Report 1614 – Response from the City of Antioch*

R1

The City should consider increasing AH (Affordable Housing) in PDAs. Response: The Rivertown Waterfront Priority Development Area (RWPDA) is located within the City of Antioch along the San Joaquin River within the City's historic downtown. According to the U.S. Census, the majority of the RWPDA is located within Census Tract 3050, which has a median gross rent of $1,079 and a median household income for renters of $34,388. Of the 1,721 rental housing units, 48% contain households paying more than 35% of their household income towards rent, which is slightly higher than the countywide figure of 46%. Further, of the 2,128 renting households in the RWPDA, 504 (24%) earn less than $20,000, which is approximately what one minimum wage worker might earn in one year. By comparison, just 7% of countywide households earn less than $20,000 each year. The RWPDA is already providing housing for minimum wage-earning households at a per-household rate that is 3.4 times greater than the County as a whole. It would be inappropriate and inconsistent with best housing practices to direct additional affordable housing to this area. The Hillcrest BART Station Priority Development Area is a planned development area near the anticipated BART Station at Hillcrest Avenue and State Route 4. The Hillcrest Station Specific Plan anticipates the construction of higher density housing near the BART Station, which will increase affordable housing in the immediate area. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. The City should consider adopting an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.

R2

Response: The purpose of an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance is to provide affordable housing within new residential development projects to provide housing opportunities for households that would otherwise be excluded from ownership in the development or community. In Antioch, the median value of a house built between 2000 and 2009 is $313,900. A household earning approximately $82,000 per year could afford one of these houses in the City of Antioch, while spending just 30% of their income on housing. It would take an annual household income of over $185,000 to afford a similarly-new house in Walnut Creek. More significantly, the citywide median value for a single-family home is $240,000, which would be affordable to a household earning just $62,000. The median citywide household income is $65,770. As demonstrated, the City of Antioch already provides a diversity of housing options and is accessible to households of all income levels. The City of Antioch recognizes that other areas of Contra Costa County are significantly different in terms of housing costs, employment centers, median incomes, land availability, residential development patterns, and similar factors that contribute to a true shortage of affordable housing. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. The City should explore rehabilitating existing housing stock as AH (Affordable

R3

Housing) for purchase or rental, and indentify funding to do so. The City of Antioch does not actively engage in the acquisition and Response: rehabilitation of housing units and does not operate its owner affordable housing program. Rather, the City uses its limited resources to assist independent developers of affordable housing in gaining access to critical county, State and federal resources. More so, the City of Antioch supports the Housing Authority of the County of Contra Costa in its efforts to provide high quality affordable housing solutions and promote self-sufficiency for low- income people of Contra Costa County. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. The City should explore increasing "impact fees" or "linkage fees" or enacting such

R5

fees in order to generate revenue with which to assist funding of AH (Affordable Housing). Response: As described above, the City of Antioch recognizes the countywide concern for additional affordable housing units, but believes that within the City of Antioch, adequate affordable housing is already being provided without additional regulatory intervention. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. The City should consider designating an employee within the City's planning or

R6

housing department to coordinate with property management to maintain current waiting and interest lists of available AF and ensure information is posted on the city website, and identify funding to do so. Response: The City maintains a part-time contract employee that is fully dedicated to coordinating Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), housing, homeless services, and similar programs. This position already provides direction to parties interested in acquiring designated affordable housing and also seeks/coordinates funding sources for a variety of purposes related to housing, homeless services, and independent affordable housing ventures. The City website contains similar information and direction. The recommendation has been implemented by existing staff. The City should consider seeking federal, state, and local funding sources for AH

R8

secure land suitable for AH, and identify funding to do so. Response: In 2011, the Governor eliminated Redevelopment Agencies statewide, which historically served and were funded by the State to undertake efforts similar to those described above. To date, there has not been a replacement funding source identified and the City of Antioch does not have the means to replace this substantial budget. That said, the City of Antioch owns properties throughout its boundaries and routinely works with organizations and developers regarding potential development projects using these sites. The City is open to any such future partnerships that can be accomplished in a fare and responsible manner. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted.

R11

The City should consider undertaking an education initiative in the earliest phase of affordable planning projects in order to alleviate community concerns regarding AH, and identify funding to do so. Response: The existing Planning Processes for multi-family housing generally require a public hearing, whereby the community is notified and invited to attend a public meeting to express any concerns regarding the project. In addition, project applicants are encouraged to independently reach out to their surrounding neighborhood to provide such education. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted.

R13

The City should consider identifying all infill and vacant land not in PDAs and encourage use of it for AH through tax incentives, density bonuses, etc. Response: The City already identifies opportunity sites throughout various planning documents, including the General Plan, the Housing Element, and Specific Plans. The City of Antioch, like nearly all cities in California, does not control the taxation of any land- based development and, as such, cannot create City-specific tax incentives. The City of Antioch already uses a Density Bonus process, which is described in detail in its Municipal Code. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted.