the account or fund, the amount of the fee, the beginning and ending balance of the account or fund, the amount of fees collected, and the interest earned. At least every five years, the City must (A) identify the purpose to which the fee is to be put, (B) demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged, (C) identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing in incomplete improvements identified when the fee was established or increased, and (D) designate the approximate dates when the anticipated funding will be secured to complete the identified improvements.

Through the General Plan and various fee studies, the City has established the nexus between development, the capital improvements necessary to mitigate the effects of development, and approved fees to fund the mitigation measures.

Analysis
During the previous fiscal year, the City collected certain developer fees that are subject to the reporting requirement. These developer fees are Traffic Mitigation (Off-Site Street Improvement Program (OSIP) and Bailey Road Traffic Improvements fees) and Drainage Acreage fees. Additionally, the City receives the following in-lieu fees, which are required to comply with AB 1600 reporting: Inclusionary Housing Fee, Parking In- lieu Fee, and Parkland in-lieu fees.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 5.e
January 9, 2024
The City no longer collects an Arts in Public Places fees, which the Council rescinded in 1996. The various fees are listed on the attached transaction report along with detailed expenditure and revenue reports for each fee the City collected (Attachment 2). Not all development projects are required to pay each fee.

The Mitigation Fee Act requires the City to perform each of the following related to developer and in-lieu fees:

1. Deposit the fees collected into separate capital facilities funds or accounts for each improvement funded with impact fees in a manner to avoid co-mingling of fees with any other revenue, except for temporary investment purposes, and expend those fees solely for the purpose for which the fees were collected (Section 66006(a)).

2. Deposit all interest income earned by the fees in the same fund; interest income must be spent solely on the purpose for which the fee was originally collected (Section 66006(a)).

3. Within 180 days after the close of each fiscal year, prepare a public report concerning each impact fee fund. Such report must include the fund's beginning and ending balance for the fiscal year, amount of fees and interest deposited into the fund for the fiscal year, and a description of each expenditure from the fund for that year, including identification of the improvement being funded (Section 66006(b)).

4. Review the report at a public meeting not less than 15 days after the report is released to the public (Section 66006(b)(2)).

5. At least every five years, the local agency must (A) identify the purpose to which the fee is to be put, (B) demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged, (C) identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing in incomplete improvements identified when the fee was established or increased, and (D) designate the approximate dates when the anticipated funding will be secured to complete the identified improvements. (Section 66001(d)).

6. A local agency may not spend impact fees for maintenance or operation of improvements funded with impact fees (Section 65913.8).

The City is in compliance with these reporting requirements mentioned above.

In accordance with requirement No. 5 above, the City Council (Council) must make the various findings, including that there is a reasonable relationship between the current need for the fees and the purposes for which they were originally charged. The fees in question are noted below in the Fund Summary section. By adopting the Resolution (Attachment 1), Council will make the necessary findings to ensure this funding remains available for these important programs.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 5.e
January 9, 2024
Development Impact Fee Fund Summary
As required, below is a summary of each of the Development Impact Fee funds below, including fund balance and any relevant project information. The allocated fund balance for the fees is in Attachment 3. Fund ID numbers are listed below and in Attachment 2 and 3.

Art in Public Places Fees (Fund 285): The City rescinded this fee in 1996 and has since expended all the original fee revenues collected prior to that time. Revenues are occasionally added to the fund from other sources and interest from account balance have kept the account alive, so the reporting of these funds are included in the annual AB1600 reports. The attached report shows a fund balance of $64,263. The fund will be expended on public art on traffic signal cabinets. The current balance is projected to be expended by the end of Fiscal Year 2024. After three years the account can be closed.

Parking In-Lieu Fees (Fund 455): This fee was established by Ordinance 954 in 1973.

The fee is intended to fund parking improvements in the downtown. Amendments to the ordinance were made in 1977 (Ordinance 77-1084) and 2017 (Ordinance 17-6). All development projects in the DP and DMX districts must meet requirements for on-site parking and loading as specified in Concord Municipal Code Sections 18.160.050and

18.160.060. Pursuant to Section18.160.060 B, an applicant for a development project can request the Planning Commission to allow payment of an in-lieu fee instead of providing some or all of the required on-site parking spaces, with the in-lieu fees used to improve publicly available parking. The current in-lieu fee cost for a single non- residential parking space is $1,572, and $25,000 per space in new multifamily residential projects.

No In-lieu fees were collected in Fiscal Year 2023, the remaining unexpended balance of $246,109 will fund parking related capacity improvements, further described below.

Staff projects all the currently unexpended funds will be spent by 2034 on PJ2652 Parking Garage Technology Improvements to the city owned garages downtown.

Inclusionary Housing Fee (Fund 251): This fee was established by Ordinance 04-3 in 2004. The fee is intended to be used for housing projects and programs that serve Very Low, Low and/or Moderate-Income Households. Currently, all for-sale residential developments of five or more units must include the number of Inclusionary Units as required by the ordinance or, if eligible, pay the in-lieu fee as provided in the Master Fee Schedule. No In-lieu fees were collected in Fiscal Year 2023. The current unexpended balance is $1,772,753. The funds are being used to fund the City’s First-Time Homebuyer Program (FTHB), which is a second mortgage loan program that assists qualified low- and moderate-income households with the purchase of a home.

The FTHB program was initially funded by Successor Agency funds and is now funded by Inclusionary Housing Fees. The fees have been used to cover some administrative costs associated with providing loan assistance. Historically, the FTHB program has

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 5.e
January 9, 2024
been able to fund three loans each year. If and when adequate funds accrue within this account, the in-lieu fee will also be used to further mitigate the impact of development projects on the need for affordable housing in the City, by subsidizing the construction of new housing or the purchase and rehabilitation of existing housing that is affordable to extremely low, very low, low, and moderate incomes, consistent with the goals and policies contained in the City’s Housing Element.

Traffic Mitigation Fees (Funds 410, 420 & 461): Traffic Mitigation Fees were established by Ordinance 05-5 in July 2005. The fees are collected from developers to improve transportation elements of our infrastructure. Primarily these funds have been used to provide improvements to traffic signals, signal operations and improvements to lane configurations supporting all modes of travel. Recent projects completed with Traffic Mitigation fees are PJ2085 Traffic Safety at Commerce Avenue, PJ 2508 Citywide signal retiming, PJ2464 Traffic Calming at Willow Pass and Clayton Road and updates to the Off-site Street Improvement Program (OSIP).

As of June 30, 2023, the Traffic Mitigation Fees fund had a balance of $4,861,782 with $619,824 allocated to projects, leaving a fiscal year-end unallocated fund balance of $4,241,958 (Attachment 3). Traffic Mitigation Fund monies are programmed as part of the Ten-Year Traffic Improvement Program (TIP), which is the long-range planning and funding which feeds into each two-year Capital Improvement Budget (CIP). The City intends to use a portion of the unallocated funds for current and future active projects (Attachment 4). Additionally, the City must have adequate funds on hand to leverage and provide matching funds as required when various federal, state, and regional grant funding sources become available for OSIP identified transportation projects. A portion of the unallocated fund balance will be used for that purpose. Fund 410 is included in the report as it contains historical transactions, the funds have all been moved to Fund 420 and Fund 410 will close in three years.

Master Storm Drain/Drainage Acreage Fees (Funds 430-441): The collection of developer fees to improve the storm drain system in certain parts of Concord was originally adopted by Ordinance 856 in August of 1971. The City's current Drainage Acreage fees range between $2,178 and $4,211 per acre, resulting in a slow build-up of developers' contributions in each of the storm drain zones. These fees are used to fund capital projects consistent with the Storm Drain Master Plan. As of June 30, 2022, the City has a total unallocated fund balance of $776,002 collected from its 12 storm drain zones. As sufficient funds become available to complete projects, the funds will be programmed into CIP projects.

Parkland Dedication In-lieu Fee (Funds 450 & 451): The City collects Parkland in-lieu fees from residential developers who are responsible for providing parkland and recreation sources for Concord’s residents. Developers may choose to pay a fee in-lieu instead of providing the required parkland. Per attachment 3, the balance in Parkland Zone A fund is $7,511,106. Fund 451 is included in the report as it contains historical

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 5.e
January 9, 2024
transactions, the funds have all been moved to Fund 450 and Fund 451 will close after this year.

Parkland funds are used to create new parks, park features and improvements to our parks. The funds cannot be used for maintenance of the existing facilities but can be used for replacement of equipment and features. The funds can be used in any of our parks.

Currently Parkland funds are being used for (1) PJ2643 Community Pool Changing Room, (2) PJ2663 Shade Structures for Community Pool, (3) PJ2523 Willow Pass Park Fitness equipment, and (4) PJ2533 Camp Concord Maintenance and Repairs Project.

The use of these fees are further detailed in the CIP.

Financial Impact
Adoption of the Resolution (Attachment 1) will allow the City to continue programming development fees and in-lieu fees discussed in this report.

Environmental Determination
Council action on this item is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies), 15273 (Rates, Tolls, Fares, and Charges),does not constitute a "project" within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 (including subsections 15378(b)(2), (4) and/or (5)), 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. If Council action on this item were determined to be a “project” for CEQA analysis, this activity falls within the "Common Sense" CEQA exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). No unusual circumstances exist and none of the exceptions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. This determination reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis. Individual projects will undergo CEQA analysis as necessary.

Public Contact
The Council Agenda was posted. In addition, the Building Industry Association and the Concord Chamber of Commerce were notified about the meeting to review the Fiscal Year’s 2022-23 report and informed them as to the location of the report on the City’s website.

Attachments

1. Resolution Accepting the Development Impact Fee Report for FY 2022-2023 and making findings in compliance with AB 1600

2. Revenues & Expenditures Summary

3. Allocated/Unallocated Fund Balances

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 5.e
January 9, 2024

4. Transportation Improvements Program Projects with Traffic Mitigation Program Funding

Res. No. 24-XX 1

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CONCORD

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A Resolution Accepting the Development Impact Fee
Report for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 and Making
Findings in Compliance with AB 1600 (Government
Code Section 66000 et seq.)
Resolution No. 24-XX
/
WHEREAS, the City’s Transportation Element of the adopted General Plan identifies improvements necessitated by continued development in the City and an Offsite Street Improvement Program to pay for development impacts has been authorized by Sections 19.25 et seq. of the Concord Municipal Code and is implemented through Policy & Procedure No. 144; and WHEREAS, the City has developed a Drainage Area Master Plan as part of the City’s adopted General Plan Drainage Element and subdivided that area into sub-areas and thereby established specific areas of common benefit to landowners within these subdivided areas as authorized by Section 13.15 et seq. of the Concord Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, in 1996, the City Council rescinded the Arts in Public Places fees and subsequently directed staff to conduct a study to identify options for using the funds; and WHEREAS, the City has established discrete accounts and fees to finance the construction of street, drainage improvements, and park improvements as mitigation measures for continued development within the City; and
WHEREAS, the City biennially adopts a comprehensive Capital Improvement Program to prioritize identified street, drainage improvements, and park improvements and allocates funds to construct the improvements as mitigation for the continued development in the City; and WHEREAS, these improvements are scheduled to be constructed over time as sufficient funds become available; and
WHEREAS, to facilitate the development and availability of housing a broad range of households and implement the Housing Element of the Concord General Plan the City has identified the First-Time Home Buyer program as an appropriate use of the Inclusionary Housing Fee; and, WHEREAS, these identified improvements are of such size that sufficient funds have not Attachment 1

Res. No. 24-XX 2
been collected or obtained in order to construct these improvements by expending fees collected within the five-year expenditure period by Government Code Section 66001(d); and WHEREAS, there continues to be a distinct nexus between continued development and the necessity to mitigate development impacts on traffic circulation and drainage; and WHEREAS, fees collected previously and in the future as Offsite Street Improvement Fee and Drainage Acreage Fees are necessary to fund identified street and drainage improvements; and WHEREAS, fees collected previously for the Arts in Public Places fees are necessary to fund Arts and Cultural Projects.

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

Section 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. Council action on this item is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies), 15273 (Rates, Tolls, Fares, and Charges),does not constitute a "project" within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 (including subsections 15378(b)(2), (4) and/or (5)), 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. If Council action on this item were determined to be a “project” for CEQA analysis, this activity falls within the "Common Sense" CEQA exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). No unusual circumstances exist and none of the exceptions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. This determination reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis. Individual projects will undergo CEQA analysis as necessary.

Section 3. The City Council of the City of Concord hereby finds the following as required by Government Code Section 66001(d) and based upon review of the Annual Development Impact Fee Report for FY 2022-2023:
a. The purpose of the development impact fees has been identified. b. There is a continued need for improvements and that there is reasonable relationship

Res. No. 24-XX 3
between the fees and the impacts for development for which the fees are collected. c. There remains a reasonable relationship between the current need for the Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu, Parking In-Lieu, Offsite Street Improvement Program, Master Storm Drain, Parkland In-Lieu, and Art in Public Places fees and the purpose for which they were originally identified.
d. The Sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete the financing of improvements has been identified.
e. The approximate dates for funding capital improvements are included in the City’s 2022- 2027 Capital Improvement Program, unless the improvements are longer term projects or are planned by another agency.

Section 4. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Concord on January 23, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers -
NOES: Councilmembers -
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers -
ABSENT: Councilmembers -
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 24-XX was duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Concord on January 23, 2024.

Joelle Fockler, MMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Susanne Meyer Brown
City Attorney

HOUSING INCLUSIONARY FUND 251

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23
FY19
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees 107,939$ 61,876$
Interest 36,908$ 35,516 27,423 16,121$ 50,088$ Other Revenue
Total 36,908$ 143,455$ 89,299$ 16,121$ 50,088$

EXPENDITURES
First Time Home Buyre Loans -$ -$ -$ -$ 250,000$
Administration 18,108 5,853 6,014
Total 18,108$ 5,853$ -$ 6,014$ 250,000$ Rev/over(under) Exp 18,800$ 137,602$ 89,299$ 10,107$ (199,912)$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfer In -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Transfers Out - - - - -
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Excess(Deficiency) of Rev & Other Source
Over(Under) Exp & Other Financing Uses 18,800$ 137,602$ 89,299$ 10,107$ (199,912)$
FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 1,716,856$ 1,735,656$ 1,873,258$ 1,962,557$ 1,972,664$ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 1,735,656$ 1,873,258$ 1,962,557$ 1,972,664$ 1,772,753$ Attachment 2 FY 23

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
ART IN PUBLIC PLACES FUND 285

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23
FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ -$ -$ -$ - $
Interest 1,231 1,569 1,423 757 1,736 Other 48,000 20,600 - - -
Total 49,231$ 22,169 $ 1,423 $ 757 $ 1,736 $

EXPENDITURES
Expenditures -$ -$ -$ -$ - $
Supplies 0 0 0 0 10,000
Creative Concord Murals - - - 28,344 -
Todos Santsos Utility Box Art - 7,141 - - -
Total -$ 7,141 $ -$ 28,344 $ 10,000 $
Rev/over(under) Exp 49,231$ 15,028 $ 1,423 $ (27,587)$ (8,264) $

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In -$ -$ -$ -$ - $
Transfers Out - - - - -
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ - $
Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
49,231$ 15,028 $ 1,423 $ (27,587)$ (8,264) $ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 34,432$ 83,663 $ 98,691 $ 100,114 $ 72,527 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 83,663$ 98,691 $ 100,114 $ 72,527 $ 64,263 $

PARKING IN LIEU FUND 455

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23
FY19
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees 7,860 $ 18,864 $ 209,432 $ -$ -$
Interest 105 438 1,349 1,961 6,098 Other Revenue - - - - -
Total 7,965 $ 19,302 $ 210,781 $ 1,961 $ 6,098 $

EXPENDITURES
Project Expenses -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Rev/over(under) Exp 7,965 $ 19,302 $ 210,781 $ 1,961 $ 6,098 $

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfer In -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Transfers Out - - - - -
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Excess(Deficiency) of Rev & Other Source
Over(Under) Exp & Other Financing Uses 7,965
$ 19,302 $ 210,781 $ 1,961 $ 6,098 $ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 7,965 $ 27,268 $ 238,049 $ 240,011 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 7,965 $ 27,268 $ 238,049 $ 240,011 $ 246,109 $ ATTACHMENT 2 FY23AT

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
OSIP CITYWIDE FUND 410

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23
FY19
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Interest - - - - -
Other Revenue - - - - -
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

EXPENDITURES
Traffic Signal Geom. ImpDesign 2284 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Rev/over(under) Exp -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfer In -$ 200,000 $
Transfers Out - - (200,000) (14,808) -
Total -$ 200,000 $ (200,000)$ (14,808)$ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of Rev & Other Source
Over(Under) E
xp & Other Financing Uses -$ 200,000$ (200,000)$ (14,808)$ -$ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 14,808$ 14,808$ 14,808$ 14,808$ -$ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 14,808$ 214,808$ (185,192)$ (0)$ -$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
OSIP FUND 420

REVENUES & EX

PENDITURES
FY19 to FY23
FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees 264,294$ 658,994$ 399,116$ 860,532$ 1,530,988$ Interest 18,118 22,722 30,245 21,462 95,554 Other - - - - -
Total 282,412$ 681,716$ 429,361$ 881,994$ 1,626,542$

EXPENDITURES
Farm Bureau Safe Route to Schools 2251 (247)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Oakgrove/Sierra Traffic Signal 2293 - - - - -
Replace Controller /Cabinet at Signalized Intersection 2462 28,068 - - - - Traffic Safety - Commerce Ave PJ2085 - - 282,832 60,311 6,100 Citywide Signal Retiming PJ2508 - - - - 22,907
OSIP update PJ2541 - - - - 71,283
Traffic Calming - Willow Pass & Clayton Rd - - 14,433 - $0 Total 27,821$ -$ 297,265$ 60,311$ 100,290$ Rev/over(under) Exp 254,591$ 681,716$ 132,096$ 821,683$ 1,526,252$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
-$ -$ -$ 14,808$ -$
Transfers In - 160,029 246,971 (314) -
Transfers Out
Total -$ 160,029$ 246,971$ 14,494$ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of Rev & Other Source 254,591$ 841,745$ 379,067$ 836,177$ 1,526,252$ Over(Under) Exp & Other Financing Uses
`` 695,071$ 949,662$ 1,791,407$ 2,170,474$ 3,006,651$ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 949,662$ 1,791,407$ 2,170,474$ 3,006,651$ 4,532,903$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
TRAFFIC MITIGATION BAILEY RD IMPROVEMENTS FUND 461

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Interest 6,500 6,176 4,522 2,621 8,149 Other - - - - - Total 6,500$ 6,176 $ 4,522 $ 2,621 $ 8,149 $

EXPENDITURES
Capital Expenditures -$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Total -$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Rev/over(under) Exp 6,500$ 6,176 $ 4,522 $ 2,621 $ 8,149 $

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Operating transfers in -$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Operating transfers out - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
6,500$ 6,176 $ 4,522 $ 2,621 $ 8,149 $ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 300,911$ 307,411 $ 313,587 $ 318,109 $ 320,730 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 307,411$ 313,587 $ 318,109 $ 320,730 $ 328,879 $

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
STORM DRAIN #1 FUND 430

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Interest 260 247 181 105 326
Total 260$ 247 $ 181 $ 105 $ 326$

EXPENDITURES
-$ - $ - $ - $ -$ - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Rev/over(under) Exp 260$ 247 $ 181 $ 105 $ 326$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Transfers Out - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
260$ 247 $ 181 $ 105 $ 326$

FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 12,039$ 12,299 $ 12,546 $ 12,727 $ 12,832 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 12,299$ 12,546 $ 12,727 $ 12,832 $ 13,158$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
STORM DRAIN #92 FUND 431

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ Interest 2,561 2,433 1,781 1,033 3,210
Total 2,561$ 2,433 $ 1,781 $ 1,033 $ 3,210$

EXPENDITURES
-$ - $ - $ - $ -$ - - - - - - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Rev/over(under) Exp 2,561$ 2,433 $ 1,781 $ 1,033 $ 3,210$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Transfers Out - - - - -

Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
2,561$ 2,433 $ 1,781 $ 1,033 $ 3,210$ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 118,550$ 121,111 $ 123,544 $ 125,325 $ 126,357 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 121,111$ 123,544 $ 125,325 $ 126,357 $ 129,567$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
STORM DRAIN #5 FUND 432

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
``

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ - $ 10,607 $ -$ Interest 835 793 581 369 1,317
Total 835$ 793 $ 581 $ 10,975 $ 1,317$

EXPENDITURES
-$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Rev/over(under) Exp 835$ 793 $ 581 $ 10,975 $ 1,317$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Transfers Out - - - - - Total - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
835$ 793 $ 581 $ 10,975 $ 1,317$ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 38,654$ 39,489 $ 40,282 $ 40,863 $ 51,838 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 39,489$ 40,282 $ 40,863 $ 51,838 $ 53,155$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
STORM DRAIN #7 FUND 433

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Interest 121 116 85 49 153
Total 121$ 116 $ 85 $ 49 $ 153$

EXPENDITURES

Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Rev/over(under) Exp 121$ 116 $ 85 $ 49 $ 153$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Transfers Out - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
121 116 85 49 153
FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 5,638$ 5,759 $ 5,875 $ 5,960 $ 6,009$ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 5,759$ 5,875 $ 5,960 $ 6,009 $ 6,162$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
STORM DRAIN #22 FUND 434

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Interest 900 855 626 363 1,124

Total 900$ 855 $ 626 $ 363 $ 1,124$

EXPENDITURES
Operational Storm Drain Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Rev/over(under) Exp 900$ 855 $ 626 $ 363 $ 1,124$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Transfers Out - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
900$ 855 $ 626 $ 363 $ 1,124$ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 41,480$ 42,380 $ 43,235 $ 43,861 $ 44,223 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 42,380$ 43,235 $ 43,861 $ 44,223 $ 45,347$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
STORM DRAIN #23 FUND 435

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees 22,649$ 8,712 $ 1,781 $ 28,270 $ 41,518$ Interest 2,823 2,984 2,259 1,466 5,737
Total 25,472$ 11,696 $ 4,040 $ 29,735 $ 47,255$

EXPENDITURES
-$ - $ - $ - $ -$ - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Rev/over(under) Exp 25,472$ 11,696 $ 4,040 $ 29,735 $ 47,255$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In from fund 441 -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Transfers Out - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
25,472$ 11,696 $ 4,040 $ 29,735 $ 47,255$ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 119,080$ 144,552 $ 156,248 $ 160,288 $ 190,023 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 144,552$ 156,248 $ 160,288 $ 190,023 $ 237,278$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
STORM DRAIN #50 FUND 436

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Interest 1,047 994 728 422 1,312 Total $1,047 $994 $728 $422 $1,312

EXPENDITURES
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0
- - - - - - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Rev/over(under) Exp 1,047$ 994 $ 728 $ 422 $ 1,312$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Transfers Out - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
1,047$ 994 $ 728 $ 422 $ 1,312$ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 48,460$ 49,507 $ 50,501 $ 51,229 $ 51,651 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 49,507$ 50,501 $ 51,229 $ 51,651 $ 52,963$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
STORM DRAIN #90 FUND 437

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Interest 662 629 460 267 830

Total 662$ 629 $ 460 $ 267 $ 830$

EXPENDITURES
-$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Rev/over(under) Exp 662$ 629 $ 460 $ 267 $ 830$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Transfers Out - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
662$ 629 $ 460 $ 267 $ 830$ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 30,633$ 31,295 $ 31,924 $ 32,384 $ 32,650 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 31,295$ 31,924 $ 32,384 $ 32,650 $ 33,480$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
STORM DRAIN #33A FUND 438

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Interest 2,812 2,674 1,956 1,134 3,526 Total 2,812$ 2,674 $ 1,956 $ 1,134 $ 3,526$

EXPENDITURES
-$ - $ - $ - $ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Rev/over(under) Exp 2,812$ 2,674 $ 1,956 $ 1,134 $ 3,526$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Transfers Out - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
2,812$ 2,674 $ 1,956 $ 1,134 $ 3,526$ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 130,197$ 133,009 $ 135,683 $ 137,639 $ 138,773 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 133,009$ 135,683 $ 137,639 $ 138,773 $ 142,299$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
STORM DRAIN #128 FUND 439

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ 510 $ - $ -$ Interest 396$ 378 $ 277 $ 163 $ 128$

Total 396$ 378 $ 787 $ 163 $ 128$

EXPENDITURES
Operational Storm Drain Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Rev/over(under) Exp 396$ 378 $ 787 $ 163 $ 128$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Transfers Out - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
396$ 378 $ 787 $ 163 $ 128$ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 3,333$ 3,729 $ 4,107 $ 4,894 $ 5,057$ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 3,729$ 4,107 $ 4,894 $ 5,057 $ 5,185$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
STORM DRAIN #33B FUND 440

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Interest 1,412$ 1,342 $ 982 $ 569 $ 1,422$

Total 1,412$ 1,342 $ 982 $ 569 $ 1,422$

EXPENDITURES
Operational Storm Drain Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Rev/over(under) Exp 1,412$ 1,342 $ 982 $ 569 $ 1,422$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Transfers Out - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ -$ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
1,412$ 1,342 $ 982 $ 569 $ 1,422$ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 51,682$ 53,094 $ 54,436 $ 55,418 $ 55,986 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 53,094$ 54,436 $ 55,418 $ 55,986 $ 57,408$

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23
PARKLAND ZONE A FUND 450

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees 96,006$ 2,336,838$ 640,599 $ 1,066,453$ 2,756,519 $ Interest - - - - Total 96,006$ 2,336,838$ 640,599 $ 1,066,453$ 2,756,519 $

EXPENDITURES
Ellis Lake Park Playground and Pathway 2349 -$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Meadow Homes Park Playground 2352 - - - - - Concord Community Pool Deck Repairs 2388 42,957 1,710 212 Replace Pump System at 4 Parks - - - 109,524 Camp Concord Maint&Repairs PJ2533 7,771
Pool Changing Room PJ2643 6,229
Shade Structures for Pool PJ2645 7,928
Loop Pond Trail Newhall PJ2663 585
Willow Pass Park Fitness 2523 - - - 1,990 48,728 Operating Expense - - 6,414 - - Total 42,957$ 1,710 $ 6,414 $ 111,726$ 71,241 $ Rev/over(under) Exp 53,049$ 2,335,128$ 634,185 $ 954,727 $ 2,685,278$

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In (includes General Fund loan) -$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Transfers Out (1,042,272) (108,557) (206) (282) - Total (1,042,272)$ (108,557) $ (206) $ (282) $ - $ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
(989,223)$ 2,226,571$ 633,979$ 954,444$ 2,685,278$ FUND BALANCES, JULY 1 2,000,057$ 1,010,834 $ 3,237,405 $ 3,871,384 $ 4,825,828 $ FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 1,010,834$ 3,237,405 $ 3,871,384 $ 4,825,828 $ 7,511,106 $

ATTACHMENT 2 FY23

PARKLAND ZONE B FUND 451

REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
FY19 to FY23

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

REVENUE
Fees -$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Interest - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ - $

EXPENDITURES
-$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - - - - - - - - - Meadow Homes Park Playground 2352 - - - - - Total -$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Rev/over(under) Exp -$ - $ - $ - $ - $

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers In (includes General Fund loan) 1,042,272$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Transfers Out - - - - - Total 1,042,272$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Excess(Deficiency) of
Rev and Other Sources
Over(Under) Exp & Other
Financing Uses
1,042,272$ - $ - $ - $ - $ Balance Sheet Changes
FUND BALANCES, JULY 1
(1,042,272)$ - $
FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30 -$ - $ - $ - $ - $

Attachment 3 FY23
AB1600 Report 2023

ALLOCATED FUND BALANCE
AS OF 06-30-23

FUND FUND ENCUMBERED UNENCUMBERED

BALANCE FUND BALANCE
251 Housing Inclusionary 1,772,752 0 1,772,752
285 ART IN PUBLIC PLACES 64,263 0 64,263
455 PARKING IN LIEU 246,109 0 246,109
410 OSIP CITY WIDE 0 0 0
420 OSIP 4,532,903 619,824 3,913,079
461TRAFFIC MITIGATION BAILEY RD IMP 328,879 0 328,879
Subtotal 4,861,782 619,824 4,241,958
430 STORM DRAIN 1 13,158 0 13,158
431 STORM DRAIN 92 129,567 0 129,567
432 STORM DRAIN 5 53,155 0 53,155
433 STORM DRAIN 7 6,162 0 6,162
434 STORM DRAIN 22 45,347 0 45,347
435 STORM DRAIN 23 237,278 0 237,278
436 STORM DRAIN 50 52,963 0 52,963
437 STORM DRAIN 90 33,480 0 33,480
438 STORM DRAIN 33A 142,299 0 142,299
439 STORM DRAIN 128 5,185 0 5,185
440 STORM DRAIN 33B 57,408 0 57,408
Subtotal 776,002 0 776,002
TOTAL OSIP and Mitigation Fees
Subject to AB1600 5,637,784 619,824 5,017,960
Quimby Act Fees AB1359
450 PARKLAND ZONE A 7,511,106 20,033 7,491,073
451 PARKLAND ZONE 0 0 0
Total 7,511,106 20,033 7,491,073
TOTAL ALL FEES 15,232,014 639,857 14,592,157

Attachment 4 FY23
Transportation Improvement Program Projects
Funded with Offsite Improvement Program (OSIP) Funds and Other Traffic Mitigation Funds
Capital Improvement Budget (CIP) FY2023-2024 and FY2024-2025 Project Name
Year of
Completion
Traffic
Mitigation
10-Year
Total
10-Year Project
Total
Citywide Traffic Improv Ongoing $190,000 $190,000
Countywide Smart Signal Project Ongoing $500,000 $500,000 Smart Signal Upgrade Ongoing $240,000 $240,000
24-11 Citywide Parks Master Ongoing $500,000 $500,000
TOTAL $1,430,000 $1,430,000

Staff Report
Date: January 23, 2024
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:

1. Authorizing staff to prepare a Task Order in the amount of $599,951 for Raimi + Associates, Inc. (Raimi) to prepare General Plan and Zoning Amendments and an
environmental impact report, conduct community
engagement, and provide other services to implement
Program 8.6 of the 2023-2031 Housing Element (General
Fund);

2. Approval of an Amendment to the Master Services
Agreement (MSA) with Raimi to increase the total not-to- exceed amount for the MSA from $500,000 to $1,100,000;
and

3. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute such documents subject to City Attorney approval.

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

Report in Brief
On August 22, 2023, the City Council (Council) adopted the 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element), and on October 23, 2023, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) found the Housing Element to be in

6.a6.a6.a6.a6.a6.a6.a6.a

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
January 23, 2024
substantial compliance with state housing element law. A significant new program of the Housing Element is Program 8.6 (Program), which commits to rezoning at least 20 acres of land in moderate- and high-resource1 areas of the City of Concord (City) (Attachment 5) in order to provide capacity for at least 1,000 additional housing units affordable to lower-income households. This Program was included to satisfy the City’s obligations under state law (AB 686, 2018) to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH).

The Program includes target dates of December 2023 for beginning the process and December 2024 for completing the rezoning. Due to the project necessitating an environmental impact report (EIR), staff has recognized that the original target completion date is not feasible; however, approval of this item will allow the City to complete this project as expeditiously as possible. The new anticipated completion date is July 2025.

Council approved the Master Service Agreement (MSA) with Raimi (MSA No. 5994) on December 13, 2022, with a not-to-exceed amount of $500,000 and an initial three-year term with authorization for the City Manager to extend the term for an additional two years (until December 13, 2027). Services under this MSA include “on-call planning and environmental review services for special projects” and “other as-needed services”. An MSA is a best practice that pre-screens firms for various technical work with the City and establishes a contractual relationship between the firm and the City. An MSA does not authorize the performance of any work; rather, work is authorized through the issuance of Task Orders.

To allow adequate budget for implementation of the Program, and to maintain capacity in the MSA for other potential projects, City staff (Staff) has prepared an Amendment to the MSA (Attachment 1) to increase the not-to-exceed amount from $500,000 to $1,100,000. No change to the term is needed. This Amendment does not authorize work; a Task Order is needed to authorize work. Accordingly, this item also requests that the Council authorize a Task Order with Raimi in the amount of $599,951 for the Program implementation, including community engagement and preparation of an EIR, as shown in the attached scope of work (Exhibit A to Attachment 1).

Recommended Action

1. Authorize staff to prepare a Task Order in the amount of $599,951 for Raimi + Associates, Inc. (Raimi) to prepare General Plan and Zoning Amendments and an environmental impact report, conduct community engagement, and provide other services to implement Program 8.6 of the 2023-2031 Housing Element; 1 The term “moderate- and high-resource” refers to areas shown on the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) and HCD’s Opportunity Maps, a tool used to evaluate access to various opportunities linked to critical life outcomes, e.g. education, employment, economic development, safe and decent housing, low rates of violent crime, transportation, recreation, food and a healthy environment. These maps designate the majority of U.S. Census tracts in California with a resource level ranging from “Low” to “Highest.”

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
January 23, 2024

2. Approve an Amendment to the Master Services Agreement (MSA) with Raimi to increase the total not-to-exceed amount for the MSA with Raimi from $500,000 to $1,100,000; and

3. Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute such documents, subject to City Attorney approval.

Background
California Assembly Bill (AB) 686 (2018) established a mandate for all public agencies in the state to AFFH, which HCD defines as follows:
“[AFFH] means taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. [AFFH includes] address[ing] significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. The duty to affirmatively further fair housing extends to all of a public agency’s activities and programs relating to housing and community development” (Government Code Section 8899.50(a)(1)).2
The concept of AFFH is based on a 2015 rule by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to implement the 1968 Fair Housing Act. AB 686 modified state housing element law to include the following requirements for housing element updates:
“…an assessment of fair housing practices, an analysis of the relationship between available sites and areas of high or low resources, and concrete actions in the form of programs to affirmatively further fair housing. The purpose of this assessment and analysis is to replace segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns and to transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAP) into areas of opportunity.” In accordance with these requirements, the Housing Element analyzed available housing sites throughout the City and found that sites meeting the state’s criteria for lower-income housing sites3 are located entirely in low-resource areas of Concord, a 2 HCD, “Affirmatively Further Fair Housing: Guidance for all Public Entities and for Housing Elements”, April 2021, p. 14. Available at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community- development/affh/docs/affh_document_final_4-27-2021.pdf. 3 State housing element law includes minimum criteria for sites designated to satisfy the lower-income component of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation, including a minimum size of 0.5 acres and a maximum density of at least 30 units per acre.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
January 23, 2024
condition at odds with the state’s AFFH goals. In order to address this, Program 8.6 was included in the Housing Element, as follows:
“Rezone sites to increase multifamily residential options in moderate- and high- resource areas (as shown in the most recent CTCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps) with a majority white population. Rezoned sites must meet the following criteria:
a) located in Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (see Attachment 4) or other moderate- or high-resource areas (as shown in the most recent CTCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps; see Attachment 5) with a majority white population;4
b) combined area of at least 20 acres;
c) maximum density of at least 60 dwelling units per acre; d) accommodate at least 1,000 total dwelling units;
e) adequate access to infrastructure;
f) strong development potential; and
g) low potential for displacement of lower-income households.

Begin the rezone process by December 2023 by conducting outreach, analyzing opportunities, and completing a CEQA analysis to finalize the rezone by December 2024. Within 6 months of completion of the rezone, work with property owners to proactively identify prime sites, notify affordable housing developers, and provide technical assistance and priority processing for affordable projects without assessing an additional charge, and include the information in the Affordable Housing Toolkit.”
Analysis
The City has already begun work on the above Program by seeking and identifying a qualified consultant. As noted earlier, the target completion date is no longer feasible.

This is due in large part to the requirement for an EIR to consider the impacts of additional density. The new anticipated completion date for the rezoning is July 2025; see Attachment 2 for project schedule. This date reflects an aggressive schedule, and staff does not anticipate any enforcement action by HCD for missing the target completion date, since HCD generally focuses on more significant infractions and gives some latitude where an agency is making good faith efforts at compliance.

Raimi Qualifications and Approach
Significant consultant support is necessary for this project given its highly specialized nature and the large effort required, particularly around community engagement and the EIR. Raimi has over 17 years of experience delivering projects of similar size and 4 Program 8.6 also allows consideration of other data sources, such as the Bay Area Equity Atlas, in determining appropriate sites for rezoning.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
January 23, 2024
complexity, including projects with a focus on racial equity and rezoning. Recent examples of similar projects Raimi has successfully completed include general plans for the cities of South San Francisco and Petaluma, and housing elements for the cities of Milpitas and Berkeley.

Raimi’s project qualifications and approach are discussed in Attachment 3. The main components of Raimi’s community engagement approach are clear and consistent messaging around project goals, frequent and timely engagement with decision makers, developing a firm understanding of community needs and desires early in the process, making materials accessible and easy to understand, and providing multiple modes of engagement. Raimi’s approach also includes an objective, data-driven approach to site selection, informed by market economics and various other factors consistent with the Program criteria.

Scope and Budget
The following table outlines the major tasks in the proposed scope of work, their identified cost, and percentage of the total project budget. As shown below, other than the EIR, community engagement is one of the largest items in the project budget, at about 20 percent. The community engagement scope is discussed in further detail in the following section.

Table 1: Work Scope and Budget
Task Description Cost % of Subtotal
Project
Initiation/
Management
Includes project team kickoff meeting, project
work plan refinement, ongoing project
management, etc.
$41,080 7.5%
Community
Engagement
Includes meetings with various types of
stakeholders, the community at large, City
Council and Planning Commission, staff, and
other agencies involved with site
development, as well as noticing and
outreach (e.g. flyers, project website,
Spanish translation, etc.).
$107,160 19.7%
Site
Identification
and Selection
Includes collection of site data and
preparation of base map, development of
criteria and methodology for site selection,
site analysis and selection, and financial
feasibility analysis.
$67,700 12.4%
Alternatives
for Rezoning
Includes development of two to three
alternatives for rezoning, selection of a
preferred alternative, and transportation
analysis of the preferred alternative.
$32,010 5.9%

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
January 23, 2024
Task Description Cost % of Subtotal
Environmental
Impact Report
(EIR)
Includes Notice of Preparation, scoping
meeting, drafting of project description,
administrative and public draft EIRs (DEIR),
and response to comments on DEIR.
$212,242 38.9%
General Plan
and Zoning
Amendments
Includes drafting of General Plan and Zoning
Amendments (both text and map), and
presentation of proposed amendments to
Planning Commission and City Council.
$40,412 7.4%
Other
Expenses
Includes subconsultant management, data
acquisition, meeting expenses (e.g. printing,
translation and interpretation), travel and
office expenses.
$44,806 8.2%
Subtotal -- $545,410 100%
Total With
10%
Contingency
Contingency allows for unanticipated work
without a Task Order amendment (which
would require Council approval)
$599,951 --
Community Engagement Plan
Given the high level of community interest and wide range of perspectives on the issue of increased density in higher resource areas, it is critical that the Program have a robust and thoughtful community engagement component. Historically, residents in low- density areas tend to have concerns about increased density in their neighborhoods, including traffic, visual impacts (e.g., building height and bulk), and loss of privacy.

Higher resource areas tend to have lower densities.

In the most recent housing element cycle (2023-2031), pursuant to AB 686, the state is requiring cities to demonstrate capacity for higher-density projects in higher-resource areas, in order to increase upward mobility for lower-income households. In past housing element cycles, the state allowed greater flexibility in the location of higher- density housing. Consequently, many cities, including Concord, have had most of their new higher-density housing sites in transit-oriented areas, which provide greater transportation access and environmental benefits. However, in Concord, because these areas tend to be low-resource areas, this approach has limited access to other amenities for lower-income residents, as discussed in Footnote 1.

The proposed community engagement scope and approach are provided in Task 2 of the scope of work (Exhibit A to Attachment 1). Figure 1 below provides an overview of the engagement process and timeline, with the types of events that will occur at each major phase of the project. Table 2 below provides a brief description of the types and number of events. As shown, engagement with various types of community members will occur at key points throughout the project to ensure concerns and suggestions are brought forward in a timely manner, and the community will be encouraged to provide input into the site selection process before a proposal is brought to the City Council for adoption.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
January 23, 2024
Figure 1: Community Engagement Process/Timeline
In addition to the events noted in Figure 1 and Table 2, the community engagement scope also provides various other communication channels to solicit input as broadly as possible. These include creation of a project webpage with an e-mail sign-up feature, frequent e-blasts to all interested parties, flyers, and a digital survey.

The following table provides a brief description for each type of engagement event, along with the number of events:

Table 2: Type and Number of Engagement Events
Event/Task Target Audience and Format
Number of
Events (or
Staff Hours)
Stakeholder/CBO
Meetings
Smaller meetings with various stakeholder
groups, including property owners,
homeowner associations, community-
based organizations (CBOs), housing
developers, and real estate professionals.

Up to 13
meetings
(including 3
hosted by
CBOs )
“Town Hall” Style
Meetings at Centre
Concord & Virtual
Meetings geared toward the general public
at key phases of project.
6 meetings
(3 in-person, 3
virtual)
Pop-up Events
(by staff, not Raimi)
Informal informational tables at events
such as Music and Market and popular
destinations in south and east Concord,
At least 3
events

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
January 23, 2024
Event/Task Target Audience and Format
Number of
Events (or
Staff Hours)
where the public can learn about the
project, complete surveys, etc.

Planning Commission/
Council Study
Sessions
Joint study sessions with Planning
Commission and City Council at key
phases of project.
2-3 meetings
City Council one-on-
one meetings
Meetings with individual Council members
to provide updates at key stages of
project.
10 meetings
Public Hearings Public comment and discussion by City
Council and Planning Commission. 2-3 meetings
EIR NOP Scoping
Meeting
Meeting to gather input on scope of EIR. 1 meeting
Total Engagement
Events Up to 39
Council Briefings and Input Opportunities
The proposed scope seeks Council’s input early in the process through three joint study sessions with the Council and Planning Commission. Given the anticipated community sensitivities around this project, the proposed scope seeks the full Council’s input throughout the process, rather than utilizing the Housing and Economic Development Committee. Joint sessions with the Planning Commission have been proposed both for efficient use of staff and consultant resources, and to allow Council to hear directly from the Commission, the body with the responsibility for making land use recommendations.

In addition to the three study sessions, the proposed scope includes two rounds of informational one-on-one meetings with Council members, and up to two Council meetings to consider and take action on the EIR and the General Plan and Zoning Amendments.

Procurement Process
A competitive procurement process is not required for Task Orders under an MSA, since MSAs are executed following a competitive Request for Qualifications process.

However, prior to selecting Raimi for this project, staff also considered a proposal from PlaceWorks, another planning consultant operating under an MSA. While PlaceWorks would also be qualified for this project, staff preferred Raimi’s approach to the project, due to a more robust community engagement process and inclusion of rezoning alternatives, massing visualizations, and financial feasibility analysis.

Financial Impact
The proposed Task Order and associated staff costs would be funded via the General Fund, through the Planning Division’s adopted budget. The work will occur over two fiscal years (2023-24 and 2024-25).

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
January 23, 2024
Environmental Determination
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq., as amended and the implementing CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code or Regulations (CEQA), the recommended action does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 21065, CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2) and/or 15378, because there is no potential that the action will result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect or direct physical change in the environment.

Moreover, even if the recommended action did comprise a project for CEQA analysis, it would fall within the “common sense” exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), which excludes 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.” No unusual circumstances exist. Accordingly, no further environmental review is required. This determination reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis.

Furthermore, the General Plan and Zoning Amendments will be fully evaluated in an appropriate environmental document which will considered at the time of the project is considered.

Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted, and staff sent an e-blast to the interested parties list related to housing issues and the Housing Element.

Attachments

1. Amendment to Master Services Agreement with Raimi
Exhibit A: Scope of Work and Budget for AFFH Rezoning Project

2. Project Schedule

3. Raimi Project Understanding, Approach & Qualifications

4. Map of Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence, 2019

5. Draft CTCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps, 2024

FIRST AMENDMENT TO MASTER AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 This First Amendment to Master Agreement for Professional Services (“First Amendment”) is entered into on this date, January 23, 2024, and amends the Master Services Agreement, Agreement No. 5994, between the City of Concord (“CITY”) and Raimi + Associates, Inc. (“CONSULTANT”).

WHEREAS, the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Master Agreement for Professional Services Agreement, Agreement No. 5994, dated December 13, 2022 (the “Agreement”), wherein CONSULTANT agreed to provide on-call planning services for special projects and other as-needed services.

WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to amend the agreement to provide for additional compensation;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and conditions set forth in the Agreement, the parties mutually desire to amend the Agreement as follows:

1. Section 3 “COMPENSATION” is hereby amended to read as follows:
“CONSULTANT shall be compensated, not to exceed $1,100,000 for the term of the contract for basic services rendered under Section 1, as more particularly described in authorized Task Orders, in accordance with the terms and conditions included therein.

CONSULTANT may submit monthly statements for services rendered; all statements shall include adequate documentation demonstrating work performed during the billing period and shall conform to Federal Funding invoicing requirements, if applicable. It is intended that payments to CONSULTANT will be made by CITY within 45 (forty- five) days of receipt of invoice. Consultant's failure to secure CITY's written authorization for additional compensation or changes to the Scope of Work shall constitute a waiver of any and all right to adjustment in the price or time due, whether by way of compensation, restitution, quantum meruit, or similar relief.”

2. Except as expressly amended herein, all other terms and conditions of the Master Services Agreement for Professional Services shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First Amendment on the date indicated above.

Signatures on the following page.

Attachment 1

2 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 Dated: ___________ RAIMI + ASSOCIATES, INC.

BY: ________________________
Matthew D. Raimi
President and CEO
Dated: ___________ CITY OF CONCORD
By: _________________________
Valerie J. Barone
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
____________________________ ____________________________________ Susanne Brown Joelle Fockler, MMC
City Attorney City Clerk
FINANCE DIRECTOR'S CERTIFICATION:

Concord, California
Date: ________________

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ADEQUATE FUNDS EXIST OR WILL BE RECEIVED DURING THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR 2023/24 AND FISCAL YEAR 2024/25

TO PAY THE ANTICIPATED EXPENSES TO BE INCURRED PURSUANT TO THIS CONTRACT.

THE SUM OF $1,100,000. Account Codes 10082001Z01-63800-500.

Finance Director's Signature

Raim
i + Associates 1 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION FOR THE
City of Concord
Submitted by Raimi + Associates
In partnership with: Rincon | Fehr & Peers | Economic & Planning Systems Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing Rezoning Project
HEU Program 8.6 | Revised December 5, 2023
Exhibit A to Attachment 1

Raimi + Associates 2 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project Scope of Work
Building on the preliminary scope developed by the City, the following scope of work describes the major tasks for the Concord AFFH Rezoning Project for the R+A team. While listed numerically for contract purposes, our scope is divided into distinct tasks:
• Project Initiation (Task 1). This includes start up activities including the kick-off meeting and work plan development. It also includes ongoing project management. • Community Engagement (Task 2). This task includes the planning and execution of stakeholder meetings with community-based organizations, developers, and property owners; community meetings; City Council and Planning Commission meetings; and City staff meetings. These meetings will be held at each phase of the rezoning project. • Site Identification and Selection (Task 3). This phase includes data collection and creation of a base map, development of site criteria, and identification of potential housing rezoning sites. • Alternatives (Task 4). This critical phase will involve the development of rezoning alternatives, selection of a preferred rezoning alternative, and preparation of growth projections to initiate the transportation modeling and EIR process.
• Environmental Impact Report (Task 5). This task will initiate the environmental review of the preferred rezoning alternative, including amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Code. • General Plan and Zoning Amendments (Task 6). The General Plan and Zoning Code amendments will then be made based on the selected rezoning alternative, and public hearings will be held.

Task 1: Project Initiation
Task 1.1: Project Kick-Off
The R+A team will hold a kick-off meeting in Concord to initiate the project. This meeting will include an overall team meeting and a tour of the proposed study area, including stops at candidate sites. Up to three stakeholder meetings may also be conducted as part of this task. These stakeholder meetings have been budgeted under Task 2.1.

Task 1.2: Project Work Plan and Management
R+A will develop a project work plan broken out by scope task that specifies lead and supporting team members, key work elements, major deliverables, due dates, required City actions, and task status. The Work Plan will be updated quarterly throughout the process. The team will schedule regular meetings with staff to discuss the status of the project and coordinate project activities (typically virtual but in-person when consolidated with other work plan tasks). We will also provide monthly status reports on the project. This task also covers “informal” communication via email and phone, up to the maximum budget.

Task 1 Deliverables
• Kick-off meeting agenda and notes
• Project Work Plan draft and quarterly updates
Task 2: Community Engagement
Task 2.1: Stakeholder Meetings
R+A will organize and facilitate stakeholder meetings with diverse groups, such as property owners (of both potential rezoning sites and surrounding/nearby properties), homeowners associations, community- based organizations (e.g., tenant and affordable housing advocates), developers (both affordable and

Raimi + Associates 3 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project market-rate), and real estate professionals. These meetings will allow the project team to share background information and results of preliminary analysis with key stakeholders. Up to thirteen stakeholder meetings will be held, including at least three meetings hosted by community-based organizations serving lower-income renters. City staff will lead the identification of potential stakeholders and scheduling of stakeholder meetings. R+A will conduct stakeholder meetings during the three phases of the project: project kick-off, site selection, and development of rezoning alternatives. R+A will prepare a brief memorandum summarizing the results of the stakeholder interviews.

Task 2.2: Community Meetings
R+A will facilitate six community meetings
throughout the process, with an in-person and
virtual (Zoom) meeting at each stage of the
process. The format and structure of each will be
different to reflect the meeting focus. In R+A’s
experience, in-person meetings still have a vital
role in the process, providing residents and other
stakeholders the opportunity to interact with City
staff and one another, establish a shared vision,
and create a sense of community and belonging.

In addition, online meetings provide flexibility for
those with scheduling conflicts, limited mobility,
childcare responsibilities, etc.

These meetings will be evening or weekend meetings and will last approximately 2 hours each. Each meeting will include an opening presentation followed by interactive exercises or open house stations.

Spanish interpretation will be provided at all meetings. The following presents our initial proposed topics for each workshop:
• Meeting 1: Listening - Project initiation and introduction; discussion of key project outcomes; community-preferences on site selection criteria and potential opportunity sites. • Meeting 2: Rezoning Alternatives - Draft housing site rezoning alternatives; discussion of pros/cons of different site options. See Task 4.1 for more information. • Meeting 3: Preferred Rezoning Alternative - Preferred housing site rezoning alternative; discussion of suggested General Plan Land Use Designations and Zoning Districts.

To gather additional community feedback in parallel with every community workshop, our team will post workshop questions and materials online using either FlashPoll or SurveyMonkey.

Our team will develop the meeting format and prepare
the agenda, consolidating and synthesizing relevant
materials from the technical team when needed. We
will also facilitate the workshop (lead facilitator and 1-2 assistants) and provide summary notes documenting
input and identifying common discussion themes.

City staff will provide logistical support and assist with staffing each event. City staff will be responsible for securing meeting rooms and refreshments and
providing additional staffing support.

Raimi + Associates 4 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project Task 2.3: City Council/Planning Commission Meetings
The R+A team will hold study sessions with the City Council and Planning Commission at key junctures throughout the process. This task includes up to three joint meetings with the City Council and Planning Commission, and City Council 1-on-1 meetings up to two times during the process. • Joint Study Session #1 (Optional): Kick-off the process; summary of Community Meeting #1 and stakeholder engagement; and site selection criteria.
• Joint Study Session #2: Summary of Community Meeting #2; draft housing site rezoning alternatives; and discussion of pros/cons of different site options. • Joint Study Session #3: Preferred rezoning alternative, including a summary of Community Meeting #3 and other stakeholder engagement.

R+A will prepare PowerPoint presentations (typically less than 30 slides), and City staff will prepare the staff reports. Spanish interpretation will be provided at joint sessions.

One set of City Council 1-on-1s may include site tours with the project team.

Task 2.4: Noticing and Outreach
To initiate the process, R+A will develop a project information factsheet that defines the purpose of the project, the project timeline, and ways that the public can get involved in the decision-making process.

Likewise, R+A will work with City staff to share regular updates via email with stakeholders involved in the process. R+A will create outreach materials, newsletters, and collateral for dissemination via email and social media. If desired, R+A will work with identified CBOs (who participated in stakeholder interviews) to enhance outreach effectiveness and boost engagement from all segments of the community.

Additionally, R+A will provide content for a new webpage for the AFFH Rezoning Project (to be hosted on the City’s website). R+A will provide initial and ongoing content for the page, including background information on the project, all engagement materials, and links to interactive surveys and upcoming meetings. The website will be provided in English and allow for translation into multiple languages, consistent with the existing website.

Task 2.5: City Staff Meetings
R+A will routinely meet with City staff to discuss the AFFH Rezoning Project throughout the process. City staff meetings may consist of both large group meetings and one-on-one meetings with individual staff members to coordinate for upcoming events, obtain input of the feasibility of potential housing rezone sites, and discuss the project status and other topics as necessary.

Materials for these meetings will be documents prepared for the project (such as the Task 3.3 Site Analysis and Selection). R+A will prepare an agenda for each meeting; no summary notes will be prepared since the input from the meetings will be directly reflected in the documents that will be prepared by the consultant team. City staff will coordinate the staff meetings and handle meeting logistics.

Task 2 Deliverables
• Project factsheet (Spanish and English)
• Stakeholder interviews, up to thirteen; summary notes

Raimi + Associates 5 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project • Community meetings, up to six (three in-person and three virtual); meeting materials and summary
• City Council/Planning Commission joint meetings, up to two; presentation (including Spanish interpretation)
• City Council 1-on-1s, up to five meetings
• City staff meetings; meeting materials
Task 3: Site Identification and Selection
Task 3.1: Data Collection and Base Map
The R+A team will prepare a document and data request list to obtain information from the City. The City will provide the R+A team with a comprehensive set of data and documents necessary to conduct the housing site, economic feasibility, traffic, and environmental analysis. This is assumed to include site data, such as existing land use, vacancy, existing zoning, Assessor land/improvement value, building age, lease status (if available), infrastructure availability, Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) resource level, Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAA) status, Bay Area Equity Atlas designations, and City Council district, among others.

As part of this task, R+A will develop a base map to be used throughout the process.

Task 3.2: Site Selection Criteria
To identify additional capacity for residential development, R+A will conduct a thorough review and analysis of the sites within the study area. R+A will prepare an objective approach by establishing a selection methodology refined for 6th cycle housing element site inventories and data available for the City of Concord. Selection criteria may include:
• Sites known to the City staff with developer interest • Vacant parcels
• City-owned sites
• Large parking lots that can be redeveloped (strip malls, churches) • Sites close to transit facilities, schools, or parks
• Sites with underperforming hotels, gas stations, or commercial uses • Sites with low Improvement to Land ratio (<1 or based on City average) • Sites with low FAR (less than 0.3 of max FAR or based on City average) • Sites with buildings older than 40-50 years
• Sites will infrastructure availability
• Sites with high potential for placemaking and/or supporting existing commercial development We may also filter out sites that:
• Are small (typically less than 0.5 acres)
• Lie in environmental hazard zones (flood, wildfire, or hillside areas) • Have poor development potential due to factors, such as odd shape or poor access • Are of historical significance
• House multifamily or condominiums currently
In addition to the selection criteria, the R+A team will recommend mixed-use and/or residential zoning districts to apply to the selected sites. Given that only a few current zoning districts meet the criteria defined in Program 8.6, this task may include applying current zoning districts to limited areas of the city, creating new districts or an overlay, or some combination of these.

Raimi + Associates 6 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project R+A will create a brief memorandum outlining the potential criteria, data sources, and data availability, as well as the recommended zoning districts.

Task 3.3 Site Analysis and Selection
After the City Council confirms the site selection criteria (Joint Session #1), R+A will conduct the analysis using GIS information from the City, County Assessor’s
database, and other sources to determine all sites that fulfilled the established criteria. The sites will be mapped using ArcGIS online to allow City staff to easily review and comment on sites.

Sites will be assigned a mixed-use or residential zoning district type to initially understand capacity, with
descriptive statistics prepared by TCAC area, RCAA area, and other characteristics to understand the relative
distribution of sites.

Each parcel will be ranked by the selection criteria and either included or excluded from the rezoning
alternatives, based on the scoring and whether development seems viable based on surrounding context and on-ground conditions like access, lot dimensions, and the age and condition of the property. Working with City staff, R+A will then further scrutinize each parcel using aerial photography, site visits, and/or local knowledge of the sites. After reviewing the sites, the selection criteria may be refined to meet the goals of the project, address City Council input, and finalize a selection of potential sites.

Task 3.4 Feasibility Analysis
As the R+A team identifies sites that may be good candidates for potential upzoning based on physical, demographic, contextual, and geographic criteria, EPS will develop several pro formas for a range of higher-density multifamily development prototypes (e.g., rental apartments and for-sale condominiums) to test how the development economics of new construction are affected by changes in density, zoning, and affordability requirements. R+A, in coordination with EPS and City staff, will create detailed development project prototypes (test fit / massing models) representing recent and likely residential development projects. EPS will research market-rate and below market- rate rents and development costs to identify yield-on-cost or profit margin requirements. To the extent the analysis demonstrates development feasibility challenges, EPS will identify, where possible, opportunities to improve development economics through zoning and other potential regulatory adjustments.

EPS anticipates that this will be an iterative exercise in which the project team works together to test an idea, refine assumptions, and retest.

Task 3 Deliverables
• Data and document request
• Project base map
• Site selection criteria memorandum

Raimi + Associates 7 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project • Site selection (draft and final) with online map and descriptive statistics • Feasibility analysis (draft and final)
Task 4: Alternatives for Rezoning
Task 4.1: Rezoning Alternatives
The R+A team, in collaboration with City
staff, will prepare up to three rezoning
alternatives based on site analysis and
selection, as well as community input. Each
alternative will provide residential options in
moderate- and high-resource areas within
Concord, meeting the target of 1,000 units
and a combined area of at least 20 acres.

Alternatives may vary by 1) the spatial
distributions of sites; 2) the amount/area of
sites included; and/or 3) the zoning district
applied to each site, amongst other factors.

The rezoning alternatives will be prepared and packaged for the community engagement process. Each alternative will be qualitatively described, basic statistics provided (area, capacity, etc.), and maps and images provided to illustrate the options. R+A will create a PowerPoint presentation and workshop materials.

Additionally, Fehr & Peers will provide analysis support to the team as it considers housing sites, including VMT effects using travel demand model runs, review of current TAZ/VMT mapping, transportation context supporting travel by multiple modes, land use context supporting shorter and/or non-auto trips for employment and shopping/entertainment purposes, transportation equity, and other metrics which may be developed collaboratively with City staff and the consultant team. Fehr & Peers will conduct a VMT assessment for each potential site (up to 10) based on City and OPR guidelines. We expect that this analysis will be conducted using the CCTA model. For this assessment, we would increase the number of housing units in the respective TAZ by the new housing development potential on each housing element site; land uses that would then not be constructed on each respective site would be removed from the model.

Task 4.2: Preferred Rezoning Alternative and Growth Projections After completing the community and decision-maker engagement process, R+A will work with City staff to prepare the preferred rezoning alternative. The preferred rezoning alternative will include: 1) an updated citywide Zoning Code map; 2) an updated citywide General Plan Land Use Diagram; and 3) descriptions of new General Plan Designations or Zoning Districts as appropriate. Additionally, R+A will develop detailed growth projections by parcel for each TAZ in the study area.

City staff will review and confirm these maps, descriptions, and projections before transportation analysis and environmental analysis begin.

Task 4 Deliverables
• Up to three rezoning alternatives for community engagement • Preferred Rezoning Alternative: updated citywide Zoning Code map; updated citywide General Plan Land Use Diagram; descriptions of new General Plan Designations or Zoning Districts / overlays

Raimi + Associates 8 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project Task 5: Environmental Impact Report
Task 5.1: Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting
Due to the broad, programmatic nature of the policy project, we recommend that the City forego the preparation of an Initial Study and address all the environmental checklist issues in the body of the EIR.

Rincon will work with consultant teammates and City staff to develop a brief project summary and will prepare a draft Notice of Preparation (NOP) for City staff to review. The NOP is intended to alert other public agencies about the undertaking, and to solicit their input on the scope of the Draft EIR. Rincon will submit a final PDF copy of the NOP to City staff for posting on its website and for distribution to public agencies. It is assumed that the City will distribute the NOP using the City’s distribution list. Rincon will review and make suggestions regarding the list, as requested, and be responsible for filing the NOP with the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse/OPR. As required by CEQA, the NOP will circulate to responsible and trustee agencies for 30 days.

During the 30-day scoping period, Rincon will develop presentation material for an EIR scoping meeting to provide the community an opportunity to provide input on the EIR work scope (issues of concern, alternatives, etc.). Rincon will make a brief presentation about the environmental review process, then record all public comments received. These comments will be summarized in the Introduction of the EIR and will be included as an EIR appendix.

Task 5.2: EIR Project Description
The Project Description will establish the framework upon which the environmental document will be based. As required by CEQA, the Project Description will describe: (1) the project’s affected locations and characteristics; (2) lead, responsible, and trustee agencies; (3) required approvals; and (4) project characteristics with potential environmental impacts. The Project Description will include an estimated development potential based on planning team and City staff-approved assumptions regarding “buildout,” and will provide adequate detail to enable environmental analysis of specific project components that are known, yet be broad enough to allow environmental evaluation of some of the long- term development concepts that are yet to be determined.

Task 5.3: Administrative Draft EIR
Rincon will prepare an Administrative Draft EIR (ADEIR) in compliance with CEQA requirements using information gathered as part of the planning phases and comments received during the scoping period, as well as information from other recent CEQA documents. The ADEIR will include the following sections:

The following summarizes the components of the ADEIR:
• Executive Summary. The Executive Summary will present a synopsis of identified environmental impacts, mitigation measures, and residual impacts in tabular format. It will also discuss CEQA requirements such as areas of known controversy and issues to be resolved. • Introduction and Environmental Setting. These sections will lay the groundwork for the substantive analysis to follow. The Introduction will describe the purpose and legal authority of the study, and a discussion of lead, responsible and trustee agencies. The Environmental Setting will provide a general description of existing conditions and geography within the study area. • Environmental Impact Analysis. Each environmental issue addressed in the EIR will have four main subsections: Setting, Impacts, Programmatic Mitigation Measures, and Level of Significance after Mitigation. The setting will be based on existing data sources and, as appropriate, technical studies prepared in conjunction with the rezone project. Where necessary, impacts will be quantified, and their level of significance established. If existing data does not allow definitive quantification or quantification is not required, reasonable assumptions will be used to qualitatively approximate potential impacts. Cumulative impacts will be discussed within this

Raimi + Associates 9 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project analysis, but at a lesser level of detail than the project-specific impacts. Mitigation measures may include a range of programmatic or procedural measures as determined appropriate by City staff and the consultant team. All mitigation measures will be presented in wording that can be directly applied to conditions of approval and will include monitoring requirements.

While all issues in the CEQA Guidelines will be addressed in the EIR, issues to be addressed in detail in this section are likely include air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, public services, transportation, and utilities. Other sections (such as agricultural and forestry resources and mineral resources) are assumed to be analyzed in an “Effects Found not to be Significant” section of the EIR. The analysis will consider general impacts associated with buildout under the updated zoning code and site-specific impacts associated with any known projects and planned physical improvements. Programmatic analysis frameworks for anticipated key issue areas are described below:
o Other CEQA-Required Sections. This section will address other CEQA requirements, including growth inducing impacts and significant, irreversible environmental changes.

Growth inducement includes both direct and indirect population and job growth, as well as the removal of potential obstacles to growth. The discussion of irreversible changes will address the zoning code update’s potential to create significant environmental effects that cannot be reversed.
o Alternatives. As required by CEQA, the EIR will consider alternatives to the rezone project. These will likely include alternative scenarios that have previously been developed and additional scenarios that are oriented around addressing identified significant impacts of the proposed project. Up to three (3) alternatives, including the “no project” alternative, will be studied. These will be developed in coordination with City staff. The alternatives analysis will be less detailed than the project analysis but will identify the magnitude of each impact and associated mitigation requirements.

Rincon will incorporate City input into the ADEIR and provide City staff with digital versions of the ADEIR in both Word and PDF formats. Following staff review of the ADEIR, Rincon will incorporate appropriate revisions and prepare a Screen Check Draft EIR. The Screen Check version will be provided in digital format.

Task 5.4: Public Review Draft EIR
Once the City approves the Screen Check Draft EIR, Rincon will prepare the Public Draft EIR (DEIR), the Notice of Completion (NOC) and Notice of Availability (NOA) for public circulation. Rincon will prepare and distribute the required copies of the DEIR, NOC and NOA to the State Clearinghouse. Rincon will also file the NOA with the County Clerk. It is assumed that City staff will distribute the NOA to responsible agencies, and interested agencies, organizations, and persons. It is also assumed that the City will be responsible for required newspaper ads and other public noticing of the document’s availability, such as radius label mailing or onsite posting. As required by CEQA, the Draft EIR will circulate for a period of 45 days.

Task 5.5: Response to Comments/Final EIR (FEIR)
The Final EIR (FEIR) will be completed after the review period has closed and all comments submitted during that period have been received. The FEIR will include corrections to the Draft EIR (if warranted), comments received, and responses. It will also include a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP). Rincon will prepare a Screen Check Final EIR for City staff review and confirmation followed by a FEIR after incorporating comments from City staff on the Administrative Draft Final EIR. The subtasks involved in the preparation of the Final EIR are summarized below.

Raimi + Associates 10 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project • Draft Responses to Comments. Rincon will prepare draft responses to comments that pertain to the Draft EIR, based on a review of the comment letters received and coordination with City staff and legal counsel to discuss the comments received and proposed responses. Rincon assumes one meeting with city staff and the City Attorney to discuss comments and approach to addressing comments received. After receipt of City staff comments on the draft Response to Comments report, Rincon will prepare a Screen Check Draft Responses to Comments. After receipt of staff comments on the Screen Check Draft, Rincon will prepare the final Responses to Comments, which will be incorporated into the Final EIR. • Final EIR Publication. Subsequent to City staff approval of the draft Responses to Comments, Rincon will produce the Final EIR. Upon City approval of the Administrative Final EIR, we will publish the Final EIR, which will be used in adoption hearings. Rincon will also assist with providing responses to agency commenters at least 10 days prior to the adoption hearing. • CEQA Findings/Statement of Overriding Considerations: Rincon will prepare the CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations (if a significant and unavoidable impact is identified) for the project based on the impact conclusions of the EIR, using a template provided by the City or a Rincon template. The Draft CEQA Findings will be submitted alongside the Final EIR. Rincon will prepare an administrative draft version of the CEQA Findings for City review, will address one round of consolidated City comments, and submit a final document version digitally. • Public Hearings. Rincon will attend up to two hearings on adoption of the proposed project to answer questions on the CEQA process or analysis.
• Notice of Determination. Rincon will assist in the preparation and filing of the Notice of Determination. We have assumed the City will pay the applicable filing fees. Upon Final EIR certification and approval of the project, Rincon will submit the draft Notice of Determination (NOD) to City staff for delivery to the County Clerk and/or State Clearinghouse.

Task 5.6: Transportation Analysis
CEQA Assessment. Fehr & Peers will prepare the transportation impact assessment for the rezoning sites.

Would the project:

1. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?

2. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?

3. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

4. Result in inadequate emergency access?
We will compare the goals, policies and programs to relevant regional plans addressing the circulation system, as well as related General Plan policies in the Land Use, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas chapters, to determine if any inconstancies exist. We will use the travel demand model to assess the VMT generated by the program, using the City’s identified VMT metrics. We will assess significance relative to the City’s chosen significance criteria. We will also assess whether the program would be considered to create hazardous conditions if implemented according to the applicable standards of the City of Concord and other governing agencies and assess whether the program would create barriers to emergency vehicle circulation and access. Where significant adverse impacts are identified, mitigation measures will be developed and proposed.

Up to three alternatives will be evaluated and discussed on a qualitative basis. The relative trip generation characteristics and VMT outcomes of the alternatives will be discussed relative to the proposed project (new model runs and LOS analysis will not be performed for the alternatives’ assessment),

Raimi + Associates 11 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project VMT Analysis. Fehr & Peers will conduct a VMT assessment for each housing element site based on the OPR requirements and the currently adopted guidelines of the City of Concord. We expect that this analysis will be conducted using the CCTA regional travel demand model. For this assessment, we would increase the number of housing units in the respective TAZ by the new housing development potential on each housing element site; land uses that would then not be constructed on each respective site would be removed from the model.

The following VMT estimates will be prepared for the baseline and cumulative scenarios, both without and with the housing element sites: Citywide – All VMT; Citywide – home based VMT; Each housing element site – home based VMT.

Intersection Level of Service Analysis. While no longer utilized within the context of CEQA, many lead agencies, including the City of Concord desire an analysis of the effects of newly generated development traffic on the local circulation network. As part of this task Fehr & Peers would assess morning and evening peak hour levels of service and vehicular delay at critical intersections near the housing element sites.

We have assumed that intersection levels of service will be assessed at ten intersections (total) in the vicinity of housing element sites. These intersections will be identified in collaboration with City of Concord traffic and planning staff once sites have been selected. We will collect weekday morning (7:00 to 9:00 AM) and evening (4:00 to 6:00 PM) peak period intersection turning movement counts at these ten locations. The data collection will include a separate count of truck, pedestrian, and bicycle activity. We will conduct field reconnaissance to verify intersection configurations and traffic control during peak hours. Traffic signal timings will be obtained from City or Caltrans staff, as necessary.

Peak-hour intersection operations will be evaluated for the following scenarios using the HCM 6th Edition method for vehicles:
• Existing – Based on existing adjusted traffic counts
• Existing with Project – Existing traffic counts with traffic expected to be generated by the housing element sites.
• Cumulative – Forecasts for the cumulative scenario will be based on traffic growth trends as described in the Concord General Plan EIR and supplemented by a check of traffic forecasts for the study area in the 2040 Contra Costa Countywide travel demand model. Land uses assumed on the parcels adjacent to the project sites will be reviewed by the team. Forecasts will be developed for all vehicle turning movements for the study intersections. Roadway and intersection geometries will be updated based on proposed future improvements.
• Cumulative with Project – Cumulative forecasts plus traffic expected to be generated by the housing element sites.

We will confirm with City of Concord staff the appropriate roadway improvements to include in each scenario. Intersection geometries, signal timings, and peak hour multimodal volumes will be modeled using the Synchro 11.0 analysis tool. For the project scenarios, project trips will be assigned to the network based on the expected trip generation and distribution. Within the cumulative analysis, the net project trips that will be generated by the rezoning will be applied (i.e., the total trips over and above what could be generated by buildout of the current zoning). For the study locations that exceed the level of service standard improvement measures will be identified.

This scope of work assumes that only minor editorial comments are received on each Draft Reports. We budgeted sixteen staff hours to prepare the final reports. As the number and complexity of public comments on the DEIR is unknown, we have budgeted 4 hours to review. This scope of work assumes

Raimi + Associates 12 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project attendance at one staff level meeting and one public hearing. We will be available to attend additional meetings on a time-and-materials basis.

Task 5 Deliverables
• NOP (draft and final)
• Scoping meeting materials
• Project description
• NOA (draft and final)
• EIR (admin, screen check, public review, and final including response to comment and NOD) • Draft and Final Transportation Impact Assessment (DEIR Documentation Basis) • Draft and Final LOS Memorandum (Level of Service)
• Memorandum summarizing VMT analysis
• Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (draft and final) • CEQA Findings/Statement of Overriding Considerations (if needed) (draft and final) Task 6: General Plan and Zoning District and Map Amendments Task 6.1: General Plan and Zoning District and Map Amendments R+A will support the City in preparing amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Code to reflect the preferred rezoning alternative. This will include: 1) an updated citywide Zoning Code map; 2) an updated citywide General Plan Land Use Diagram; and 3) new General Plan Designations or Zoning Districts / overlays.

Task 6.2: Public Hearings
R+A will attend up to two hearings with City Council and one with the Planning Commission to review the EIR and General Plan and Zoning District and Map amendments. At the conclusion of the hearings, the City Council will determine whether to certify the Final EIR and whether to adopt/approve the amendments. In preparation for the Council hearings, this task also includes up to five 1-on-1 meetings with Council members.

Task 6 Deliverables
• General Plan and Zoning District and Map amendment support • City Council 1-on-1s, up to five meetings
• City Council and Planning Commission hearings, up to three meetings; presentations (with Spanish translation)

5. Budget
Principal
Senior
Planner
Planner Graphics
Principal
A. Kanat
Vice
President
Associate
Transportation
Lead (Burton)
Transportation
Engineer
(Gonzalez)
Graphics Admin
Principal
I
Senior
Supervisor II
Senior
Professional II
Planner
III
GIS
Specialist
Publishing
/Accountin
g
Labor
Hours Per
Task
Labor Cost
Per Task

1.1 Project Kick-Off 8 8 4 2 2 2 24 2 3 4 7,684$

1.2 Project Work Plan and Management 24 24 20 4 8 20 32 12 144 33,396$ Subtotal Task 1 32 32 24 - 6 10 2 - - - - 22 36 - - - 14 178 41,080$

2.1 Stakeholder Meetings 14 16 12 8 8 8 66 14,430$

2.2 Community Meetings 50 72 84 30 8 244 43,750$

2.3 City Council / Planning Commission Meetings 60 50 16 126 30,550$

2.4 Noticing and Outreach 4 16 38 24 82 11,830$

2.5 C ity Staff Meetings 12 12 8 32 6,600$ Subtotal Task 2 140 166 142 54 24 16 8 - - - - - - - - - - 550 107,160$

3.1 Data Collection and Base Map 8 16 36 60 10,020$

3.2 Site Selection Criteria 8 16 16 40 7,320$

3.3 Site Analysis and Selection 16 40 60 116 19,900$

3.4 Feasibility Analysis 4 40 20 32 40 136 30,460$ Subtotal Task 3 36 112 112 - 20 32 40 - - - - - - - - - - 352 67,700$

4.1 Rezoning Alternatives 16 30 30 4 16 2 98 18,510$

4.2 Preferred Rezoning Alternative and Growth Projections 16 20 40 76 13,500$ Subtotal Task 4 32 50 70 - - - - 4 16 - 2 - - - - - - 174 32,010$

5.1 Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting 6 12 8 2 4 32 7,452$

5.2 EIR Project Description 4 8 2 16 4 2 36 7,782$

5.3 Adminis tr ativ e D r aft EIR 30 60 32 280 16 20 438 91,362$

5.4 Public Review Draft EIR 8 24 6 48 4 8 98 21,240$

5. 5 Responses t o Com m ent s/ Final E I R 14 36 12 64 4 8 138 30,906$

5.6 Transportation Analysis 50 180 16 12 258 53,500$ Subtotal Task 5 - - - - - - - 50 180 16 12 62 140 52 416 30 42 1,000 212,242$

6.1 General Plan and Zoning District and Map Amendments 26 36 46 108 20,020$

6.2 Public Hearings 28 28 12 14 82 20,392$ Subtotal Task 6 54 64 46 - - - - - - - - 12 14 - - - - 190 40,412$ Total Hours 294 424 394 54 50 58 50 54 196 16 14 96 190 52 416 30 56 1,324 Billing Rate $275 $185 $135 $110 $300 $255 $195 $350 $175 $165 $155 $297 $282 $246 $189 $145 $121 Labor Cost $80,850 $78,440 $53,190 $5,940 $15,000 $14,790 $9,750 $18,900 $34,300 $2,640 $2,170 $28,512 $53,580 $12,792 $78,624 $ 4,350 $6,776 Total Firm Labor Cost $218,420 $39,540 $58,010 $184,634 500,604 $

EXPENSES
Project/Sub M anagement (7%) $19,753 $0 $0 $0 19,753 $
D a ta Acquisition $500 $5,000
M eeting Expenses (Printing, Translation, Interpretation) $12,000 $0 $0 $200 12,200 $ Trav el $600 $0 $0 $200 800 $
Offic e Ex penses (3%) $6,553 $0 $0 $0 6,553 $
Total Expenses $38,906 $500 5,000 400 $44,806 TOTAL PER FIRM $257,326 $40,040 $63,010 $185,034
TOTAL FOR ALL FIRMS (Labor + Expenses)
10% CO NT INGENCY $54, 541
GRAND T O T AL (T ota l for All Firms + Con tin g en cy) $599, 951 Raimi + Associates City of Concord A FFH Rezoning Project Total
Task 1: Project Initiation
Raimi + Associates EPS Fehr & Peers Rincon
Task 2: Community Engagement
Task 3: Site Identification and Selection
Task 4: Alternatives for Rezoning
Task 5: Environmental Impact Report
Task 6: General Plan and Zoning Amendments
$545, 410

4. Project Schedule
123456789 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8
Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June

1.1 Project Kick-Off

1.2 Project Work Plan and Management

2.1 Stakeholder Meetings

2.2 Community Meetings Listening Rezoning Alts Preferred Rezoning

2.3 City Council / Planning Commission Meetings PC/CC-Optional PC/CC Council 1v1s PC/CC Council 1v1s

2.4 Noticing and Outreach

2.5 City Staff Meetings
Task 3: Site Identification and Selection

3.1 Data Collection and Base Map

3.2 Site Selection Criteria

3.3 Site Analysis and Selection

3.4 Feasibility Analysis

4.1 Rezoning Alternatives

4.2 Preferred Rezoning Alternative and Growth Projections

5.1 Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting Scoping Mtg

5.2 EIR Project Description

5.3 Administrative Draft EIR

5.4 Public Review Draft EIR

5.5 Responses to Comments/Final EIR

5.6 Transportation Analysis

6.1 General Plan and Zoning District and Map Amendments

6.2 Public Hearings PC CC
Raimi + Associates City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project Task 5: Environmental Impact Report
Task 6: General Plan and Zoning Amendments
Task 4: Alternatives for Rezoning
Task 2: Community Engagement
Task
Months
2024 2025
Task 1: Project Initiation
Attachment 2

Raimi
+ Associates 4 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project

1. Our Understanding
Located in the heart of the East Bay, the City of Concord is home to a growing population of over 130,000 residents. The city itself boasts beautiful parks, concert venues, theme parks, and a lively downtown core.

Nestled in north Contra Costa County, only 30 miles east of San Francisco, Concord provides an “urban lifestyle with the comforts of a suburban setting,” maintaining connections to the regional economy.

Like the broader Bay Area, Concord continues to change and evolve. The city experienced a steady population growth before 2020, declining slightly during the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. It continues to grow more ethnically diverse, with an increase in the proportion of the population who identify as Hispanic, Asian, and African American. Concord has steadily added more housing, but like the broader Bay Area and state, supply lags behind demand, with single-family home prices up 75% and rents up 44% from 2010 to 2020, increasing cost burdened households.

To address the housing crisis and
expand the range of housing
opportunities available to all people,
the City’s recently adopted 6th Cycle
Housing Element includes programs
detailing opportunities to produce
housing to meet the needs of the
community, including in the
moderate- and high-resource areas.

Most of the housing sites identified
in the Sites Analysis, however, are
concentrated in low resource areas,
close to Downtown, BART stations,
and Highway 242.

To ensure equal housing opportunity
and affirmatively further fair housing,
Housing Element Program 8.6 aims
to increase housing capacity in
higher resource areas and areas of
affluence by rezoning sites
appropriate for medium and high-
density housing. While some multifamily housing exists in these areas, most housing is single family. New multifamily housing will need to be accommodated along streets, such as Clayton Road, Treat Boulevard, Ygnacio Valley Road, and Oak Grove Road.

Through Program 8.6, the City aims to identify capacity for at least 1,000 additional units. This program cannot be just about “fit” from a physical design perspective. Successfully accomplishing this goal will require an objective analysis of potential sites, an understanding of residential development feasibility, opportunities to reduce constraints to residential development, and a commitment to collaboration with the community, with a lens of inclusion.

Concord faces the challenges of any large city in the Bay Area working to ensure all can thrive. The City has an opportunity to face these challenges head-on as it implements it’s Housing Element. This project is also an opportunity for the City to build a more equitable and robust culture of community engagement, fostering new relationships and creating new community trust that invigorates not this rezoning process, but the future of community engagement in Concord.

Attachment 3

Raimi + Associates 5 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project

2. Our Team
Raimi + Associates (R+A) has assembled a nationally respected team of urban planners, economists, transportation planners, and environmental professionals to work on the City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project. This team has worked extensively on similar projects, including multiple general plans, housing element updates, feasibility studies, and zoning code updates throughout California and the rest of the country. Below are descriptions and roles for each of the firms on the Raimi + Associates team. The following section includes descriptions of our firm as well as our subconsultants, our team’s organizational chart, and an overview of the management team and key staff.

Raimi + Associates will serve as the project lead, ensuring that all subconsultants and tasks are moving in lockstep and meet the high standards and requirements of the City. R+A will lead the sites analysis, land use planning, and community engagement efforts of the project.

Established in 2006, R+A is an award-winning multidisciplinary urban design, planning, policy, and research firm with offices in Berkeley and Los Angeles. General and comprehensive plans, housing, and zoning are part of the firm’s core services. The firm’s planning and urban design expertise is complemented and informed by its focus on equity, sustainability, and program evaluation.

R+A has worked extensively across California and the Bay Area. Recent Bay Area projects include general plans in South San Francisco, Petaluma, and East Palo Alto; 6th cycle housing elements in Milpitas and Berkeley; area plans for North Walnut Creek, Sunnyvale Moffett Park, Mountain View East Whisman, San Leandro BayFair BART Station, Castro Valley Downtown, Berkeley Adeline Corridor, and South San Francisco Lindenville; and zoning and design standards for North Berkeley BART, Walnut Creek, Milpitas, and Palo Alto. In addition, our firm has extensive experience across the state working on general plan, housing element, and zoning code updates for the cities of Ventura, Palmdale, Indio, Culver City, Beaumont, and more. Much of the firm’s current comprehensive planning, housing, and zoning work incorporates thorough and equity-focused community engagement. Our breadth of experience and specialties make us uniquely qualified to assist the City of Concord.

Rincon Consultants, Inc. will be responsible for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on the project. Rincon is an award-winning multi-disciplinary environmental science, planning, and engineering consulting firm that provides quality professional services to government and industry. Our approach to every project is centered upon the design and development of innovative solutions that respond to our clients’ specific needs in a cost-effective manner.

Supporting planning programs for housing is a core service area for Rincon. We have prepared CEQA documents for dozens of jurisdictions during the 6
th cycle for full housing elements as well as housing element implantation programs, ranging from EIR addendums and Initial Study-(Mitigated) Negative Declarations to comprehensive environmental impact reports. In addition to CEQA review, we also prepare housing elements and policy and zoning programs to implement housing elements, giving us a unique insight into the optimal approach and process for environmental review and streamlining. Rincon Consultants has provided planning and environmental documentation services to the City of Concord since 2015 under successive on-call contracts.

Fehr & Peers will lead the vehicle miles travelled (VMT) and level of service (LOS) analysis for the Rezoning Project. At Fehr & Peers, we are passionate about transforming transportation consulting through innovation and creativity. We derive inspiration by partnering with communities to understand and shape local transportation futures objectively tailored to diverse needs. Fehr & Peers has specialized in providing transportation planning and engineering services to

Raimi + Associates 6 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project public and private sector clients since 1985. We develop creative, cost-effective, and results-oriented solutions to planning and design problems associated with all modes of transportation. We offer our clients the right combination of leading-edge technical skills and extensive knowledge of the communities in which we work to deliver comprehensive solutions and superior client service. We are nationally recognized experts who routinely publish original research, serve on national committees, and teach courses to others in the industry.

We do this while maintaining our commitment to translating those techniques into practical solutions.

Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. will lead the housing feasibility analysis component of the project. EPS is a land economics consulting firm experienced in the full spectrum of services related to real estate development, housing policy, the financing of public infrastructure and government services, land use and conservation planning, and local government organization. EPS was founded in 1983 on the principle that real estate development and land use-related public policy should be built on realistic assessment of market forces and economic trends, feasible implementation measures, and recognition of public policy objectives, including provisions for required public facilities and services. The firm excels in preparing concise analyses that disclose risks and impacts, support decision making, and provide solutions to real estate development and land use-related problems. For this project, EPS will provide economic analysis to help the team evaluate the impact of rezoning on the economics of development. The project will be staffed out of EPS’s Oakland office.

Team Organization

Raimi + Associates 7 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project Project Team
Raimi + Associates will oversee project management of the Concord AFFH Rezoning Project, overseen by Matt Raimi and led by Eric Yurkovich. All discipline leads will coordinate with R+A regularly to ensure timely delivery of project deliverables. Below is an overview of the key staff members on the project.

Raimi + Associates
MATT RAIMI, AICP | Raimi + Associates | Project Oversight Matt will oversee the Concord AFFH Rezoning Project. Matt, the founder of Raimi + Associates, has over 25 years of experience in planning across the country. He has directed numerous comprehensive plans, specific plans, corridor plans, vision plans, healthy community plans, and other complex planning projects. Examples include general plans for Mountain View, East Palo Alto, West Hollywood, Ventura, and Thousand Oaks; Berkeley Housing Element; and HCD Housing Scenarios.

ERIC YURKOVICH | Raimi + Associates | Principal and Project Manager Eric Yurkovich will serve as the project manager for the Concord AFFH Rezoning Project. Eric has over twenty years of experience as a community planner focused on issues of land use, housing, sustainability, and equitable development.

Examples include general plans for South San Francisco, Culver City, Seaside, and Indio; Milpitas Housing Element; and area plans for North Bayshore, East Whisman, Moffett Park, and Lindenville.

ANTARA TANDON | Senior Planner | Land Use and Urban Design Antara will serve as the land use and housing support for the Concord AFFH Rezoning Project. She is an accomplished planner and an architect with an interest in sustainable community planning and affordable housing. She holds a degree in Master’s in Urban Planning from Harvard University and a Bachelor’s of Architecture from School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi. Antara secured Third Place in the 2016 Affordable Housing Development Competition in Massachusetts where she was involved in the design and policy analysis.

MICHELLE HERNANDEZ | Planner | Land Use and Engagement
Michelle will support community engagement for the Concord AFFH Rezoning Project. Michelle is a Planner/Designer with a passion for interdisciplinary approaches that incorporate sustainability into all areas of planning. She believes that equitable collaboration is necessary in designing adaptive and resilient communities. Michelle has experience conducting zero waste and environmental research at UC Berkeley and mapping gentrification and climate-related investments with UC Berkeley’s Urban Displacement Project.

SASHA CHEECHOV | Planner | GIS, Land Use, and Engagement Sasha will be working on planning and GIS support for the Concord AFFH Rezoning Project. She is a Project Planner who conducts research, engagement, analysis, and visualization to address disparities and create healthy, affordable, and safe communities. She has extensive experience executing equitable community engagement and is adept with GIS and mapping tools, as well as other forms of data analysis and visualization.

Raimi + Associates 8 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project Rincon
ABE LEIDER, AICP CEP | Principal in Charge
Abe is a Principal in Rincon’s Environmental Sciences and Planning group. Abe has over 22 years of experience in the planning field and has managed or primarily authored successful planning and environmental documents on subjects ranging from regional resource management and planning programs to complex public and private development projects. He oversees Rincon’s environmental planning practice in Northern California and is Principal-in-Charge of our on-call contracts for planning and environmental services, including for the City of Concord.

KARLY KAUFMAN | Supervising Environmental Planner/Project Manager Karly Kaufman serves as an Environmental Planner/Project Manager in Rincon’s Environmental Science and Planning group. She has over 17 years of experience in the industry and over 11 years of experience in CEQA project management. Karly specializes in advising on and managing programmatic CEQA documentation for general plans, housing elements and housing element implementation, and zoning ordinance amendments. She also manages CEQA documentation for residential and commercial projects and large-scale transportation projects.

Fehr & Peers
BILL BURTON, PE | Transportation Lead & Principal
Bill Burton, PE, will serve as transportation lead for the project. Bill has 30 years of experience in the planning and design of transportation systems. A registered Civil and Traffic Engineer, his experience ranges from transportation planning studies of region-wide significance to the planning and design of improvements to local intersections and roadways. He manages many of the company’s on-call transportation engineering and transportation planning contracts.

KAYLA GONZALEZ, EIT | Transportation Engineer
Kayla Gonzalez, EIT, will serve as the transportation engineer and lead transportation analyst for the project. Her passion for transportation engineering is fostered by the potential to improve communities by implementing effective and transformative solutions. Since joining Fehr & Peers, Kayla has worked on a variety of projects throughout Concord and in doing so, expanding her knowledge of and appreciation for traffic impact studies and design.

Economic & Planning Systems
ASHLEIGH KANAT | Principal
Ashleigh Kanat will serve as the EPS lead on this project, building on her Housing Element experience (in other jurisdictions) and her experience with the City of Concord (inclusionary housing and review of affordable housing development proposals for surplus land). Ashleigh has been with EPS for more than 15 years and has long been involved in the firm’s housing policy work. She has been working for the City of Concord on the inclusionary housing update and will leverage that experience.

Raimi + Associates 9 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project

3. Our Approach to Rezoning
Project Approach
Our approach to the project is based on our understanding of issues facing the city, the City staff’s goals for the project, and our team’s experience preparing innovative plans. Our process for completing the AFFH Rezoning Project is designed to leverage existing institutional knowledge of City staff, combined with a fresh vision for the future of the community and high caliber technical analysis. We aim to not only satisfy Assembly Bill 686 and complete Program 8.6, but to energize the community with a newfound sense of possibility. Our approach to achieving this is described below.

Facilitate Authentic Community Engagement
The effective involvement of the community in the decision-making process is critical to shaping any planning process or program development. At R+A, we believe that the most successful plans emerge through a rich community dialogue that engages all segments of the population, not just those that are typically involved. We will consult community members and key stakeholders at various project milestones to share information and gather feedback. Key elements of our approach include:
• Clear and consistent messaging. With sensitive issues of development, traffic congestion, and affordable housing at the forefront of the regional and local discourse, it will be critical to develop clear and consistent messaging at the beginning of the project. The development of Concord’s Housing Element Program 8.6 will be a complex and complicated process. It will be easy to lose site of the big picture through the technical studies and community engagement process. Thus, it’s critical to establish and continually reiterate a clear statement of intent for the program’s housing goals. At points in the process, we will undoubtedly need to make tough decisions by balancing trade-offs between different rezoning approaches. Having a clear north star will ensure we stay true to the vision of the program without getting mired in controversy. • Engage decision makers. Given the sensitivity of development, it is important that policymakers and decision-makers be actively involved at every step of the planning process. Public study sessions with the Planning Commission, the Housing and Economic Development (HED) Committee, and City Council can be an effective outreach strategy, as some people pay close attention to those meeting agendas but may not otherwise engage in project activities. We will help policymakers understand the perspectives of the full spectrum of stakeholders. • Establish a firm understanding of community needs and desires. In the early phase of the project, R+A will solicit input from key groups through stakeholder interviews and City Council

Raimi + Associates 10 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project one-on-on meetings. This will enable the team to establish a holistic perspective of community needs and provide clear direction for the rest of the project. • Make materials accessible and easy-to-understand. All meeting materials, including presentations, recordings, and handouts, will be posted online for those who are unable to attend or wish to reference previous meeting content. Additionally, all project collateral such as the project fact sheet will feature visually attractive and easy-to-understand design. • Provide multiple modes of engagement. All in-person community meetings will be held in the evening or on the weekends. Complementary online engagement methods will be utilized in parallel with these meetings to accommodate those who cannot attend in-person.

Establishing Potential Housing Rezoning Sites
To identify potential housing rezoning sites, R+A will use a mixed methods approach, combining objective technical analysis with local knowledge from City staff and property owners, input from community members, and direction from decision makers. R+A
will prepare an objective approach to site selection by defining a methodology refined for 6th cycle housing
element site inventories. Working with City staff and
stakeholders, R+A will scrutinize each candidate parcel using aerial photography, site visits, and/or local
knowledge of the sites and informed by the residential
feasibility analysis (described below). After reviewing the sites, the selection criteria may be refined to meet the goals of the project and finalize a selection of
potential sites.

This technical process will be complemented by our community engagement approach. R+A will work with the community and decision makers to identify where change / rezoning should occur and areas that should generally remain the same. During community meeting #1, we will listen to potential locations and ideas proposed by community members through an open-ended mapping activity. For meeting #2, we will package potential rezoning sites into different alternatives to allow community members an opportunity to provide feedback on those options. For each of the potential rezoning alternatives we will use photos and illustrations to show the general scale of development. The alternatives will be presented to the Planning Commission, HED Committee, and City Council for discussion and direction. This engagement process will enable us to further refine the candidate sites for rezoning and help the City to define a clear vision for areas which require rezoning to meet the intent of Program 8.6.

Use Market Economics to Inform Our Efforts
We understand the importance of integrating market-based analysis and economic forces into the planning process. The construction of affordable housing, perceived by some as potentially harmful to the local economy due to property value concerns, does not necessarily yield negative impacts. Through thorough analysis and strategic development, affordable housing initiatives can instead prove highly advantageous, fostering increased consumer spending, community stabilization, and the attraction of a skilled workforce. EPS will prepare multiple pro formas for a range of higher-density multifamily development prototypes, identify yield-on-cost or profit margin requirements, and seek out opportunities to improve development economics through zoning.

Integrate Housing into the Planning System
R+A specializes in managing projects that include all aspects of comprehensive planning and explicitly synchronize policies with code implementation. By default, therefore, we bring an integrated, systemic

Raimi + Associates 11 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project perspective to the consistency analysis required for site rezones and focused General Plan updates.

Specifically, we ensure foundational “horizontal” consistency among the Housing, Land Use, and Circulation Elements. We will also ensure the “vertical” consistency between the General Plan, the development Code, and the rezoning of specific parcels that is required for successful implementation.

This rezoning may be accommodated through a variety of means including new zoning districts or an overlay and complimentary general plan amendments.

Tailor Environmental Compliance to Project Goals and Requirements Rincon’s environmental scientists and planners have both the expertise to quickly assess and mitigate a project’s environmental impacts and the experience to shepherd the project expeditiously through the CEQA compliance process. Specifically, Rincon efficiently integrates environmental review with the Housing Element planning process and required rezones and ensures CEQA compliance. Based on discussions with City staff, an EIR that includes a review of rezone sites will be prepared, including VMT analysis.

Collaborate with City Staff
We envision our firm serving as a partner to staff supporting and building capacity through the Rezoning Project effort with our team’s creativity, technical expertise, and staff resources. We commit to working closely with City staff, and this is a role that we have also previously played with considerable success on multiple similar comprehensive planning and zoning code projects that aimed to meet the community’s diverse needs. This includes providing senior-level staff members to lead the project and provide technical expertise for all components of the project.

Raimi + Associates 23 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project

6. Project Qualifications
General Plan Updates
South San Francisco General Plan Update
South San Francisco, California | Timeline: 2019-2022
The City of South San Francisco adopted its 2040 General Plan in October 2022, titled Shape SSF, led by Raimi +
Associates and supported by a multi-disciplinary team. The development of this plan has been guided by an overarching vision, a set of community values, and guiding principles that were shaped through community input. Shape SSF
presents the community’s vision for South San Francisco for the next two decades, and it provides a roadmap for the City to implement policies and actions that create a resilient community, improve the quality of life of its residents, and expand economic development opportunities. South San
Francisco has been known as “The Industrial City,” but in recent years, has become the “birthplace of biotechnology.” Shape SSF nurtures a thriving research and development industry, capitalizing on the city’s strategic location, while simultaneously protecting small businesses and its industrial heritage. Shape SSF positions the City to create new, complete, and resilient neighborhoods with high-quality and accessible services and facilities for residents of all ages and abilities, adding up to 15,000 new housing units and supportive amenities over the next two decades.

These included sites located within moderate and high resource areas to affirmatively further fair housing.

Subsequently, the City initiated the Lindenville Specific Plan, led by R+A, to both preserve the area’s industrial heritage and implement a new, mixed-use neighborhood with over 5,000 housing units near BART and Downtown, key Housing Element sites.

East Palo Alto General Plan Update
East Palo Alto, California | Timeline: 2015-2018
Raimi + Associates updated the General Plan for the City of East Palo Alto, one of the most ethnically diverse cities in the Bay Area. As part of the planning effort, R+A also created a chapter of the General Plan focused on East Palo Alto’s Westside, which provides a significant percentage of the San Francisco Peninsula’s existing affordable housing stock. The updated General Plan emphasizes pressing community issues, such as affordable housing, public safety, infrastructure deficiencies, increased employment opportunities, public realm improvements, public health, fiscal health, and the need for better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. It includes specific policy guidance for each unique neighborhood of the City.

The Plan also clarifies and strengthens protections for affordable housing, creates a strong community benefit program and ensures an open and transparent engagement process prior to the approval of significant new development projects. Throughout the General Plan process, R+A implemented an extensive engagement process that included 2 advisory committees, a dozen workshops, pop-up workshops, focus groups, and youth-focused engagement. As a result, the Plan was approved with nearly unanimous support from the public and the City Council.

Raimi + Associates 24 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project Ventura General Plan Update
Ventura, California | Timeline: 2018-ongoing
Raimi + Associates is leading a team of consultants to
comprehensively update the City of San Buenaventura's
General Plan, Climate Action Plan, and Local Coastal
Program. As the administrative center of Ventura County, the City of San Buenaventura ("Ventura") is home to quaint single-family neighborhoods, regional employment and
educational hubs, and historic landmarks like the San
Buenaventura Mission. The community has been beset by
many issues impacting its quality of life, such as housing affordability, homelessness, wildfire risk, and sea level rise.

Because its General Plan was last updated in 2005, the City is reinventing it as a forward-looking document that tackles these issues head-on with the support of residents not
traditionally involved in community planning processes.

The process is working to find and rezone housing sites throughout the city.

Culver City General Plan Update
Culver City, California | Timeline: 2019-ongoing
Nestled in the heart of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area, Culver City has established itself as a vibrant community with a high quality of life, easy access to transit, and healthy neighborhoods. Culver City’s commitments to transit-oriented development and sustainability have also been heralded across the region. While the city's ongoing economic revitalization has contributed to a strong job market, it has also exerted significant pressure on the housing market and put a strain on local transportation infrastructure. For these reasons, Raimi + Associates is helping the City prepare a comprehensive update of Culver City's General Plan and associated Environmental Impact Report.

R+A worked with City staff to develop an inclusive engagement process to increase housing opportunities. This includes allowing higher density multifamily housing in activity centers and along mixed use corridors, while developing “incremental infill” to integrate missing middle housing into to the city’s higher opportunity neighborhoods.

Housing Element and Ordinance Updates
Concord Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Update and Fee Study Concord, California | Timeline: 2022-ongoing
EPS was selected to assist the City of Concord with a review and update of its existing inclusionary housing program. EPS worked with City staff to review the inclusionary programs of area jurisdictions, and to explore the feasibility implications of different inclusionary requirements and in-lieu fee methodologies.

EPS’s work included multiple study sessions before the Housing and Economic Development Committee and the Planning Commission. The recommended inclusionary requirements will go before the City Council in fall 2023.

Raimi + Associates 25 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project Milpitas Housing Element Update
Milpitas, California | Timeline: 2022 - 2023
R+A led a team of consultants to prepare the 6th Cycle Housing Element for the City of Milpitas that will shape and guide housing development from 2023 through 2031. The Housing Element Update includes analyzing governmental and non-governmental constraints to housing development through a thorough review of the City's Plans and Zoning Ordinance, evaluating the City's resources, and reviewing past housing accomplishments. The Housing Element also includes an assessment of the City's capacity to accommodate the Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) goals, developing a selection of objective criteria to identify rezoning sites, while affirmatively furthering fair housing. Rincon prepared the EIR addendum for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.

Throughout the project, the team conducted targeted outreach and coordination with the community, stakeholders, property owners, and city staff through workshops, pop-ups, and focus group meetings. The final Housing Plan includes housing goals, policies, and actions to meet the diverse housing needs of the community.

City of Berkeley Housing Element Update
Berkeley, California | Timeline: 2022 - 2023
R+A was hired by the City of Berkeley to prepare an updated Housing Element, which will serve as the City’s housing plan for the next 8 years. The process included an objective analysis of sites, robust community engagement plan, General Plan Updates, zoning consistency, and environmental review.

Rincon Consultants prepared an EIR for the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update (HEU). The HEU amended the City of Berkeley’s General Plan by replacing the current Housing Element with the proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element and amending the City’s General Plan for consistency and HEU implementation to facilitate the development of nearly 20,000 new residential units. Key issues included transportation, public services, and wildfire.

Petaluma Housing Element Update
Petaluma, California | Timeline: 2020-2023
R+A was selected to execute the City of Petaluma’s General Plan Update, which included a Housing Element Update.

The aim was to expand housing diversity and increase
affordability within the city. The project team implemented a place-based approach, identified growth, visualized
community design and change, and utilized research and
market economics to create an element that thoroughly
addressed housing needs. An inclusive community
engagement plan was utilized to reach as many residents as possible and put the community in the driver’s seat of the update.

Raimi + Associates 26 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project General Plan and Housing Element Rezoning
Ventura Housing Overlay Zones
Ventura, California | Timeline: 2022-2023
The City of San Buenaventura achieved a significant milestone in 2022 with the adoption of its 6th Cycle Housing Element. As one of the first steps towards implementing the Housing Element objectives, R+A worked with the City to create several form-based code housing overlay zones for sites that need to be rezoned per the Housing Element. The new housing overlay zones built off of the City’s past form-based codes, improved their objectivity, and addressed challenges that have occurred with implementation of these codes in a manner that allows the overlays to be applied in other parts of the city.

Milpitas Housing Overlay Zones
Milpitas, California | Timeline: 2021-ongoing
R+A was hired by the City of Milpitas to prepare their Housing Opportunity Zone (HOZ) Overlay District for seven development opportunity areas. In addition to providing objective standards and incentives to support development of affordable and supportive housing projects, the project team is also preparing project-level CEQA documents to facilitate by-right housing production in these opportunity areas.

Culver City Zoning Code Update
Culver City, California | Timeline: 2023 – ongoing
R+A is working with the City of Culver City to
comprehensively update their Zoning Code
with the goals of implementing updates in the
Land Use Element of the 2045 General Plan and
programs in the 2021-2029 Housing Element,
codifying an appropriate mechanism to
implement incentives for affordable housing
City-wide, and ensuring the Subdivision Chapter is current and facilitates streamlined review and approval of subdivisions including small lot subdivisions. The team is working closely with City Staff and employing a robust community engagement plan which includes surveys, pop-ups, workshops, and advisory groups.

Palmdale Zoning Code Update
Palmdale, California | Timeline: 2021-ongoing
R+A has been hired by the City of Palmdale to comprehensively update the Zoning Code in conjunction with the ongoing General Plan Update process. The updated code will implement the land use patterns, especially mixed use, and the development framework established in the Palmdale 2045 General Plan Update. The code will also incorporate and build upon recently completed Specific Plans and multifamily design regulations. The team will work closely with Staff and the development community to make sure the new Code is easy to navigate, user-friendly, and highly illustrative.

Raimi + Associates 27 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project Indio Zoning + Sign Code Update
Indio, California | Timeline: 2020-2022
R+A was hired by the City of Indio for a comprehensive Zoning Code Update that implements the recently adopted General Plan. The code update focused on modernizing allowed uses, creating development standards that encourage economic revitalization and high-quality infill and mixed-use development, and ensuring consistency with new State legislation. The team also worked closely with Staff and the development community to make sure the new Code is easy to navigate, user-friendly, and highly illustrative with new graphics, figures, and tables.

San Leandro Zoning Code Update
San Leandro, CA | Timeline: 2018
R+A worked collaboratively with City of San Leandro planning staff to complete a targeted update to key sections of the San Leandro Zoning Code. R+A’s update to the Code focused on clarifying the base allowed densities for residential and mixed-use development in key zones and ensuring consistency between maximum heights and FARs in corridor zoning districts, performing a "reality check" of the zoning standards.

Environmental Analysis
2023-2031 Housing Element EIR Addendum
Palo Alto, California | Timeline: 2023
Rincon Consultants prepared the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element, and subsequently prepared an addendum to the City’s Comprehensive Plan EIR for adoption of the Housing Element. The Housing Element is designed to allow for the capacity to build nearly 7,000 residential units on a variety of sites and locations in the city. Key issues include greenhouse gas emissions and transportation. 2023-2031 Housing Element Update IS-MND
Alameda County, California | Timeline: 2023
Rincon Consultants is preparing an Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration for the County’s 2023- 2031 Housing Element Update. The IS-MND focuses on housing production through rezoning and other programs in the County’s key unincorporated urban areas, with a goal of producing over 3,000 units.

Code amendments and consistency amendments for the General Plan are also analyzed. Key issues include air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation. 2023-2031 Housing Element Implementation Project EIR
Piedmont, California | Timeline: 2022 – 2023
Rincon Consultants prepared an Initial Study-Negative Declaration for the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element Update and is currently preparing an EIR for the City’s implementation of the Housing Element.

The implementation project would involve amendments to the City of Piedmont’s General Plan to implement the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element. The 2023-2031 Housing Element is designed to allow for the capacity to build housing in accordance with the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) assigned to Piedmont. The EIR also includes a programmatic but detailed analysis of the impacts of the proposed Moraga Canyon Specific Plan, which is intended to transform the constrained and controversial Moraga Canyon site into the City’s largest envisioned housing sites.

Raimi + Associates 28 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project Comprehensive Advanced Planning Initiative EIR
Moraga, California | 2021 – 2023
As a subconsultant to Barry Miller, Rincon prepared an EIR for the Town of Moraga’s Comprehensive Advanced Planning Initiative. The Planning Initiative included adoption of the Town’s 2023-2031 Housing Element; rezoning of key sites within the Town’s jurisdiction including the Moraga Center Specific Plan and Rheem Park areas, along with objective design standards for Rheem Park; conforming amendments to the Moraga 2002 General Plan; amendments to the 2002 General Plan Safety and Conservation Elements to comply with new State laws; and replacement of the “Study” General Plan and zoning designations for Bollinger Canyon with new designations. The Town of Moraga consolidated long range planning efforts through this initiative, namely the Housing Element Update and corresponding rezoning of the Moraga Center Specific Plan and Rheem Park Areas, rezoning of the Bollinger Canyon Study Area, and 2002 General Plan amendments to achieve internal consistency and meet recent State requirements.

Feasibility Analysis
Healdsburg Housing Sites Feasibility Analysis
Healdsburg, California | Timeline: 2018 – 2019
To support the City’s Housing Action Plan, EPS worked with City staff to identify four sites in the City with potential to provide affordable housing. EPS evaluated the physical characteristics of the site to account for access and environmental constraints before estimating a potential unit yield. The financial feasibility evaluated several programs per site, and tested a range of income levels, development costs, and tax credit scenarios. Council evaluated each to identify priorities. Ultimately, the analysis led to the issuance of Requests for Proposals for several sites that are now entitled, and in some cases, under construction.

Balboa Reservoir Development Feasibility Analysis
San Francisco, California | Timeline: 2015 – 2020 (multiple phases) EPS was retained by the San Francisco Public Utilities
Commission (SFPUC) as its real estate consultant for a five- year term. SFPUC sought outside expertise to augment its staff capabilities to optimize the revenue generation potential of its surplus land assets. EPS provided support related to the Balboa Reservoir, which is part of the Mayor’s Public Land for Housing program. EPS reviewed the capacity plans and pro forma analyses that were prepared to help SFPUC and other City agencies understand the financial tradeoffs of alternative land use programs, alternative levels of affordable housing, and alternative disposition types (i.e., ground lease vs. fee simple).

This work informed the Request for Proposals (RFP) that was issued in 2015/2016.

City of Burlingame Public Parking Lots Financial Feasibility Analysis Burlingame, California | Timeline: 2017 – 2018
The City of Burlingame owns several surface parking lots in the Downtown area and wanted to leverage these valuable real estate assets. The City retained EPS to specify the business terms for each of the projects and negotiate the terms of the agreements between the developers and the City. EPS developed a multi-year development pro forma to evaluate the residual land value of the project to determine the appropriate value for the City-owned parcel.

Raimi + Associates 29 City of Concord AFFH Rezoning Project

7. Resumes
Assembled on the following pages are resumes for members proposed on the R+A team. These materials highlight our team’s relevant project experience that demonstrate our ability to excel in performing the tasks and duties of the Concord Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rezoning Project.

www.raimiassociates.com

MATT RAIMI, AICP

PRINCIPAL
Matt Raimi, the founder of Raimi + Associates, has over 20 years of experience in planning across the country. He has directed numerous comprehensive plans, specific plans, corridor plans, vision plans, healthy community plans, and other complex planning projects throughout the country. Matt is an expert in creating inclusive and authentic public planning processes and creating more equitable, resilient, and sustainable cities. He has spoken and written extensively on applying the principles of new urbanism to comprehensive plans, incorporating public health concerns into the planning process, and promoting sustainable development.

KEY PROJECTS
ƒ Ventura General Plan Update (Ventura, CA)
Serving as Principal-in-Charge for Ventura’s comprehensive Plan Update. The Plan will address critical topics affecting Ventura including housing, sea level rise, health and equity, mobility, and wildfire risk. Project includes extensive community engagement, including a diverse General Plan Advisory Committee, pop-up workshops, focus groups, stakeholder interviews, and public workshops. ƒ East Palo Alto General Plan and Westside Area Plan (East Palo Alto, CA) Served as Project Manager and Principal-in-Charge. Lead a multi-disciplinary team to develop a General Plan that includes policies and regulations for infill development, economic development, health, sustainability and social equity.

Developed an Area Plan for a 160-area section of the City with detailed policies on anti-displacement, tenant rights and affordable housing. Lead an extensive public outreach effort that includes two advisory committees, citywide workshops, neighborhood meetings and social media activities. ƒ Mountain View General Plan (Mountain View, CA)
Served as Project Manager and Principal-in-Charge (in coordination with MIG). Duties included generating land use and urban design content, helping structure General Plan, and served as strategic advisor to the City. ƒ Thousand Oaks General Plan (Thousand Oaks, CA)
Serving as Principal-in-Charge for first comprehensive update to the city’s General Plan. Project to incorporate new state laws and recent local planning efforts, complex
planning and growth discussions, and land use and mobility alternatives analysis. Project includes extensive community engagemen t program such as General Plan Advisory Committee, focus groups, stakeholder interviews, pop-ups, office hours, and virtual and in-person workshops . ƒ Hermosa Beach General Plan (Hermosa Beach, CA)
Served as Principal-in-Charge. Worked with stakeholders, advisory committee, and community members to comprehensively update the General Plan an d integrated Local Coastal Plan with the goal of reaching carbon neutrality. ƒ Coachella General Plan Update (Coachella, CA)
Principal-in-Charge. Led a multidisciplinary team of consultants for the Coachella General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan. The implementation- f
ocused Plan included a “place-based” approach to urban design an d placemaking and a standalone community health and wellness element. ƒ Berkeley Housing Element (Berkeley, CA)
Serving as Principal-in-Charge. Matt is leading a team in preparing an updated Housing Element for the City of Berkeley, including community engagement, General Plan Updates, zoning consistency, and environmental review. ƒ Marina General Plan Update (Marina, CA)
Serving as Principal-in-Charge. Matt is leading a team in preparing an updated General Plan for the City of Marina. This includes robust technical, engagement, and management efforts, with a focus on environmental justice, equity, and climate change resilience.

EDUCATION
University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill
Master of Regional Planning, 1997
University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
Bachelor of Arts, English, 1992

AFFILIATIONS &

CERTIFICATIONS
American Institute of Certified
Planners
Former LEED Faculty. U.S. Green
Building Council
Member. Congress for the New
Urbanism, American Planning
Association
Senior Fellow. Environmental
Leadership Program

EXPERIENCE
Raimi+Associates
Berkeley, CA
Principal, 2006-present
Design, Community, & Environment
Berkeley, CA
Senior Associate, 2002-2006
SMWM
San Francisco, CA
Senior Associate, 1999-2002

www.raimiassociates.com

ADDITIONAL PROJECT EXPERIENCE
ƒ Orange Line BRT Sustainable Corridor Implementation Plan (City of Los Angeles, CA) ƒ Florence-Firestone Vision Plan (Los Angeles County, CA) ƒ El Monte Health and Wellness Element (City of El Monte, CA) ƒ Santa Clara County Health Element (Santa Clara County, CA) ƒ Downtown Beaverton Design and Development Readiness Project (Beaverton, OR) ƒ Kauai County General Plan Update Support (Kauai, HI)
ƒ Santa Clara County Health Element (Santa Clara County, CA) ƒ Fremont Community Plan and Form Based Code (Fremont, CA) ƒ Fresno Central Southeast Area Specific Plan (Fresno, CA) ƒ City Center Precise Plan and Form Based Code (City of Fremont, CA) ƒ International Boulevard TOD Plan (City of Oakland, CA)

PUBLICATIONS
ƒ Creating Built Environments for an Aging Population, Northern News: Northern California American Planning Association, June 2018.
ƒ A Citizen’s Guide to LEED for Neighborhood Development, Natural Resources Defense Council, 2011. ƒ How to Create and Implement Healthy General Plans, Co-authored with Public Health Law & Policy Center of the Public Health Institute, 2008.
ƒ Understanding the Relationship Between Public Health and the Built Environment: A Report Prepared for the LEED-ND Core Committee. U.S. Green Building Council and Congress for the New Urbanism, 2006. ƒ Once There Were Greenfields: How Urban Sprawl is Undermining America’s Environment, Economy and Social Fabric.

Co-authored for the Natural Resources Defense Council, 1999. ƒ Five Years of Progress: 110 Communities Where ISTEA is Making a Difference. Co-authored for the Surface Transportation Policy Project, 1996.

www.raimiassociates.com

ERIC YURKOVICH

PRINCIPAL

EDUCATION
University of California, Los Angeles
Master of Arts in Urban Planning, 2010
Macalester College, St. Paul, MN
Bachelor of Arts, Geography, 2000

AFFILIATIONS
Member. American Planning
Association

EXPERIENCE
Raimi+Associates
Berkeley, CA
Principal, 2012-present
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration/Pew Center on
Climate Change
Oakland, CA
Climate Change Researcher,
2010-2012
Calthorpe Associates
Berkeley, CA
Senior Planner, 2002-2008
Eric Yurkovich has extensive experience working on planning policy, analysis, and outreach for clients across the country. Eric’s work focuses on creating sustainable communities that offer alternatives to the automobile, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, protect natural resources and rural lands, and minimize risk from natural hazards. He specializes in land use and transportation planning, climate action and adaptation planning, and geographic information systems analysis.

KEY PROJECTS
ƒ South San Francisco General Plan Update (South San Francisco, CA) Served as Project Manager. Lead land use, housing, climate change, and public engagement for the General Plan Update.
ƒ Moffett Park Specific Plan Update (Sunnyvale, CA)
Served as Project Manager. Lead urban design, land use policy, climate adaptation strategies, and public engagement for the Specific Plan Update. ƒ East Whisman Precise Plan (Mountain View, CA)
Served as Project manager of a small area plan for a transit oriented development district around a light rain station. Wrote detailed design standards, guidelines, and implementation guide for the city. ƒ North Bayshore Precise Plan (Mountain View, CA)
Served as Deputy Project Manager. Wrote portions of the plan, including an incentive-based framework to encourage project- and district-level sustainability and incorporation of housing into the precise plan. ƒ Seaside General Plan (Seaside, CA)
Serving as Project Manager. Assisting with land use policy, environmental assessment, and public engagement for the General Plan Update. Managing work plan, documentation and oversight of CEQA process. ƒ Indio General Plan Update & Climate Action Plan (Indio, CA) Leading the City’s second effort to update their General Plan and Climate Action Plan. Managing multiple subconsultatns in sifting through technical analysis and updating where necessary. Writing Climate Action Plan including GHG forecasts and evaluating GHG reduction measures.
ƒ Culver City General Plan Update (Culver City, CA)
Serving as Project Manager. Leading land use policy and public engagement for the General Plan Update. Managing work plan, documentation, and oversight of CEQA process.
ƒ Coachella General Plan (Coachella, CA)
Contributed to the Sustainability and Health Chapters of the Plan. Wrote Climate Action Plan, which analyzed GP land use, energy, solid waste, and water strategies compared to a business-as-usual scenario. Inventoried community emissions and estimated the co-benefits of Plan policies. ƒ Milpitas Housing Element Update (Milpitas, CA)
Served as Project Manager. Lead a team of consultants throughout the Housing Element Update process. Managed work plan, community outreach, development, and documentation.

www.raimiassociates.com

ANTARA TANDON

SENIOR PLANNER/DESIGNER
Antara is a planner and an architect with an interest in sustainable community planning and affordable housing. She has experience working, researching, and developing innovative solutions for local and international projects. Antara’s strong design sensibilities with a social conscience help understand unique contexts and create responsive designs. She holds a degree in Master’s in Urban Planning from Harvard University and a Bachelor’s of Architecture from School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi. Antara secured Third Place in the 2016 Affordable Housing Development Competition in Massachusetts where she was involved in the design and policy analysis.

KEY PROJECTS
ƒ Milpitas Housing Element (Milpitas, CA)
Served as deputy project manager to draft the 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023-2031). Lead the constraints analysis and sites inventory process to identify housing sites to meet the future housing needs and RHNA goals of the city. The Housing Element was adopted by City Council and certified by California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). ƒ Berkeley Housing Element (Berkeley, CA)
Worked closely with City Staff to draft the 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023- 2031). Lead the sites inventory process to identify housing sites to meet the future housing needs and RHNA goals of the city. The Housing Element was adopted by City Council and certified by HCD.
ƒ Petaluma Housing Element (Petaluma, CA)
Worked closely with City Staff to draft the 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023- 2031). Lead the sites inventory process to identify housing sites to meet the future housing needs and RHNA goals of the city. The Housing Element was adopted by City Council and certified by HCD.
ƒ Milpitas Housing Overlay Zone (Milpitas, CA)
Working with the City of Milpitas to develop a Housing Overlay Zone to encourage affordable and supportive housing in the city through revised development standards, financial incentives, and streamlined processing. ƒ Santa Maria General Plan Update (Santa Maria, CA)
Supporting the land use policy and public engagement for the Imagine Santa Maria, the City’s General Plan update. Conducted technical analysis to shape the development of three land use alternatives.
ƒ Ojai General Plan Update (Ojai, CA)
Serving as key staff for the Ojai General Plan Update. Facilitated community engagement, assisted in developing land use alternatives for the General Plan. ƒ Urban Sustainability Assessment Framework (Worldwide)* Developed an Urban Sustainability Assessment Framework for spatial planning in India under the SCIAP project implemented by UNIDO and UN- Habitat as a decision support tool to support sustainable and resilient urban planning and management of cities.
ƒ Cities and Pandemics Report (Worldwide)*
Drafted the chapter “Rethinking the form and function of the city” exploring the relationship between urban health and spatial city form including socio- economic patterns, regional and territorial planning, and environmental policies as part of the Cities and Pandemics report by UN-Habitat. *Denotes projects completed while serving as key staff at other organizations.

EDUCATION
Harvard University Graduate School
of Design, Cambridge, MA
Master in Urban Planning
School of Planning and Architecture
New Delhi, India
Bachelor of Architecture

AFFILIATIONS
American Planning Association

EXPERIENCE
Raimi+Associates
Berkeley, CA
Senior Planner/ Designer,
2021-Present
United Nations Human Settlements
Programme (UN-Habitat)
Nairobi, Kenya
Urban Planner
2018-2021
Raimi+Associates
Berkeley, CA
Intermediate Planner/ Designer,
2017-2018
Harvard University Graduate School of
Design, Cambridge, MA
Research Assistant
Community Design + Architecture
Oakland, CA
Planning Intern
Indian Institute of Technology
Roorkee, India
Research Assistant
Micro Home Solutions
Delhi, india
Intern

www.raimiassociates.com

MICHELLE HERNANDEZ

PLANNER/DESIGNER

KEY PROJECTS
ƒ Lindenville Specific Plan (South San Francisco, CA)
Supporting development of existing conditions report, land use alternatives, and specific plan document to introduce mixed-use residential land uses in a historically industrial district of South San Francisco. Responsiblities include preparing maps and graphics, developing and translating community engagement materials, coordinating outreach events, managing the project website.
ƒ Petaluma General Plan Update (Petaluma, CA)
Supporting project coordination and task management. Develop and translate community engagement material and coordinate engagement events, such as workshops, advisory committee meetings, and focus groups. ƒ South San Francisco General Plan + Climate Action Plan Update (South San Francisco, CA)
Prepared maps, graphics, and analysis for the General Plan and the Climate Action Plan, in addition to authoring the Our Plan section. Aided in the design of the Digital General Plan and maintained the website.
ƒ Palmdale Zoning Code Update (Palmdale, CA)
Provided support in developing zoning code drafts for City staff and community review. Supported updates to the City’s Municipal Code for consistency with new zoning code.
ƒ LEED for Homes (various locations)
Preparing LEED certification submittal packages for various affordable housing projects by coordinating with project teams and preparing materials to support credit documentation. Responsibilities include reviewing project plans, construction documents, Title 24 energy models, and submittals from contractors. ƒ REACH Ashland Youth Center Evaluation (Alameda County, CA) Supported the data collection and analysis of REACH member responses to the Annual Youth Member Survey, which informed the evaluation findings and recommendations development. The evaluation looked at the effectiveness of the REACH’s programs in supporting youth and the parents of youth who live in unincorporated Alameda County.
ƒ Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax Program Evaluation (San Francisco, CA) Supported the data collection and analysis of City programs and community organizations funded by the Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax (SDDT) in order to determine the effectiveness of the SDDT funding in expanding health and racial equity and creating long-term impacts in communities disproportionately impacted by sugary beverages and diet-sensitive chronic diseases.

EDUCATION
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, CA
Bachelor of Arts,
Sustainable Environmental Design
Minor in City & Regional Planning

CERTIFICATIONS
LEED Green Associate

EXPERIENCE
Raimi + Associates
Berkeley, CA
Planner/Designer,
2021 - Present
Urban Displacement Project,
UC Berkeley
Berkeley, CA
Research Assistant
Student Environmental
Resource Center
Berkeley, CA
E-Waste Operations Associate
Michelle is a planner and designer with experience working on comprehensive and specific plans, community engagement strategies, program performance evaluations & assessments, and LEED green building certifications. She has a passion for interdisciplinary approaches that incorporate sustainability into all areas of planning and placemaking. She believes that equitable collaboration is necessary in designing adaptive and resilient communities.

www.raimiassociates.com

SASHA CHEECHOV

PLANNER
Sasha is a planner who specializes in mapping, data analysis, and community engagement. In previous positions, she has utilized GIS and technology to collect and catalog data, conduct environmental research, and connect stakeholders to projects in innovative ways. Sasha is passionate about sustainability for the benefit of both people and planet, and values an authentic and equitable approach to community engagement. She believes in the positive impact of communities designed with intention and innovation.

KEY PROJECTS
ƒ City of Marina Climate Vulnerability Assessment (Marina, CA) Develops maps and graphics and supports research pertaining to climate hazards. ƒ City of Ventural General Plan Update (Ventura, CA)
Assists in development of policy for various elements of general plan. ƒ Metro Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project* (Los Angeles, CA) Created an alternatives-focused StoryMap that displayed station designs in conjunction with features like bus routes & bikeways. Assisted in facilitation of workshop series in which StoryMap was displayed & discussed with community. ƒ SCAG Burbank Media District Specific Plan Update* (Burbank, CA) Created a website to share project information and resources. Developed an interactive mapping platform to collect stakeholder input pertaining to land use within the Media District..
ƒ City of Burbank Council District Formation* (Burbank, CA) Created a tri-lingual website to disseminate project information and details on community involvement. Developed interactive mapping platform for stakeholders to draw their neighborhoods and share the characteristics that define them. ƒ City of Palmdale Sustainable Transportation Plan* (Palmdale, CA) Developed a digital engagement website to share project information and host a survey and interactive mapping tool, which collected stakeholder input on sustainable transportation improvements such as mobility & connectivity and transit hubs. ƒ LADOT Westside Mobility Projects* (Los Angeles, CA)
Developed an online mapping platform to capture walking and biking travel patterns, as well as common safety concerns within the Westside Mobility project areas. . ƒ OCTA Long Range Transportation Plan* (Orange County, CA) Development of StoryMap to demonstrate how projected growth and climate change impacts through 2045 could influence the transporptation system in Orange County. ƒ Metro West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor* (Los Angeles, CA) Assisted with collateral development, mailing coordination, SMS campaign execution, and public meeting planning. Facilitated virtual and hybrid public hearings.

Developed project StoryMap to share information about project alternatives.

(* Indicates projects completed while key staff for other organization)

EDUCATION
University of California, Los Angeles,
Los Angeles, CA
Bachelor of Arts,
Geography & Environmental Studies
Geospatial Information Systems and
Technologies Minor

EXPERIENCE
Raimi + Associates
Los Angeles, CA
Planner,
2023-Present
Arellano Associates
Chino Hills, CA
Technology and Project Coordinator
City of Yorba Linda
Yorba Linda, CA
GIS Intern
Irvine Ranch Conservancy
Irvine, CA
Environmental Research Intern

Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers

EDUCATION
BA, English and Environmental
Studies, University of
California, Santa Barbara

CERTIFICATIONS/

REGISTRATIONS
Professional Certificate in
Land Use and Environmental
Planning, UCSB Extension
American Institute of Certified
Planners, Certified
Environmental Planner
(no. 021413)

YEARS OF

EXPERIENCE
22 Abe Leider, AICP CEP
Principal Planner
Abe Leider is a Principal in Rincon’s Environmental Sciences and Planning group.

He is responsible for management and preparation of planning and environmental documents and specialized technical studies. Abe has over 22 years of experience in the planning field and has managed or primarily authored successful planning and environmental documents on subjects ranging from regional resource management and land use regulation to complex public and private development projects. He is proficient at interpreting state and f
ederal planning and
environmental regulations and guidelines as well as developing thorough and clear environmental documentation. Abe
is experienced at providing professional
contract planning support in all facets of the project review and permitting pro cess to small, mid -sized and large jurisdictions throughout California. He has prepared informational and technical reports on a range of planning and environmental topics, including general land use trends, agriculture, biology and aesthetics/visual resources.

SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Principal-in-Charge, City of Concord – On-Call Planning and Environmental Services, Concord
Rincon has provided planning and environmental services to the City of Concord under successive on-call contracts since 2016. Under these contracts, Rincon has been pre- qualified to augment staff in the review and process of development projects, including environmental review and technical analysis. Abe as acted as Principal-In-Charge for the review and processing services for develop ment applications for specific projects, including wireless projects. Rincon also prepared a number of CEQA documents including programmatic analyses for several rezones, CEQA streamlining documents for two major downtown projects, an IS -MND for a controversial drive-through restaurant project and an EIR addendum for the John Muir Hospital project.

Principal-in-Charge, Various Clients – Housing Element CEQA - Selected Examples, Various Counties/Cities, California
Abe has been principal in charge of numerous housing element -related CEQA reviews, including the following:
• City of Berkeley 2023-2031 Housing Element EIR
• City of Palo Alto 2023-2031 Housing Element EIR Addendum • City of Piedmont 2023-2031 Housing Element Implementation EIR • County of Alameda 2023-2031 Housing Element IS-MND
• City of Belmont 2023-2031 Housing Element EIR
• City of Los Altos 2023-2031 Housing Element IS-MND
• City of Orinda Downtown Precise Plan and 6th Cycle Housing Element Update EIR
• Town of Moraga Advance Planning Initiative/2023-2031 Housing Element EIR • City of Burlingame 2023-2031 Housing Element EIR Addendum

Abe Leider, AICP CEP, Page 2

Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers

Principal-in-Charge, City of Berkeley – On-Call Planning and Environmental Services, Berkeley Rincon has provided planning and environmental services to the City of Berkeley under successive on-call contracts since 2013. Under these contracts, Rincon has been pre- qualified to augment staff in the review and process of development projects, including environmental review and technical analysis. Abe as acted as Principal -In-Charge for the review and processing services for dozens of development applications for specific projects, including overseeing project management, environmental review, policy and ordinance review, staff reports and public hearings. Under this contract, Abe has overseen projects such as:
• 2023-2031 Housing Element Update EIR
• Adeline Corridor Specific Plan EIR
• 2190 Shattuck Avenue Mixed-Use EIR and Staff Reports
• 1950 Shattuck Avenue CEQA Section 15183.3 Streamlining Consistency Analysis • 2352 Shattuck Avenue CEQA Section 15183.3 Streamlining Consistency Analysis • 2129 Shattuck Avenue EIR Peer Review and Staff Reports • 2211 Harold Way EIR and Staff Reports
• 2009 Addison Street (Berkeley Rep) CEQA Section 15183.3 Streamlining Consistency Analysis • 6th Cycle Housing Element Update EIR
• Ashby and North Berkeley BART Station Rezoning EIR
• 1900 Fourth Street EIR Peer Review
• 710 Heinz Avenue R&D Parking Structure EIR Addendum and Use Permit Processing • 2100 San Pablo Avenue Senior Housing Use Permit Processing and CEQA • 3100 San Pablo Avenue Medical Office EIR and Use Permit Processing • Urban Adamah Urban Farm and Educational Center Use Permit Processing

Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers

EDUCATION
MESM, Emphasis in Energy
and Climate, Bren School of
Environmental Science &
Management, University of
California, Santa Barbara
BS, Environmental Policy
Analysis and Planning,
University of California, Davis

CERTIFICATIONS/

REGISTRATIONS
AEP Spring 2023 CEQA
Advanced Workshop
AEP Summer 2019 CEQA
Legislative Update Workshop
HUD Winter 2014 NEPA
Training

AFFILIATIONS
Board Member, Association of
Environmental Professionals,
SF Chapter

YEARS OF

EXPERIENCE
17+
Karly Kaufman
Supervising Environmental Planner/Project Manager
Karly Kaufman serves as a Supervising Environmental Planner/Project Manager within Rincon’s Environmental Science and Planning group. Karly has over 17 years of experience in the environmental industry and 11 years of experience in CEQA consulting. She is involved in managing CEQA and NEPA documentation and technical air quality, greenhouse gas, and noise impact analyses for a variety of clients throughout the state. Karly specializes in advising on and managing programmatic CEQA documentation for long-range plans and zoning programs such as for General Plans, Housing Elements, Specific Plans, and zoning ordinance amendments. She also manages CEQA documentation for residential an d commercial development projects and for large- scale transportation projects. She also prepares CEQA guidance, training, and templates for key clients.

SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Project Manager, City of Concord - John Muir Health Concord Medical Center Campus Seismic Replacement and Modernization Project EIR Addendum, Concord
Rincon prepared an Addendum to the EIR certified in 2007 for the John Muir Medical Center Concord Campus Project for a project which involved replacement and upgrades to some of the existing facilities within the medical center in accordance with State-mandated seismic safety standards, as well as addressing other capacity and modernization needs. Key issues analyzed in the Addendum included air quality, noise impacts from stationary sources, and transportation impacts.

Project Manager, City of Berkeley – 2023-2031 Housing Element EIR, Berkeley Rincon prepared an EIR for the Berkeley 2023 -2031 Housing Element. The EIR analyzed implementation of the policies and programs in the Housing Element to facilitate the development of housing in accordance with the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation as well as implementation of other rezone programs to facilitate “missing middle” housing and student housing development. Key issues analyzed in the EIR include transportation, cultural resources, population and housing, noise, air quality, GHG emissions, and wildfire.

Project Manager, City of Berkeley – Adeline Corridor Specific Plan EIR, Berkeley Rincon completed an EIR for the proposed Adeline Corridor Specific Plan in the City of Berkeley. The Plan Area is in the southern portion of the City of Berkeley and extends approximately 1.3 miles north from the Berkeley/Oakland border along Adeline Street and Shattuck Avenue to the intersection of Shattuck Avenue and Dwight Way. The Adeline Corridor Specific Plan is intended to direct changes in land uses and development and right-of-way improvements for the Plan Area. Key issues analyzed in the EIR include traffic/circulation, cultural resources, population and housing, noise, air quality, and GHG emissions.

Project Manager, City of Piedmont – Housing Element EIR and IS-ND, Piedmont Rincon prepared an Initial Study-Negative Declaration for the Piedmont 2023-2031 Housing Element Update and is currently preparing a Program EIR for implementation of Housing Element. Key issues analyzed to be analyzed in the EIR include transportation, cultural resources, population and housing, noise, air quality, GHG emissions, and wildfire.

Karly Kaufman, Page 2
Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers
Project Manager, City of Palo Alto – Housing Incentive Expansion Program and 788 San Antonio Road Mixed - Use Project EIR, Palo Alto
Rincon Consultants prepared an EIR for the City’s proposed effort to expand their Housing Inventive Program to a portion of the San Antonio Road corridor. This involves increasing the allowed residential density on some parcels to encourage inventive housing. One proposed project, the 788 San Antonio Road Mixed Use project, would be allowed under the proposed program expansion. The EIR covers both the programmatic zoning code changes and the project -level impacts associated with the individual 788 San Antonio Road project. This project involves demolition of an eligible historic resource. Key issues analyzed in the EIR include historical resources, air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation.

Project Manager, City of Palo Alto – 2755 El Camino Real Multi-Family Residential Project IS-MND, Palo Alto Rincon prepared an IS -MND for the 2755 El Camino Real Multi- Family Residential Project. The project involved development of a four-story multi-family apartment building with up to 60 residential units on a 0.5 -acre site. The project also included a Zoning Code Text Amendment to create a “Workforce Housing” combining district under the Palo Alto Municipal Code, which would allow for higher density residential development within a specified distance of public transit and reduced parking standards to encourage increased transit uses, as well as a Zoning Map Amendment to apply the new combining district to the proposed site. Key issues analyzed in the IS -MND included air quality, noise, traffic, hazardous materials, and land use.

Project Manager, City of Mountain View – 1696-1758 Villa Street Multi-Family Residential Project, Mountain View
Rincon prepared an EIR for the 1696-1758 Villa Street Multi-Family Residential Project in Mountain View. The 3.3- acre project site included a former Superfund site. The proposed project involved construction of a 226 -unit apartment complex over two levels of underground parking. Rincon prepared an EIR and associated technical studies, including high-level biological resources and cultural resources reviews of the property. Other key issues examined in the EIR include aesthetics, air quality, noise, and hazards.

Project Manager, County of Alameda – Ashland Cherryland Business District Specific Plan EIR, Alameda County Karly served as the Rincon team Project Manager for preparation of CEQA documentation for the update to the Ashland Cherryland Business City Specific Plan (ACBDSP). The ACBDSP area encompasses two corridors in Ashland and Cherryland, two unincorporated communities within the County of Alameda. The project emphasized economic revitalization through place -making, innovative implementation strategies, creative marketing, branding, public improvement programs, robust community outreach; and a form- based code. In 2016, the American Planning Association (APA) Northern Section presented the County of Alameda with the “Excellence in Economic Planning and Development” award for the Ashland and Cherryland Business District Specific Plan and Code.

Project Manager, City of San Leandro – Bay Fair BART Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Specific Plan EIR, San Leandro
Karly served as the Rincon team Project Manager for the Bay Fair BART Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Specific Plan for the City of San Leandro as part of a larger planning team. The Specific Plan addresses a wide range of development, planning and economic issues. It identifies existing and future opportunities for transit-oriented mixed- use and residential development as well as transportation and infrastructure improvements to accommodate the selected land use alternative. Key environmental issues in the CEQA document included aesthetics; air quality/GHGs; historical resources, noise; hydrology/water quality; land use and planning; and transportation/circulation. The project was the recipient of the American Planning Association, California Chapter, Northern Section 2019 Award of Merit, Comprehensive Plan, Small Jurisdiction.

Project Manager, Barry Miller Consulting/County of Alameda – Fairview Specific Plan Update IS-MND, Alameda County
Karly is the project manager for the Fairview Specific Plan Update IS -MND. Focused o n Fairview, a semi -rural community in unincorporated Alameda County, the Plan is centered on community driven policies to protect natural resources (e.g. natural landforms, riparian areas/creeks) while creating a set of development standards. As the team’s environmental consultant, Rincon is preparing an IS -MND to satisfy the CEQA requirement for the project.

Due to the programmatic nature of the project, the IS- MND is tailored specifically to analyze all aspects of the Specific Plan at a broad, program level to provide a comprehensive impact assessment and to facilitate streamlining of future CEQA processes.

Bill Burton, PE, TE RSP1
Principal

EDUCATION
Master of Science, Civil Engineering,
University of California at Berkeley, 1993

Bachelor of Science, Civil Engineering,
University of California at Berkeley, 1992

REGISTRATIONS
Licensed Civil Engineer, State of California
(#53977)

Licensed Traffic Engineer, State of California
(#1857)

AFFILIATIONS
Institute of Transportation Engineers
American Planning Association
American Society of Civil Engineers
Woman’s Transportation Seminar

EXPERTISE
• Transit System Planning and Design
• TOD Planning
• Transportation Demand Management
• Traffic and Transit Facility Planning and
Engineering
• Traffic Signal and Lighting Design
• Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning and Design
• Transportation Planning and Impact
Analysis for Developments, Specific Plans,
Master Plans, and General Plans
• Traffic Operations Analyses for Roadway
Infrastructure Projects

ABOUT
Bill has 30 years of experience in the planning and design of transportation systems.

A registered Civil and Traffic Engineer, his experience ranges from transportation planning studies of region-wide significance to the planning and design of improvements to local intersections and roadways. He manages many of the company’s most high profile on-call transportation engineering and transportation planning contracts including engagements with BART and local cities. Bill has prepared the transportation and circulation sections for numerous environmental documents including environmental assessments, mitigated negative declarations, environmental impact reports (EIRs), and environmental impact statements (EISs) and is adept at ensuring that impacts are identified and that mitigation measures are adequately addressed.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE
John Muir Health – Walnut Creek and Concord Campuses, Master Plans Bill managed the review and preparation of overall master plans for expansions and renovations at the John Muir Health Walnut Creek and Concord Campuses. Key technical elements of the work were understanding conditions during the Covid-19 pandemic and in the post-pandemic period. Measurements and forecasts of traffic and parking conditions at the facilities during pre, during, and post-pandemic periods were developed and used to right-size the parking and transportation networks at the various facilities.

City of Antioch Housing Element Update and SB 743 Implementation Bill served as project manager for the City of Antioch’s Housing Element Update and SB 743 Implementation project. Fehr & Peers was the transportation consultant who prepared the technical analysis supporting the City’s update to the General Plan’s Housing Element. As part of this work, the firm prepared analysis supporting the development of housing plans and programs that will result in beneficial VMT outcomes. In a separate but linked piece of work Fehr & Peers prepared the analysis and updates to the City’s transportation guidelines for the full implementation of SB 743 and the use of VMT to evaluate projects within the city.

City of Pleasanton Housing Element Update
Transportation Impact Analysis
Bill was the project manager responsible for the transportation impact analysis prepared for the update to the City of
Pleasanton’s Housing Element Update. As part of the work, Fehr & Peers evaluated the implications to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) of the implementation of the Housing Element Update.

Where significant adverse impacts relative to various housing sites were identified, mitigation measures were developed and proposed. In addition to the impact of the HEU on VMT the effects of newly generated traffic on intersection levels of service were also assessed. Intersection LOS was evaluated for 50 intersections under multiple scenarios using the local and regional travel demand models.

Choice In Learning Pleasant Hill, Transportation Impact Study
Bill was the project manager responsible for the preparation of the transportation impact study for the Choice in
Learning/Choice in Aging center in Pleasant Hill. Fehr & Peers assessed the potential transportation-related effects of the proposed redevelopment of the property at 490 Golf Club Road in Pleasant Hill. The project included a new 82-unit senior housing complex, day care center with capacity to serve 90 children and the redevelopment of the existing Choice in Learning/Choice in Aging facilities. As part of their development submittal, the applicant prepared and submitted detailed vehicle counts at the project’s driveway which describe the level of current/historical activity at the site. Our scope included a peer review of this work. The potential impacts of the proposed project on Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) was assessed in accordance with CCTA and City guidelines. In addition, the effects of project generated traffic on local intersection levels of service were reviewed and compared to city policies.

BART On City of Vallejo VMT Assessments (Vallejo, CA)
Bill has served as project manager for the assessment of Vehicle Miles Traveled for several recent development projects in Vallejo, California. These include development projects proposed at 1555 Broadway and 78 Springs Road. The VMT assessments were performed in accordance with the City’s transportation impact and VMT analysis guidelines, employing the Sonoma-Napa
County Activity Based travel demand model. Where significant unavoidable VMT impacts were identified, appropriate mitigation measures were developed and proposed, including development specific Travel Demand Management Plans.

BART On-Call Planning
Project manager responsible for overall contracting and performance on the On-Call Planning and Environmental
Services contract for the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District. As part of task orders for BART, Bill served as Project Manager to develop conceptual station modernization plans for the Coliseum and 19th Street Stations. The work included assessments of existing and future conditions at the stations, including the potential for a large-scale “Coliseum City” development adjacent the Coliseum Station to include new sporting venues.

Fehr & Peers is currently leading the BECCAP that is a
collaborative effort of BART and the cities of Berkeley and El Cerrito to identify station access strategies for communities served by the El Cerrito Plaza, North Berkeley, Downtown Berkeley, and Ashby BART stations before 2500 mixed-income apartments are built on the three parking lots. The goal of the plan is to develop strategies that equitably distribute investments in walking, rolling, biking, riding transit, driving, and parking. The plan will incorporate and balance
stakeholder input for these interrelated stations in a way that is consistent with Berkeley’s and El Cerrito’s adopted
community plans as well as BART’S TOD and Station
Access policy goals and performance metrics.

High Speed Rail – San Jose to Central Valley
Transportation Technical Report and Station Access
Plans
Bill managed the preparation of the Transportation Technical Report for the Central Valley to San Jose section of the California High Speed Rail section. The transportation assessment
addressed planned stations in Gilroy and San Jose, a planned maintenance facility in Gilroy, and 25 at-grade crossings along the corridor.

As part of the project, Bill led the Fehr & Peers team that developed station access plans for the Diridon, Gilroy and East Gilroy station alternatives. Each plan was developed within the context of the local station areas, which are quite different for each location. A station access hierarchy for each modal user group (transit, bicycle, pedestrian, TNCs, taxis, rental cars, automobiles) was developed and used to assign real estate in and around the stations. Integration with other transit providers, such as BART, VTA light rail and various other user groups was key to the plans. TNCs are playing an ever-increasing role in urban mobility and the provision of adequate curb space in appropriate areas was a central element in the development of each station area plan.

Kayla Gonzalez, EIT
Project Engineer & Planner

EDUCATION
Bachelor of Science, Civil Engineering, San
Jose State University, 2021

REGISTRATIONS
Engineer-in-Training, State of California
(#173609)

EXPERTISE
• Traffic Operational Analysis
• Traffic Signal Design
• Conceptual Design
• Traffic Impact Analysis

ABOUT
Kayla joined Fehr & Peers after completing her college education at San Jose State University. Her passion for transportation engineering is fostered by the potential to improve communities by implementing effective and transformative solutions. Since joining Fehr & Peers, Kayla has worked on a variety of projects throughout Concord and in doing so, expanding her knowledge of and appreciation for traffic impact studies and design.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Monument Class I Path (Concord, CA)
Fehr & Peers provided transportation engineering services for the proposed mixed- use Class I path along the east side of Monument Boulevard from Walters Way/Systron Drive to Cowell Road/Oakmead Drive. Kayla assisted with the traffic operation modeling in Synchro and updated the signal timing sheets for the modified signals.

County Connection Electric Trolly Site (Concord, CA)
Fehr & Peers prepared the design and specification for the electrical components of the construction documents for the replacement of existing Electric Bus Charging equipment at the County Connection bus yard with in-ground inductive charging equipment. Kayla served as Transportation Engineer for this effort.

Contra Costa Boulevard Improvements (Pleasant Hill, CA) Fehr & Peers worked with Bellecci & Associates to design improvements along Contra Costa Boulevard from Harriet Drive to Viking Drive. Our tasks included signal design, lighting design, signage and striping, and an operation analysis of the proposed improvements. Kayla’s role in this project included SimTraffic analysis and design support for signage and striping.
555 Sally Ride Drive Peer Review (Contra Costa County, CA) Fehr & Peers performed a peer review of the transportation impact analysis (TIA) for 555 Sally Ride Drive in unincorporated Contra Costa County. Kayla assisted in reviewing the level of service (LOS) analysis and the site plan review.

Culture Cannabis (Concord, CA)
Fehr & Peers provided local transportation engineering and planning services for the proposed Culture Cannabis Club of Concord in Concord. Project work included project trip
generation, an evaluation of parking demand and a parking management plan, site plan review, and associated
documentation. Kayla served as Transportation Engineer & Planner for this effort.

John Muir Health Concord Medical Center
(Concord, CA)
Fehr & Peers is assisting Rincon and the City of Concord with the transportation analysis and documentation for the John Muir Health CMC Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Addendum. As Transportation Engineer & Planner
supporting this project, Kayla is assisting with several aspects of project work, including a comparison to the original EIR’s traffic impact analysis and a new VMT analysis.

Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1330 Broadway, Suite 450  Oakland, CA 94612 The Economics of Land Use 510.841.9190  [email protected]  www.epsys.com Ashleigh Kanat
Principal

Education
Master of Public Policy,
University of California,
Berkeley, 2004
Bachelor of Arts in American
Studies with a concentration in
Urban Studies, Smith College,
1998
Previous Employment
Assistant Vice President, New
York City Economic
Development Corporation
(2005-2007)
Senior Associate, Rosen
Consulting Group (2004-2005)
Assistant Planner, City of
Piedmont (1998–2002)
Awards
California American Planning
Association 2022—Sausalito
General Plan
California American Planning
Association 2022—Santa Rosa
Downtown Station Area Plan
California American Planning
Association 2014—Windsor
Station Area Plan
California American Planning
Association 2010—South
Fremont/Warm Springs
Revitalization Plan
Associations
Lambda Alpha International
San Francisco Planning and
Urban Research Association
(SPUR)
ULI UrbanPlan Volunteer
CREW, San Francisco

ABOUT
Ashleigh Kanat joined EPS in 2007 and has significant experience preparing and evaluating real estate market and financial feasibility analyses, urban revitalization and economic development strategies, public financing and implementation plans, and economic and fiscal impact analyses. She brings technical rigor, creativity, and collaborative leadership and project management experience to her projects.

SELECTED PROJECT MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE
Alameda Unified School District Real Estate Advisory and Feasibility Services AUSD owns several properties in the City of Alameda that are not strictly used for education purposes but do support the overall functioning of the District. These properties present a range of issues and considerations—and opportunities. EPS was engaged to prepare a real estate portfolio strategy. Since our initial engagement, we helped identify and appropriate space for the District Office and supported the acquisition of the space, finalized in December 2017. In addition, discussions commenced with a nonprofit developer to provide employee housing at Alameda Point. The preliminary plan reflects development of 70 below-market rate rental units, which would be available to employees of AUSD.

SFPUC Site Development Assessments
EPS was retained by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) to lead a multi-disciplinary team charged with assisting staff with optimizing the revenue generation potential of its surplus land assets. Unlocking the value in SFPUC’s substantial real estate holdings (spanning multiple counties) is critical to meeting the system’s financial requirements, estimated at $4.9 billion in its 10-year capital plan. One of the most relevant tasks undertaken since contract award was to provide disposition and negotiation support related to the Balboa Reservoir, which is part of the Mayor’s Public Land for Housing program. EPS is reviewing the capacity plans and providing development feasibility analysis to help SFPUC and other City agencies understand the financial tradeoffs of alternative land use programs, levels of affordable housing, and disposition strategies (i.e., ground lease vs. fee simple). This work informed the RFP and subsequent developer negotiations.

University of Hawaii’s West O’ahu Master Developer Solicitation Facing growing enrollment and demand for additional academic facilities, the University of Hawaii retained EPS to assist with the solicitation of a master developer for the non-campus lands, through preparation of a Request for Qualifications, followed by a Request for Business Plan. EPS helped evaluate responses.

UC Law San Francisco Housing Real Estate Advisory Services and Developer Solicitation and Negotiation Support
The shortage of affordable housing in the Bay Area generally and the lack of affordable campus housing in San Francisco in particular has become a significant barrier for both UC Hastings and UC San Francisco to enroll top-ranked students and trainees. UCH and UCSF retained the EPS Team to evaluate the financial feasibility of the project while ensuring rents well below market rate. The work also resulted in a recommended deal structure between UC Hastings and a master developer, and the terms of UCSF’s guarantee to lease residential units for students and faculty on a long-term basis. A subsequent phase further refined development costs, financial feasibility, proposed parameters for a public-private partnership (PPP) deal structure, and proposed terms for a long-term lease.

A SHLEIGH K ANAT 2

Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.

Mountain Housing Council Housing Implementation Plan
The Mountain Housing Council of the Tahoe/Truckee Community Foundation works to accelerate solutions to local achievable housing, including creating policy recommendations for local jurisdictions, advocating for state housing bills, and creating tools for action. EPS updated the outdated housing needs assessment and facilitated a collaborative process to develop a 3-year Regional Housing Implementation Plan.

Healdsburg Housing Sites Feasibility Analysis
To support implementation of the City’s Housing Action Plan, EPS worked with City staff to identify four sites in the City with potential to provide affordable housing. EPS evaluated the physical characteristics of the site to account for access and environmental constraints before estimating a potential unit yield. The financial feasibility evaluated several programs per site, and tested a range of income levels, development costs, and tax credit scenarios. The City Council will evaluate each to identify priorities for scarce City resources in the coming year.

City of Burlingame Public Parking Lots Financial Feasibility Analysis The City of Burlingame owns several surface parking lots in the Downtown area and wanted to leverage these valuable real estate assets. The City retained EPS to specify the business terms for each of the projects and negotiate the terms of the agreements between the developers and the City. EPS developed a multi-year development pro forma to evaluate the residual land value of the project to determine the appropriate value for the City-owned parcel.

Santa Rosa Housing Action Plan and Implementation Support Facing a significant housing supply shortage, the City retained EPS to evaluate the role of impact fees within the larger context of public finance and development feasibility. This work led to the development of the City’s first Housing Action Plan, focused on addressing how Santa Rosa can increase housing production, working toward a goal of “housing for all.” EPS provided implementation support in the form of framework and policy development, technical analysis, ordinance drafting, and assistance with staff report preparation and public hearing presentations.

Healdsburg Housing Needs Analysis and Housing Action Plan EPS assisted the City with a review and update of the City’s affordable housing policies. Most recently, EPS’s work was focused on developing an approach to estimating unmet current and future housing demand. This analysis led to calculating the in-lieu fee that corresponds to the revised inclusionary housing ordinance (IHO), which requires developers of for-sale housing developments to provide 20 percent of such units at income-restricted, below-market-rate prices. Additional work was completed to develop a commercial linkage fee charged to new hotel development.

Inclusionary Housing Programs and In-Lieu Fees
For dozens of cities in California, including recent work for Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Healdsburg, Clayton, Atascadero, San Luis Obispo, and Benicia, as well as for Mono County, EPS evaluates and formulates inclusionary policies requiring developers to provide affordable units within their market-rate developments. EPS works with planning and community development staff to identify policy-based inclusionary targets, calculate equivalent in-lieu fees, and evaluate the economic feasibility of such programs.

Affordable Housing Nexus Fee Studies and Commercial Linkage Fees EPS has prepared nexus studies documenting the link between the development and occupancy of new market-rate housing and new nonresidential development and the demand for affordable housing. EPS coordinates with planning staff and local developer stakeholders to establish critical development prototype and cost assumptions, which underpin the fee calculations. EPS evaluates the feasibility of the maximum-justified fees and works with planning and community development staff to recommend fees to mitigate these impacts. Recent clients include Rohnert Park, Petaluma, Mono County, and the Town of Jackson/Teton County, Wyoming.

?×
?×
%&p(
%&p(
A¿
Ygnacio Valley Rd
DetroitAve
DiamondBl
vd
Treat BlvdOakGroveRd
Clayton Rd
Kirker Pass Rd
Concord Ave
SunvalleyBlvd CowellRd
Concord Blvd
Port
Chica
goHwy
Willow Pass Rd
Meadow
Ln
MonumentBlvd
I
0 0.75 1.5
Miles
S:\MapRequest\Engineering\CIPPavement\CIPPavementProjects.aprx Map Created: 1/4/2023
By GIS Division of Information Technology
Legend
RCAA Area
City Boundary
Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAA)
ACS (2015-2019)
ATTACHMENT 4

?×
?×
%&p(
%&p(
A¿
Cowell Rd
Ygnacio Valley Rd
DetroitAve
Diamond
Blvd
OakGroveRd
Clayton Rd
Kirker Pass Rd
Concord Ave
SunvalleyBlvd
Treat Blvd
Concord Blvd
Port
Chicag
oHwy
Willow Pass Rd
Meadow
Ln Monument
Blvd
2024 TCAC Opportunity Areas (Draft) I
0 4,000 8,0002,000
Feet
S:\MapRequest\Engineering\CIPPavement\CIPPavementProjects.aprx Map Created: 12/20/2023
By GIS Division of Information Technology
Legend
Highest Resource
High Resource
Moderate Resource
Low Resource
City Boundary
Attachment 5

Rezoning to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
Task Order for Planning Services
City Council
January 23, 2024
Project Planner: Aaron Sage, Principal Planner
(925) 671-3465
[email protected]

Background
• August 22, 2023: Council adopts 2023-2031 Housing
Element
• October 23, 2023: State certifies Housing Element
• AB 686 (2018) added Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH)
• Lower-income sites in Housing Element inventory are
located entirely in low-resource areas
2

2024 TCAC
Opportunity Map
(draft)
3

Background
• Program 8.6 commits to rezoning sites in moderate/high resource areas, per the following criteria:
• Census tracts with majority white population
• Minimum 20 acres
• Maximum density of at least 60 units per acre
• Add capacity for at least 1,000 units
• Adequate infrastructure and development potential
• Low potential for displacement of lower-income households 4

Background
• Begin rezone process by December 2023
• Finalize rezone by December 2024
• New anticipated completion date is Summer 2025
• HCD enforcement action is unlikely
5

Raimi + Associates, Inc.
• Current on-call consultant under Master Services
Agreement approved by Council on December 13, 2022
• Over 17 years experience with similar projects
• Strong capabilities with community engagement and data- driven analysis
6

Scope of Work (Main Items)
• Project management
• Community engagement (approx. 20% of cost)
• Site identification
• Rezoning alternatives
• EIR (approx. 40% of cost)
• General Plan and Zoning Amendments
7

Project Schedule / Community Engagement Process
8

Community Engagement Events
9 Event Type Number of
Events
Stakeholder Meetings Up to 13
Town Hall Meetings (virtual and in-person) 6 (3 unique) Pop-up Events 3
Planning Commission / City Council
Joint Study Sessions
2-3
Public Hearings (PC & Council) 2-3
EIR Scoping Meeting 1
TOTAL At least 27 Page 67 of 70
Other Engagement Tools
• Translation services
• Project website
• E-blasts
• Digital surveys
• Social media
• Direct mailers
• Hearing notices
10

Recommended Actions
• Authorize Task Order for $599,951 for Raimi + Associates, Inc. (Raimi) to prepare General Plan and Zoning Amendments and an environmental impact report, conduct community
engagement, and provide other services to implement Program

8.6 of the 2023-2031 Housing Element
• Amend Master Services Agreement (MSA) with Raimi to
increase the total not-to-exceed amount for the MSA from $500,000 to $1,100,000
• Authorize City Manager to execute the above subject to City Attorney approval
11

Questions?
12

Staff Report
Date: January 23, 2024
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Reviewed by: Kevin Marstall, PE, Director of Community Development Prepared by: Mindy Gentry, Planning Manager
[email protected]
(925) 671-3369
Scott Watkins, Associate Planner
[email protected]
(925) 671-3281
Subject: Considering the following:

1. Introduction of an Ordinance amending Concord Municipal Code, Title 18 (Development Code) Section 18.20.030
(Definitions) and Chapter 18.185 (Affordable Housing), by reading of the title only and waiving further reading.

2. Adoption of a Resolution amending the Inclusionary
Housing Fee by amending Exhibit A to Resolution No. 78- 6042 establishing fees and charges for various municipal services in the City of Concord. (2023–2031 Housing
Element Programs 10.1, 11.1, 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, 12.4)
(PL23100 – MC).

3. Introduction of an Ordinance amending Concord Municipal Code, Title 18 (Development Code) Section 18.20.030
(Definitions), adding Chapter 18.115 (Affordable Housing Overlay District), and adding Section 18.200.230 (Lot
Consolidation Incentive Program), by reading of the title only and waiving further reading.

4. Adoption of a Resolution adding a By-Right Approval Fee by amending Exhibit A to Resolution No. 78-6042
establishing fees and charges for various municipal

7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a7.a

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
services in the City of Concord. (2023–2031 Housing
Element Programs 6.1 and 13.2) (PL23185 – MC).

CEQA: Not a “project” under Public Resources Code 21065, CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c) or 15378 and, in the
alternative, if deemed a “project,” exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).

Report in Brief
Between the four recommended actions, this report contains two separate packages of amendments to implement various programs from the 2023-2031 Housing Element (“2023-2031 HE").

The first package of amendments is addressing cleanup and modifications to the existing programs of the Affordable Housing Ordinance (hereinafter referred to as “AHO Amendments”).

More specifically, the focus of the proposed update is on two components of the AHO:

1. Modify the Density Bonus Program (DBP) to conform with state law.

2. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Program (IHP)and the associated in-lieu fees.

The second package of amendments accomplish the following:

1. Establish a by-right approval process for eligible housing projects on sites identified within the 2023-2031 HE that provide a minimum of 20 percent of the units as affordable to lower income households to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets.1

2. Create a lot consolidation incentive program that provides incentives and a density bonus in exchange for lot consolidation on eligible sites identified within the 2023-2031 HE Sites Inventory (“Sites Inventory”).

Recommended Action

1. Introduce an Ordinance amending Concord Municipal Code, Title 18 (Development Code) Section 18.20.030 (Definitions) and Chapter 18.185 (Affordable Housing), by reading of the title only and waiving further reading (Attachment 1).

2. Adopt a Resolution amending the Inclusionary Housing Fee by amending Exhibit A to Resolution No. 78-6042 establishing fees and charges for various municipal services in the City of Concord. (2023 – 2031 Housing Element Programs 10.1, 1 The City of Concord’s total RHNA is 5,073 units, with 2,883 units affordable to very low-, low-, and moderate- income households and 2,190 units affordable to above moderate-income households.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024

11.1, 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, 12.4) (PL23100 – MC) (Attachment 2).

3. Introduce an Ordinance amending Concord Municipal Code, Title 18 (Development Code), Section 18.20.030 (Definitions), adding Chapter 18.115 (Affordable Housing Overlay District), and adding Section 18.200.230 (Lot Consolidation Incentive Program), by reading of the title only and waiving further reading (Attachment 3).

4. Adopt a Resolution adding a By-Right Fee by amending Exhibit A to Resolution No. 78-6042 establishing fees and charges for various municipal services in the City of Concord. (2023–2031 Housing Element Programs 6.1 and 13.2) (PL23185 – MC) (Attachment 4).

Background
AHO Amendments (Package #1)
The current Affordable Housing Ordinance, Concord Municipal Code (CMC) Chapter

18.185 is attached (Attachment 5). The purpose of the AHO is to:
“Facilitate and encourage the development of housing affordable to a broad range of households with varying income levels within the city. It is intended to implement the city’s general plan housing element policies and programs pertaining to the need for housing affordable to persons of very low, low and moderate income. In addition, this chapter is intended to ensure that at least a minimum percentage of units affordable to very low, low, and/or moderate-income individuals is included within new residential developments and that appropriate incentives are established to encourage the inclusion of affordable units beyond the stated minimum.

This chapter is further intended to allow for density bonuses and related incentives consistent with state density bonus law.”
The purpose of this update is:

1. Modify the Density Bonus Program (DBP) to conform with state law.

2. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Program (IHP) and the associated in-lieu fees.

Density Bonus Program (DBP)
This section of the Affordable Housing Ordinance (AHO) addresses the ability of residential housing developers to increase the density (add units) of a proposed residential project above the maximum density allowed by the City’s Development Code. The DBP allows additional density if the developer meets one of four criteria, which include commitments to constructing a certain percent of units that would be affordable to very low-, low-, or moderate-income households in new housing developments.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
State Density Bonus Law has been amended several times by the legislature in recent years resulting in the City’s DBP being out of conformance with state law.

Examples of recent changes in the state law provisions include:
 Increased maximum density bonuses from 35% to 80%,
 Addition of a fourth incentive or concession based on the percentage of affordable housing units, and
 Elimination of parking requirements for 100% affordable projects within ½ mile of an accessible major transit stop2.

Inclusionary Housing Program (IHP)
The City’s IHP was initially adopted in 2004 to facilitate the development of housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households within the City and has not been comprehensively reviewed or amended in a number of years. There have been a number of changes in state law that impact the City’s program.

The most recent changes that impacted the Inclusionary Housing Program occurred in 2016, when the City Council took the following actions:

1. Amended the City’s Fees and Charges Resolution to increase in-lieu fees for ownership units within the City’s Inclusionary Housing program, beginning January 1, 2017.

2. Amended the City’s Fees and Charges Resolution to adopt Affordable Housing Impact Fees for development of rental units within the City’s Affordable Housing Program, effective July 1, 2018. This action was subject to postponement if the City had not issued building permits for at least 600 residential rental units between January 1, 2017, and April 1, 2018. This threshold of building permits was not met, and in turn, the charges on rental units have not been implemented.

Number of Inclusionary Housing Units Created: Since 2004, the City’s IHP has produced 34 moderate and low income Below Market Rate homeownership units, with seven additional units in the pipeline. The City is currently overseeing the administration and monitoring of all inclusionary units produced under this program. No rental units have been produced under the IHP.

Current Inclusionary Housing Fees: In 2004, the City established an in-lieu fee for eligible projects to meet the inclusionary housing requirements at $17,760 per unit; 2 A “major transit stop” means a site containing any of the following: 1. An existing rail or bus rapid transit station,

2. A ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, 3. The intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. For Concord, this means the two BART stations.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
however, due to the significant downturn in the housing market and in response to the Great Recession, the City, in 2010, downwardly adjusted the fee to $5,043 per unit for ownership projects and suspended the fee for rental projects.

On November 29, 2016, due to the rebounding housing market, the City Council passed two resolutions, one to establish an in-lieu fee for ownership housing projects and one to establish an impact fee for rental housing projects.

Pursuant to the resolution for ownership projects, the adopted fees were to be phased in with increases scheduled to occur between 2018 and 2021.

For ownership projects the fees were established as follows:
 Projects with ten units or more:
 $8 per square foot as of July 1, 2018
 $9 per square foot as of January 1, 2019
 $10 per square foot as of January 1, 2021
 Five units: $4 per square foot
 Six to seven units: $6 per square foot
 Eight to nine units: $8 per square foot
For rental projects the fees were established as follows:
 $3 per square foot as of July 1, 2018
 $4 per square foot as of January 1, 2019
 $5 per square foot as of January 1, 2021
As noted above, the fee increase for rental projects was subject to a postponement if the City had not issued building permits for at least 600 units between January 1, 2017, and April 1, 2018. The Council was to review the number of building permits issued during the aforementioned timeframe in May 2018 prior to the incorporation of fees on July 1. The City still has yet to issue building permits for 600 units and the fees were never revisited by the Council, so the rental inclusionary housing impact fee is still not implemented.

Since adoption of the IHP, the City has collected $2.2 million in in-lieu fees from ownership projects and the funds are being used to fund the First-Time Homebuyer Program, which is a second mortgage loan program that assists low- and moderate- income households with the purchase of a home.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
2023-2031 HE3
The adopted 2023-2031 HE incorporates the following programs:

1. Program 10 – Homeownership Assistance
a) Facilitate the production of Below Market Rate (BMR) units through an amendment to the Inclusionary Housing Program including removing exemption for rental and condo units by December 2024.

2. Program 11 – Incentives to Assist in Development
Amend Development Code to:
a) Ensure consistency with current state law for density bonus program and b) Clarify incentives offered under the Affordable Housing Incentive Program, including ministerial review.

3. Program 12 – Inclusionary Housing
a) Remove current threshold which excludes application of the inclusionary housing requirements on rental and condominium projects. b) Adopt an amendment to allow moderate-income rental units to satisfy inclusionary requirements.
c) Update inclusionary housing fee to maintain project feasibility while maximizing affordable housing funds.

Housing and Economic Development (HED) Committee Direction The City Council Housing and Economic Development (HED) Committee (Councilmembers Aliano and former Councilmember McGallian) met on June 15, 20224 and November 29, 20225 to review the AHO. The HED Committee received information about the AHO update, provided an opportunity for public input, and gave direction to staff on policy issues. An Ordinance has been prepared based on the input from the HED Committee. The proposed amendments to the Concord Municipal Code are attached in both a red-lined format (Attachment 6 and 7) and in a clean version (Exhibit A and B, Attachment 1).

On June 15, 2022, the HED Committee reviewed preliminary details on the AHO and provided direction to staff to help inform the feasibility analysis and proposed amendments to the Ordinance, which included:

1. For the required inclusionary units, create a blend of income levels, rather than selection of one income level (e.g. low-income households), 3 The City adopted its 2023-2031 HE on August 22, 2023 and it was certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on October 23, 2023. 4 https://www.cityofconcord.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_06152022-923 5 https://www.cityofconcord.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_11292022-950

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
as currently established.

2. Support for removing the 600-unit threshold precluding the application of the inclusionary housing requirements on rental housing projects.

3. The inclusionary in-lieu fees should be the economical equivalent to providing units onsite.

4. Retain the current threshold of the IHP applying to projects of five or more units.

On November 29, 2022, the HED Committee reviewed more detailed information about the AHO update and provided the following direction to staff:

1. Amend the City’s DBP regulations to conform to state law.

2. For ownership projects, provide a total inclusionary requirement of 15% with 7.5% low- and 7.5% moderate-income units, aligning with a fee of $20.00 per square foot of market rate development.

3. For rental projects, provide a total inclusionary requirement of 6% with 1% very low-, 1% low-, and 4% moderate-income units, aligning with a fee of $15.00 per square foot.

4. Include within the City’s regulations alternatives that would provide the same value of providing the units onsite or payment of the in-lieu fee to provide flexibility to the development community.

On July 19, 2023, the Planning Commission reviewed this Ordinance and adopted (AYES: Mizutani, Corio, Barbour, Kaushal, Laub) a Resolution recommending the City Council approve an Ordinance amending Concord Municipal Code (CMC), Title 18 (Development Code) Section 18.20.030 (Definitions) and Chapter 18.185 (Affordable Housing).

AHO Outreach
In addition to the public HED and Planning Commission meetings on this topic, City staff hosted a virtual informational session for the housing interested parties list and developers currently working in Concord on the proposed AHO Amendments; the virtual meeting occurred on November 1, 2023. The session was attended by approximately nine individuals. There were comments related to the inclusionary housing requirements not being adequate to address affordable housing issues within the community as well as comments related to ensuring housing projects remain economically feasible to ensure units, including affordable units, get built. A full summary of the comments is provided as Attachment 8.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
By-Right Development and Lot Consolidation Incentive Programs (Package #2) Program 6.1: By-Right Development
State Law Requirements and 2023-2031 HE Implementation: Government Code Section 65583.2 requires the City to implement Program 6.1 to allow by-right approvals of eligible housing projects on sites identified for lower-income households within the Sites Inventory that had been previously identified in past housing elements (Attachment 9).

Program 6.1, states the following:

Amend the Development Code by January 2024 to permit by-right development on sites previously identified in past Housing Elements in which at least 20% of the units are affordable to lower income households in accordance with the specifications of Government Code Section 65583.2(c).

To accommodate the City’s lower income Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) target, the 2023-2031 HE included sites within the Sites Inventory that had been identified in previous housing elements cycles (Attachment 9). More specifically, the applicable sites are those identified in the Sites Inventory that meet the following criteria, as outlined in Government Code Section 65583.2(c):

1. Vacant sites, with a density of at least 30 units per acre, that have been included in two or more consecutive housing element planning periods that were not approved to develop a portion of the City’s RHNA.

2. Nonvacant sites, with a density of at least 30 units per acre, identified in a prior housing element planning period.

Given the criteria above, Program 6.1 applies to 23 parcels within the City, which have three different zoning designations, as noted in Table 1 below (“By-Right Project Sites”), which are mapped in Attachment 10.

Table 1: Program 6.1 By-Right Project Sites by Zoning Designation Zoning
Residential
Medium
(RM)
Commercial
Mixed Use
(CMX)
Downtown
Mixed Use
(DMX)
Total
Number of Sites 2 12 9 23
Source: 2023-2031 HE
Pursuant to state law, housing projects proposed on the By-Right Project Sites are required to be subjected to a “use by right” or ministerial process starting on January 31,

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
2024, if 20 percent of the units are affordable to lower income households,6 regardless of whether the City adopts an implementing ordinance.

The phrase “use by right” is defined by state law as a local government’s review of an owner-occupied or multifamily residential use,7 which may not require a conditional use permit, planned unit development permit, or other discretionary review or approval that would constitute a “project” for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). Therefore this requires a ministerial or staff level review of housing projects on By-Right Project Sites, as shown in Attachment 10, and that also provide 20 percent of the units at a level affordable to lower income households.

Program 13.2 Lot Consolidation Incentive Program
State Law Requirements and 2023-2031 HE Implementation: Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(2)(A) requires sites included in a jurisdiction’s sites inventory to be at least 0.5 acres in size to accommodate the lower-income RHNA targets. Due to the economies of scale and to increase the likelihood of development, California Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD) generally considers parcels less than 0.5 acres to not be suitable to accommodate the lower-income RHNA unless they can reasonably be consolidated to form sites over 0.5 acres in size and the base zoning allows for at least 30 dwelling units per acre.

According to the analysis within the 2023-2031 HE, the average parcel size in Concord is 0.46 acres, just below the 0.5-acre minimum, and only six percent of the City’s total parcels are greater than 0.5 acres. In fact, approximately 75 percent of the parcels identified in the Sites Inventory can be consolidated to form larger sites, which are comprised of contiguous parcels that are vacant and underutilized, sharing features such as common ownership, adjacency, and high-density zoning (“Lots Identified for Consolidation”). Development trends within the City indicate that lot consolidation is a common tool used for facilitating residential development.8 Given the identification of parcels less than 0.5 acres in size in the Sites Inventory to accommodate the City’s lower income RHNA target, Program 13.2 was required to be included in the 2023-2031 HE to incentivize lot consolidation to facilitate housing developments affordable to lower income households. Specifically, Program 13.2 seeks to promote parcel consolidation to facilitate the assembly of two or more parcels that result in development sites that measure at least 0.5 acres in size. 6 Lower income households are defined as households making below 80% of Area Median Income. 7 Pursuant to state law, housing development projects includes projects with residential units only; mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses with at least two-thirds of the square footage designated for residential use; and transitional or supportive housing. 8 The following recent developments have utilized lot consolidation: Willow Terrace (Enclave), Clayton Road Townhomes, Galindo Terrace, and The Grant.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
Program 13.2 states the following:

Amend the Development Code to provide financial or regulatory incentives and a density bonus in exchange for lot consolidation by December 2023.

The Sites Inventory determined there were 177 total Lots Identified for Consolidation, which are cataloged by letters on the Sites Inventory map (Attachment 9). Table 2 below groups the Lots Identified for Consolidation by how many contiguous parcels can be merged to create a single project site. If all Lots Identified for Consolidation are consolidated per their groupings noted in the Sites Inventory, a total of 54 development sites would be created.

Table 2: Eligible Parcels for Lot Consolidation
Number of Contiguous Parcels 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 TOTAL
Lots Identified for Consolidation 40 54 32 20 6 7 8 0 10 177 Consolidated Sites 20 18 8 4 1 1 1 0 1 54
Source: 2023-2031 HE
The Sites Inventory provides the number of projected units or net new capacity,9 and affordability level for those parcels that have been identified. Based on the net new capacity, approximately 1,735 units are estimated on the Lots Identified for Consolidation. It is important to note that the Sites Inventory is merely an indicator of capacity for new development and does not influence or determine what income levels the market will ultimately provide.

HED Committee Direction
On November 29, and December 6, 2023, the HED Committee (Councilmembers Birsan and Obringer) met and provided feedback on policy questions proposed by staff related to developing a Lot Consolidation Incentive Program (Program 13.2).

The HED Committee reviewed ten possible incentives and recommended six incentives for consideration by the full Council, with some minor modifications. The four incentives considered by the HED Committee that were not supported due to concerns regarding financial incentives having an impact on the General Fund while also acknowledging there were other laws, such as the State Density Bonus Law, that provide more comprehensive incentives and concessions related to development and design standards.

Program 6.1 did not require feedback from the HED Committee because it is mandated by state law.
9 Net new capacity is the total new units per property, minus the existing units, that a development project proposes.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
On December 20, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted (AYES: Mizutani, Barbour, Kaushal. Abstain: Laub. Absent: Corio) Resolution No. 23-12 PC recommending the City Council approve an Ordinance amending CMC, Title 18 (Development Code) Section 18.20.030 (Definitions), adding Chapter 18.115 (Affordable Housing Overlay District), and Section 18.210.230 (Lot Consolidation Incentive Program).

Analysis AHO Amendments
Inclusionary Housing Program (IHP) Feasibility Analysis To test the feasibility of requiring onsite inclusionary units and associated in-lieu fees, the City’s real estate economics consultant, Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) developed a feasibility model to compare different inclusionary requirements and fee level scenarios for both rental and ownership housing prototypes10 (Attachment 11).

The model is a financial pro forma that reflects the expected costs to build new rental and ownership housing and compares those costs to the revenues that could be generated from the projects given various mixes of market-rate and affordable housing.

Using industry standard return metrics for determining feasibility, EPS identified the maximum cost that the prototypes could absorb and still meet the feasibility threshold, and then converted that cost into a fee per market-rate building square footage and percentage of affordable units that could be financially subsidized at an equivalent cost.

Ownership Scenarios: In evaluating various inclusionary and in-lieu fee scenarios for market-rate ownership housing projects, EPS analyzed the development economics of a hypothetical development consisting of 2,000-square foot units, with three bedrooms and an average of four people per household. The assumed density is ten units per acre. Key revenue assumptions are based on recent Redfin sales data for recently constructed homes in Concord, which suggest that a home of this type and size would sell for about $1.4 million. Construction cost estimates11 are based on conversations with residential developers active in the area, with total direct and indirect costs (except affordable/inclusionary housing fees) assumed to be approximately $1.14 million per unit.

Maximum affordable home prices were informed by HCD’s 2023 income limits for Contra Costa County (Attachment 12), with the assumption that households can spend up to 30 percent (and 35 percent for moderate-income households) of their gross income on housing. Comparing the affordable home prices for very low-, low-, and moderate- income households against development costs results in affordability gaps in each of the three income cohorts, as shown in Figure 1. 10 The financial scenarios for the rental and homeownership markets differ requiring a model for each. 11 This includes land costs and assumes a labor premium allowance.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
Estimated
development cost
for 3-bedroom
single family unit:
~$1.1 million
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
$0

FOR SALE
Very Low
Income
(50% AMI)

FOR SALE
Low
Income
(80% AMI)

FOR SALE
Moderate
Income
(110% AMI)Total Supportable Unit Value Affordability Gap Figure 1: Onsite Ownership Gap Analysis
Note that a moderate-income household is defined as earning between 81 and 120 percent of AMI. At the upper end of the range (around 120 percent AMI), moderate- income households can participate in the market. However, at the lower end of the moderate-income category, the model does result in an affordability gap; therefore, it is recommended that the moderate-income bracket be included as part of the inclusionary program. For purposes of this analysis, the moderate-income household is assumed to earn the area median income 110 percent of AMI, consistent with the City’s income qualifying practices when selling a BMR unit.

The HED Committee reviewed the scenarios in Figure 2 below to test the feasibility of incorporating different fee levels and affordability requirements, with feasibility evaluated against a 20 percent profit margin.12
12 Based on recent discussions with developers in the region, EPS assumes that developers would require at least a 20 percent profit margin in order to accept the risk associated with a project

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
Figure 2: Ownership Feasibility Results by Scenario
The HED Committee recommended a 15 percent onsite inclusionary requirement, with half of the affordable units set aside as affordable to low-income households and half set aside as affordable to moderate-income households. The Ordinance has been drafted according to this direction. The in-lieu fee equivalent to providing a unit on-site is $20 per square foot of market-rate development and is recommended, along with annual adjustments based on construction costs13, for inclusion in the City’s Master Fee and Charges Schedule. The fees are discussed in further detail below.

Rental Scenarios: For rental projects, EPS modeled a market-rate, multifamily apartment development. Units are assumed to average 1,000 square feet with two bedrooms, and a household size of three people. As with the homeownership scenarios, development costs are based on discussions with developers who are developing projects in the region. The cost to develop rental units is calculated to be approximately $720,000 per unit. For market-rate rent revenue assumptions, EPS compiled market- 13 In-lieu fees should be adjusted each year according to a well-established construction cost index, such as the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index.

60.0%

50.0%

40.0% 20% profit margin
required for feasibility

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%
Current Current
Inclusionary Inclusionary
(10% Moderate) (6% Low)
Current No Inclusionary Maximum Recommended
Fee or Fee Feasible Fee Target Fee
($9/sq.ft.) ($116/sq.ft.) ($20/sq. ft.)

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
rate rents based on conditions and requirements in Concord and found rents for newly constructed multifamily product in/around Concord to be approximately $4,000 per month. This rent results in a net operating income (revenue minus operational costs) of $37,000 per unit per year.

Affordable rents were also informed by HCD’s 2023 income limits for Contra Costa County (Attachment 12), with the assumption that these households can spend up to 30 percent of gross income on housing. Comparing the affordable rents for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households against development costs results in affordability gaps in each of the three income cohorts, as shown in Figure 3. For purposes of this analysis, the moderate-income household is assumed to earn the median income (100 percent of AMI).

Figure 3: Onsite Rental Gap Analysis
To evaluate project feasibility, EPS calculated the annual revenue of an illustrative 100- unit project (after accounting for operating costs) and divided by the development cost.

This is a common metric used in the real estate industry for rental projects, often referred to as an annual yield on cost. A five percent yield on cost was deemed the threshold for feasibility, based on industry standards and conversations with developers.

Estimated
development cost
for 2-bedroom
rental apartment:
~$720,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$0
RENTAL
Very Low
Income
(50% AMI)
RENTAL
Low
Income
(80% AMI)
RENTAL
Moderate
Income
(100% AMI)Total Supportable Unit Value Affordability Gap

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
As with homeownership, EPS evaluated a number of scenarios for rental housing, adjusting the inclusionary requirements and fee levels for each. The results show that the City’s current14 onsite inclusionary requirements may be challenging for developers to incorporate into their rental projects as shown in Figure 4 and as outlined below:

Figure 4: Rental Feasibility Results by Scenario
The HED Committee recommended that the Ordinance reflect a six percent onsite inclusionary requirement, with one percent of the units affordable to very low-income households, one percent of the units affordable to low-income households, and four percent of the units as affordable to moderate-income households. The Ordinance has been drafted according to this direction.

The in-lieu fee equivalent to providing a unit on-site is $15 per square foot of market-rate development and is recommended to be included, along with annual adjustments based on construction costs, in the City’s Master Fee and Charges Schedule15. Due to the 14 Due to the 600-unit threshold currently in place, the onsite and in-lieu fee inclusionary requirements are not being applied to rental projects.
15 In-lieu fees should be adjusted each year according to a well-established construction cost index, such as the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index.

5.20%

5.15%

5.10% 5% yield-on-cost
required for feasibility

5.05%

5.00%

4.95%

4.90%

4.85%

4.80%
Current Current
Inclusionary Inclusionary
(10% Low) (6% Very Low)
Current No Inclusionary/ Maximum Recommended
Fee No Fee Feasible Fee Target Fee
($4/sq.ft.) ($20/sq.ft.) ($15/sq. ft.)

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
inclusionary requirement being a blend of incomes and for ease of implementation, the attached schedule shows projects with unit counts ranging from 5-104 and the associated in-lieu fee requirement (Appendix B, Attachment 11).

The inclusionary requirements, along with the equivalent in-lieu fees for both ownership and rental projects were recommended by the HED Committee because it was a balanced approach. The proposed ordinance is intended to allow sufficient developer profit to make Concord economically attractive for investment. The proposed requirements are also designed to allow for market fluctuations and other unanticipated project costs. The inclusionary requirements are also comparable to other jurisdictions surveyed (Appendix A of Attachment 11).

Proposed Amendments
Throughout the draft Ordinance there are a significant number of proposed minor amendments to make it more readable as well as making the language consistent throughout Chapter 18.185, with the bulk of the changes being contained in the DBP and the IHP sections.

A. Definitions (CMC Section 18.20.030) – Affordable Housing Definitions, (Exhibit A to Attachment 1)
Based on the proposed amendments below to CMC Sections 18.185.040 and

18.185.050, the definitions have been updated for language consistency and to remove terms that are no longer necessary due to deletions.

B. Density Bonus Program (CMC Section 18.185.050), (Exhibit B to Attachment 1) Based on input from the HED Committee and to provide clarity to developers, simplify the administration of the DBP, and to ensure compliance with regularly changing state requirements, amendments to the Ordinance are to simply adopt the state provisions. This also includes establishing a review procedure to ensure the application for a density bonus is consistent with state law and the City’s policies and regulations, as applicable.

C. Inclusionary Housing Program (CMC Section 18.185.040), (Exhibit B to Attachment 1)
In conformance with the direction provided by the HED Committee, the primary proposed amendments are as follows:
 Removing the prohibition of application to rental housing projects.  Exempting office building conversions from having to provide inclusionary housing units.
 Ownership projects are required to provide 15 percent of the total units as inclusionary, 7.5 percent as low-income and 7.5 percent as moderate- income units (discussed in more detail below).

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
 Rental projects are required to provide six percent of the total units as inclusionary, one percent very low-, one percent low-, and four percent moderate-income units (discussed in more detail below).  Specifying affordable units under SDBL shall count toward meeting the number of inclusionary units, which is in conformance with state and case law.  Providing an alternative means of compliance as required by state law. 16 Payment of an in-lieu fee, allowing onsite rental units instead of ownership units in an ownership project, and providing affordable units off-site are alternatives to providing affordable units onsite. Previously, the AHO only allowed for the payment of an in-lieu fee for fractional units or for smaller projects (five to nine units) not for an entire onsite inclusionary obligation.

However, it is now a proposed amendment for both rental and ownership based on direction from the HED Committee.
 Clarification on how much smaller of a unit and/or lot can be in relation to the average square footage of the market-rate units.

For ease of comparison, Table 3 below shows the existing and proposed regulations pertaining to the inclusionary rate for ownership and rental.

Table 3: Comparison of Existing and Proposed Inclusionary Rate Ownership
Percentage
Ownership In-Lieu
Fee*
Rental
Percentage **
Rental In-
Lieu Fee**
Existing 10%
moderate or
6% low
5 units: $4/sq. ft.
6-7 units: $6/sq. ft.
8-9 units: $8/sq. ft.
10+ units: $10/sq. ft
10% low or 6 %
very low
$5/sq. ft
Proposed 15% (7.5%
low and

7.5%
moderate)
$20/sq. ft. 6% (1% very
low, 1% low, &
4% moderate)
$15/sq. ft
*Only applicable on projects 5-9 units or a fractional unit under 0.5 ** Inclusionary requirements for rental projects is currently suspended.

Master Fee and Charges Schedule for the AHO Amendments
Based on the overview above, the following are the recommended fees to be amended and added to the Master Fee and Charges Schedule to replace the existing fees (Exhibit A, Attachment 2).
16 Alternatives to providing units onsite are only required for rental housing projects. Ownership projects can be required to provide units on site without having an alternative means for compliance (Government Code Section 65850(g)).

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
 In-Lieu Fee (projects electing to pay a fee in lieu of building any inclusionary units on site)
o Ownership: $20 per square foot of market-rate square footage o Rental: $15 per square foot of market-rate square footage  Fractional Units (projects that result in a fractional unit below one-half) o Ownership: $254,838 X fractional unit
o Rental: $173,034 X fractional unit
 The above Inclusionary Housing fees would also be updated annually based on a construction cost index.

For projects that elect to pay a fee in lieu of building inclusionary units onsite, the in-lieu fee is multiplied by the total amount of market-rate building gross square footage. For projects that are building units onsite and where the inclusionary requirement results in a fractional unit (below 0.5 of a unit17), the project applicant may pay a fee that is based on the total cost of providing an affordable unit and reflects the development economics of the inclusionary requirements. In both cases, the fees are intended to align with the onsite requirements, they are just expressed differently, reflecting the different choices an applicant might make.

Analysis for Amendments for By-Right Development and Lot Consolidation Incentive Programs
This second package of amendments would amend CMC section (18.20.030 Definitions), add one new chapter (18.115 Affordable Housing Overlay District), and one new section (18.200.230 Lot Consolidation Incentive Program).

A. Definitions (CMC Section 18.20.030), (Exhibit A to Attachment 3) This chapter contains use classifications and definitions used throughout the Development Code and while not specific to these Programs, this amendment would add the term “housing element” to address these Programs as well as future programs anticipated to be implemented in the coming months and years in accordance with the 2023-2031 HE.
“Housing element” means the housing element of the City’s general plan, as required pursuant to subdivision (c) of Government Code Section 65302.

B. Affordable Housing Overlay District (CMC Chapter 18.115), (Exhibit B to Attachment 3)
To effectuate state law and implement Program 6.1 of the 2023-2031 HE, a new chapter to the Development Code is proposed that establishes program 17 For fractional units of 0.5 or more, the developer is required to round up to one additional unit.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
requirements, including standards and procedures for the preparation, filing, and processing of planning permit applications for development on By-Right Project Sites.

18.115.030. This section establishes the map codifying the 23 parcels that this program would apply to, which will be included as part of the City’s Zoning Map as an overlay district. Upon adoption, this map would be made available to the public via the City’s GIS viewer to readily provide this information to the public and development community.

18.115.040. To qualify for by-right approval, the project must be entirely located on a By-Right Site(s) and provide at least 20 percent of the units as affordable to lower-income households with a deed restriction, ensuring long-term affordability18. The projects must be in conformance with objective development and design standards including the City’s Objective Design Standards. However, projects requesting a major or minor subdivision would still require consideration by the review authority identified in the CMC.19

18.115.050. Pursuant to CMC Section 18.402.020, the applicant is required to schedule an initial meeting with staff prior to filing a permit application and may voluntarily submit a preliminary application for review.

Applications are required to include the information identified by the relevant application checklist on file with the Planning Division, and all applicable fees in accordance with the currently adopted master fees and charges schedule.

Applications for a density bonus, development incentive or concession, or other affordable housing program incentive, are processed concurrently with any other application(s) required for the housing development project.

18.115.060. Planning Division staff will be the review authority for these projects except if a subdivision map is requested. The review authority identified in the CMC will consider the subdivision map and make a determination prior to the Planning Division rendering its ministerial decision on the remainder of the project.

18.115.090. Prior to approval, all qualifying projects with five or more dwelling units are required to conduct a neighborhood meeting with public notification provided to all properties within 500 feet of the subject property. 18 Long term affordability is secured through a deed restriction ensuring affordability for rental units for 55 years and ownership units for 45 years.
19 Minor subdivisions are considered by the Zoning Administrator and major subdivisions are considered by the Planning Commission. Consequently, these projects would be subject to a limited discretionary process for any proposed parcel or subdivision maps..

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024

18.115.100. This section will be repealed in conformance with state law on December 31, 2028, unless modified by the state.

C. Lot Consolidation Incentive Program (CMC Section 18.200.230), (Exhibit C to Attachment 3)
This would create a new section to the Development Code that establishes a Lot Consolidation Incentive Program. This section was drafted based on the parameters identified in the 2023-2031 HE as well as the direction received from the HED Committee.

Eligibility: As directed by the HED Committee, the Lot Consolidation Incentive Program would be available to all residential and mixed-use20 projects (e.g. affordable and market-rate) as long as the project includes Lots Identified for Consolidation. The HED Committee provided this direction to increase the possibility of all housing development to address supply constraints rather than a strict focus on affordable housing projects.

Incentives: As directed by the HED Committee, the Lot Consolidation Incentive Program would offer the following incentives.

1. Priority or expedited review once an application has been deemed complete:
a. 150 units or fewer – 90 days
b. More than 150 units – 180 days

2. Priority placement on meeting agenda for projects subject.

3. City assistance on marketing affordable units.

4. A three percent density bonus increase, with the minimum of one additional unit, which would be in addition to density bonus granted under State Density Bonus Law. For calculation purposes, this density bonus would not be compounded with a density bonus received under Density Bonus Law.

5. A 10 percent reduction in required residential parking for mixed-use and residential projects. This incentive would only apply to Lots Identified for Consolidation. This incentive would also be available to projects that do not utilize the State Density Bonus Law.

6. Allow a 50% increase of compact spaces of all required parking spaces provided in any configuration for projects comprised of 100% ofLots Identified for Consolidation. For project sites comprised of 50% or more of Lots Identified for Consolidation, a 35% increase in compact parking spaces is 20 A mixed-use project shall mean a project with at least two-thirds total square footage designed for residential use (including residential amenities) and that meets the minimum residential density required by the General Plan.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
allowed in any configuration. For projects comprised of less than 50% of Lots Identified for Consolidation, no increase in compact parking spaces under this incentive would be applicable. This incentive is only available to projects that do not elect to reduce their required parking through the application of any state law.

Master Fee and Charges Schedule for the By-Right Development Program Due to the changes described above establishing a by-right review process for qualifying housing projects, a new fee is recommended to be added to the Master Fee and Charges Schedule, as follows:
 Housing Applications
o By-Right Development
For eligible projects within the Affordable Housing Overlay District, a By-Right Development fee would be established as a $10,000 deposit to cover staff time to process project applications. This fee would also be applicable to projects submitted under Senate Bill 35 and any anticipated future changes for the by-right processing of housing projects that are anticipated with the implementation of the 2023-2031 HE. Any staff time spent on accepting and reviewing the project for conformance with local and state regulations will be deducted from the deposit.

Development Code Findings
Pursuant to CMC Section 18.455.070, a Development Code amendment may be approved only if all the applicable findings are made. Staff’s analysis on how the packages of amendments meets each finding as follows:
1) The proposed amendment is consistent with the general plan.

AHO Amendments
The project consists of amendments to the existing Affordable Housing Ordinance, which is in conformance with the General Plan by providing a balanced supply of housing types and prices to meet the needs for all economic segments of the community. The Ordinance is also internally consistent with all other provisions and elements of the General Plan.

By-Right Development and Lot Consolidation Incentive Program Amendments The proposed amendments to the Concord Municipal Code, Title 18 (Development Code), consist of updates to the City’s existing General Terms (Chapter 18.20) and the addition of a new chapter (18.115) and a new section (18.200.230) in order to implement state law and the 2023–2031 HE. The amendments are in conformance with the General Plan by streamlining and incentivizing housing development that provides the City with a balanced supply of housing types and prices, and in particular lower income housing, to meet the

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
needs for all economic segments of the community. The proposed amendments are also internally consistent with all other provisions and elements of the General Plan.
2) The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the city.

AHO Amendments
The amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City because it would merely require units to be set aside in a housing project for lower-income households. The housing projects would be required to comply with all other federal, state, and local laws; therefore, will not be detrimental.

By-Right Development and Lot Consolidation Incentive Program Amendments In response to California’s housing shortage, the State has adopted laws to accelerate housing production by removing or limiting the City’s discretionary review on housing developments. The proposed amendments would implement state law in addition to the 2023-2031 HE. Incentivizing lot consolidation will help facilitate residential and mixed-use projects to help the City meet its RHNA targets and increase opportunities for housing in the City. The proposed amendments would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. On the contrary, the proposed amendments will serve the City’s public interest by facilitating and streamlining the review of residential projects that will help alleviate the City of Concord’s housing shortage, and in particular housing affordable to lower-income households. 3) Zoning map amendments shall also find that the affected site is physically suitable, including absence of physical constraints, access, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and provision of utilities, for the requested zoning designation and proposed or anticipated uses and/or development.

AHO Amendments
This amendment does not include any amendments to the zoning map.

By-Right Development and Lot Consolidation Incentive Program Amendments This amendment implements state law by including a new Affordable Housing Overlay District that facilitates a by-right process for residential projects on sites identified for lower-income households within the Sites Inventory that had been previously identified in past Housing Elements. The Affordable Housing Zoning Overlay District does not change the underlying zoning district or land use; therefore, will not physically effect, change the land use compatibility of any the identified sites, or impact the provision of utilities. The Lot Consolidation

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
Incentive Program (Program 13.2) does not include an amendment to the zoning map.

Alternatives

1. Direct staff to change the percentage inclusionary requirements and/or identified income categories and change the in-lieu fee accordingly.

2. Direct staff to change the incentives for the Lot Consolidation Incentive Program.

Financial Impact
AHO Amendments
There is no financial impact to the City with the adoption of this Ordinance.

If the City Council adopts the Ordinance and Resolution (Exhibit A, Attachment 2), the Master Fee and Charges Schedule will be updated. All revenue generated from in-lieu fees will be deposited in the City’s Inclusionary Housing Fund for use on affordable housing projects.

By-Right Development and Lot Consolidation Incentive Program Amendments If the City Council adopts the Ordinance and Resolution (Exhibit A, Attachment 4), the Master Fees and Charges, Schedule D Permit Center Fees will be updated to add a new fee in order to cover to cover staff time associated with the processing of these applications. This protects the City’s General Fund from carrying the staff costs of private development applications.

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 Ordinance does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 21065, 14 Cal Code Regs. Section 15060(c)(2) or 15378 because it has not potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect change in the environment. Even if the Ordinance did constitute a “project” under CEQA, the Ordinance falls within the “common sense” exemption set forth in 14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15061(b)(3), excluding project 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 Municipal Code amendments do not warrant further environmental review.

Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted. Notification was published in the East Bay Times, as required by state law and the Concord Municipal Code. Additionally, notice has been provided to all individuals on the housing interested parties list.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
January 23, 2024
Attachments

1. Ordinance amending Concord Municipal Code, Title 18 (Development Code) Section 18.20.030 (Definitions) and CDC Chapter 18.185 (Affordable Housing)
Exhibit A: Amendments to Concord Municipal Code Section 18.20.030 (Definitions)
Exhibit B: Amendments to Concord Municipal Code Chapter 18.185 (Affordable Housing)

2. Resolution amending the Inclusionary Housing Fee by amending Exhibit A to Resolution No. 78-6042 establishing fees and charges for various municipal services in the City of Concord
Exhibit A: Amendments to the Master Fees and Charges Schedule

3. Ordinance amending Concord Municipal Code, Title 18 (Development Code) Section 18.20.030 (Definitions), and adding Chapter 18.115 (Affordable Housing Overlay District) and Section 18.200.230 (Lot Consolidation Incentive Program)
Exhibit A: Amendments to Concord Municipal Code Section 18.20.030 (Definitions)
Exhibit B: New Concord Municipal Code Chapter 18.115 (Affordable Housing Overlay District)
Exhibit C: New Concord Municipal Code Section 18.200.230 (Lot Consolidation Incentive Program)

4. Resolution adding a By-Right Fee by amending Exhibit A to Resolution No. 78-6042 establishing fees and charges for various municipal services in the City of Concord.

Exhibit A: Amendments to the Master Fees and Charges Schedule

5. Current Affordable Housing Ordinance (Concord Municipal Code Chapter

18.185)

6. Proposed Amendments to Concord Municipal Code Section 18.20.030 (Definitions) (red-lined)

7. Proposed Amendments to Concord Municipal Code Chapter 18.185 (Affordable Housing) (red-lined)

8. Summary of Comments from the November 1, 2023, Meeting with Stakeholders

9. 2023-2031 HE Sites Inventory, including Lots Identified for Consolidation

10.Sites Identified for By-Right Approval (Program 6.1)

11.EPS’s Feasibility Analysis of Inclusionary Requirements

12. HCD 2023 Income Limits for Contra Costa County

Ord. No. 24-XX 1
ORDINANCE NO. 24-XX
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.20.030 AND CHAPTER

18.185 OF THE CONCORD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADDRESS UPDATES TO STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW AND EXPAND THE CITY’S

INCLUSIONARY HOUSING REQUIREMENTS
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65800 et seq. provides for the amendment of any and all adopted City of Concord (“City”) zoning laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations; and WHEREAS, the State of California has found that local governments have a responsibility to facilitate the development of housing for all economic segments of the community (Government Code Section 65580(d)); and
WHEREAS, the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) assigned to the City of Concord by the Association of Bay Area Governments requires that the City plan for 5,073 units of new housing between 2023 and 2031, including 2,883 units affordable to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households; and
WHEREAS, the City has not produced a sufficient number of affordable units to meet its RHNA in prior Housing Element cycles; and
WHEREAS, the State of California has provided limited funding for affordable housing construction, thereby requiring the private sector to participate in meeting the City’s RHNA; WHEREAS, the City currently does not have mechanisms in place to compel developers to include housing affordable to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households in future residential rental projects; and
WHEREAS, the median sales price of a home in City exceeded $835,000 in 2022, and the median rent for a two-bedroom apartment was $2,378, prices that are not affordable to lower-income households; and
WHEREAS, the shortage of affordable housing in the City has also led to insufficient supply of housing for the local workforce and student population, leading to overcrowding in some units, placing a cost burden on households, and long commutes as workers seek affordable housing in other communities; and
Attachment 1

Ord. No. 24-XX 2
WHEREAS, a stated Goal of the City’s Housing Element is to achieve a balanced supply of housing for all income groups; and
WHEREAS, legislation adopted in 2017 (AB 1505; Government Code Sections 65850(g) and 65850.01) authorizes cities to adopt inclusionary requirements for rental residential developments, provided that such ordinances provide alternative means of compliance; and WHEREAS, this Ordinance provides such alternative means of compliance; and WHEREAS, additional legislation adopted in 2017 (SB 686) requires that every jurisdiction in California affirmatively further fair housing by distributing opportunities for very low-, low-, and moderate-income housing in multiple locations rather than concentrating it in a single location, an outcome that is supported by this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted a 2023-2031 Housing Element in compliance with state law that includes a goal of providing 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; and WHEREAS, the City reached out to the a developer community to solicit input regarding assumptions in the feasibility analysis, the inclusionary housing requirement, and in-lieu fee; and WHEREAS, the City engaged in these discussions with the developer community as part of an economic feasibility study to ensure the levels of affordability set forth in this inclusionary housing ordinance would not unduly constrain the production of housing; and WHEREAS, on June 15, 2022, the City Council Committee on Housing and Economic Development provided the following input on the City’s inclusionary housing requirements:

1. For the required inclusionary units, create a blend of income levels, rather than selection of one income level (e.g. low-income households), as currently established.

2. Support for removing the 600-unit threshold precluding the application of the inclusionary housing requirements on rental projects.

3. The inclusionary in-lieu fees should be the economical equivalent to providing units onsite.

4. Retain the current threshold of the inclusionary housing requirements applying to

Ord. No. 24-XX 3
projects of five or more units.

WHEREAS, on November 29, 2022, the City Council Committee on Housing and Economic Development met again and provided the following input on the Affordable Housing Ordinance:

1. Amend the City’s Density Bonus regulation to conform to state law.

2. For ownership projects, provide a total inclusionary requirement of 15% with 7.5% low- and 7.5% moderate-income units.

3. For rental projects, provide a total inclusionary requirement of 6% with 1% very low-, 1% low, and 4% moderate-income units.

4. Include within the City’s regulations an alternative housing proposal that would provide the same value of providing the units onsite or payment of the in-lieu fee to provide flexibility to the development community.

WHEREAS, the City finds that the housing supply shortage for persons of very low-, low-, and moderate-incomes is detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare and that it is a public purpose of the City, and a public policy of the State of California, to make an adequate supply of housing available for persons of all income groups; and WHEREAS, on July 19, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed amendments related to affordable housing, received the staff report and staff presentation, received comments from the public and interested parties, and after closing the public comments portion discussed the matter (the “Planning Commission Information”); and WHEREAS, following the July 19, 2023, public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-09PC, recommending that the City Council adopt proposed amendments to City of Concord Municipal Code (“Municipal Code”) at Sections 18.20.030, Definitions and Chapter 18.185, Affordable Housing, as contained in Exhibits A and B; and WHEREAS, the City has made the economic feasibility study available for at least 30 days on its website prior to adoption of this ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City has considered the economic feasibility study on the agenda at regularly scheduled City Council meeting on January 23, 2024, prior to consideration and approval; and

Ord. No. 24-XX 4
WHEREAS, the City Council, after giving all public notices required by state law and the Municipal Code, held a duly noticed public hearing on January 23, 2024, to consider this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, at such public hearing, the City Council considered all oral and written information, testimony, and comments and at the public hearing, the oral report from City staff, the written report from City staff dated January 23, 2024, attached materials, exhibits presented, the Planning Commission Information, and all other information that constitutes the record of proceedings relating to the proposed Ordinance, which are maintained at the offices of the City of Concord City Clerk (collectively, “City Council Information”), and declared their intent to approve and adopt the Ordinance.

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

Section 1. All of the facts set forth in the Recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.

Section 2. The City Council has reviewed, considered, and evaluated all of the Planning Commission Information, City Council Information, all other pertinent plans, documents, and testimony prior to acting upon Ordinance.

Section 3. The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council has based its decision are located in an may be obtained from the City of Concord Clerk’s Office, 1950 Parkside Drive, Concord, CA 94519.

Section 4. CEQA
The City Council finds that the proposed Municipal Code amendments are exempt from CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(2) or 15378 in that they do not constitute a “project” as defined by CEQA since they do not have the potential to result in either a direct physical change to the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment.

If the Ordinance did constitute a “project” under CEQA, the Ordinance falls within the

Ord. No. 24-XX 5
“common sense” exemption set forth in 14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15061(b)(3), excluding project 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 Municipal Code amendments do not warrant further environmental review. This determination reflects the City’s independent judgement and analysis.

Section 5. Development Code Amendment Findings
1) The proposed amendment is consistent with the general plan.

The project consists of amendments to the existing Affordable Housing Ordinance, which is in conformance with the General Plan by providing a balanced supply of housing types and prices to meet the needs for all economic segments of the community. The Ordinance is also internally consistent with all other provisions and elements of the General Plan. 2) The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the city; and
The amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City because it would merely require units to be set aside in a housing project for lower-income households. The housing projects would be required to comply with all other federal, state, and local laws; therefore, will not be detrimental. 3) Zoning map amendments shall also find that the affected site is physically suitable, including absence of physical constraints, access, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and provision of utilities, for the requested zoning designation and proposed or anticipated uses and/or development.

This amendment does not include any amendments to the zoning map.

Section 6. The City Council does hereby pass and adopt this Ordinance No. 24-XX.

Section 7. Municipal Code, Title 18 (Development Code) Section 18.20.030 (Definitions) and Chapter 18.185, is hereby amended to revise the Affordable Housing Definitions therein as set forth in Exhibits A and B attached here to and made a part hereof.

Section 8. This Ordinance No. 24-XX shall become effective thirty (30) days following its