First-of-its-kind measure to help build and preserve more than 70,000 homes

Contra Costa County would receive $1.9 billion

By John Goodwin, Assistant Director of Communications & Rebecca Long, Director, Legislation & Public Affairs, Metropolitan Transportation Commission

The Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA) on Wednesday, June 26, 2024, adopted a resolution to place a general obligation bond measure on the November 5 general election ballot in each of the nine Bay Area counties to raise and distribute $20 billion for the production of new affordable housing and the preservation of existing affordable housing throughout the region. BAHFA is jointly governed by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)’s Executive Board and by the BAHFA Board, which is comprised of the same membership as the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). 

The bond could create 72,000 new affordable homes – more than double what would be possible without a bond. Without more funding, only about 71,000 affordable homes will be built or preserved in the Bay Area over the next 15 years – a status quo that is failing to meet the needs of the people who live and work here.

Currently, the Bay Area doesn’t have enough homes for the people who live here. As a result of the region’s housing shortage: 

• In 2022, 37,000 people were unhoused in the Bay Area. 
• 1.4 million people—23% of Bay Area renters—spend over half their income on rent. 
• High rents and home prices force people to live far from work, making congestion and pollution much worse, and putting a major strain on working families.
• Too many Bay Area residents live in overcrowded and unsafe housing.
• Vital employees and community members are leaving the area.

Wednesday’s unanimous vote by the BAHFA Board marks the final discretionary step in the process to place the measure on the November ballot. Under state law, each Bay Area county will now take a non-discretionary, ministerial vote to place the measure on the ballot in that county, in accordance with election deadlines. 

The BAHFA bond measure currently would require approval by at least two-thirds of voters to pass. Voters throughout California this November will consider Assembly Constitutional Amendment 1 (ACA 1) — which would set the voter threshold at 55 percent for voter approval of bond measures for affordable housing and infrastructure. If a majority of California voters support ACA 1, the 55 percent threshold will apply to the BAHFA bond measure.

“Today’s vote is the culmination of so many years of effort by so many people all around our region,” observed BAHFA Chair and Napa County Supervisor Alfredo Pedroza. “The Bay Area’s longstanding housing affordability problems affect all of us, our friends, our neighbors and our family members. This vote is about preserving opportunity for everyone.” 

The proposed BAHFA bond measure calls for 80 percent of the funds to go directly to the nine Bay Area counties (and to the cities of San Jose, Oakland, Santa Rosa and Napa, each of which carries more than 30 percent of their county’s low-income housing need), in proportion to each county’s tax contribution to the bond. In consultation with its cities and towns, each county would determine how to distribute bond funds to best meet its jurisdictions’ most pressing housing needs. These distributions would include:

• Contra Costa County: $1.9 billion
• Alameda County: $2 billion
• Marin County: $699 million
• Napa County: $118 million
• San Francisco County: $2.4 billion
• San Mateo County: $2.1 billion
• Santa Clara County: $2.4 billion
• Solano County: $489 million
• Sonoma County: $553 million
• City of Napa: $246 million
• City of Oakland: $765 million
• City of San Jose: $2.1 billion
• City of Santa Rosa: $242 million

The remaining 20 percent, or $4 billion, would be used by BAHFA to establish a new regional program to fund affordable housing construction and preservation projects throughout the Bay Area. Most of this money (at least 52 percent) must be spent on new construction of affordable homes, but every city and county receiving a bond allocation must also spend at least 15 percent of the funds to preserve existing affordable housing. Almost one-third of funds may be used for the production or preservation of affordable housing, or for housing-related uses such as infrastructure needed to support new housing. 

The California Constitution currently does not allow bond funds to be used for tenant protections such as rental assistance, but planned investments in new housing and affordable housing preservation will protect tens of thousands of low-income renters and vulnerable residents. 

The BAHFA Board also adopted, on Wednesday, resolutions approving the Authority’s Business Plan and its Regional Expenditure Plan, which explain the prioritization for use of the funds that would be directly administered by BAHFA. 

Oversight and accountability provisions to be included in the BAHFA bond measure include the creation of a special bond proceeds account; establishment of a Citizens’ Oversight Committee that would review the expenditure of bond proceeds and report to the BAHFA and ABAG Executive Boards on whether the funds were spent appropriately; an independent annual performance audit; a requirement that all bond-projects be consistent with state laws on labor standards; a requirement that administrative costs not exceed the amount prescribed in state law; and a prohibition against any public official who voted to send the ballot measure to the voters bidding on any work funded with proceeds from the bond. 

The ABAG Executive Board voted unanimously at its April meeting to adopt a resolution approving BAHFA’s Business Plan and its Expenditure Plan, as well as to endorse placement of the bond measure on the November ballot. In her remarks preceding the vote, ABAG President and Napa County Supervisor Belia Ramos noted, “This is a remarkable milestone moment for our region. Housing stability is essential for our community to thrive, and this proposal is a once-in-a-generation opportunity.”

Read the Bond Report and learn more about the bond measure, here and here.

Proposed $20 billion regional November bond measure seen as way to close the gap

By Kate Hartley, BAHFA & Justine Marcus, Enterprise Community Partners

Enterprise Community Partners (Enterprise) and the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA) released the Bay Area Affordable Housing Pipeline 2024 Report, last month, which analyzes affordable housing projects in various stages of predevelopment and identifies solutions for moving them toward completion. The updated research reveals there are now 433 projects in various stages of predevelopment that would create more than 40,896 affordable homes across the nine-county Bay Area. These would account for nearly a quarter of the 180,000 affordable homes the state’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan determined are needed in the Bay Area by 2031. (See related articles here and here)

Affordable housing developments typically are supported by a capital “stack” investment that includes a commercial mortgage; Low-Income Housing Tax Credits; tax-exempt bonds; and additional local, regional and state dollars that fill the gap between the cost of the development and the financing secured through debt and equity. The new report calculates that the hundreds of Bay Area projects now in the predevelopment pipeline need $9.7 billion in public funds to move forward, and that a $20 billion regional bond measure proposed for the ballot in Bay Area counties this fall would help close this gap.

“We’ve been stuck in an affordable housing crisis that has overwhelmed the region. The November ballot presents an opportunity to unlock thousands of affordable homes for Bay Area residents,” said Heather Hood, VP and Northern California Market Leader at Enterprise. “We expect voters to have a chance to end our housing crisis and deliver the dignified, healthy homes the Bay Area community needs and deserves.”

The predevelopment pipeline includes projects in all nine Bay Area counties. These include more than 10,000 units in both Alameda and Santa Clara counties, with another 8,400 affordable homes pending development in San Francisco and more than 3,000 units in both San Mateo and Sonoma counties. Project pipelines in other Bay Area counties range from over 300 affordable homes in Solano County to 1,173 units in Marin County; nearly 1,500 homes in Napa County; and over 2,500 units in Contra Costa County. Each Bay Area city, town or county currently is working on its own to meet the challenges of housing affordability and homelessness.

“The need for affordable housing transcends jurisdictional boundaries. BAHFA’s proposed bond measure would finally allow our Bay Area to take a regional approach to a regional problem,” said BAHFA Director Kate Hartley. “With significant new resources for every county, we can build at scale, deliver equitable solutions, and create a better way to deliver the affordable homes Bay Area residents need.

The updated Bay Area Housing Pipeline research brief was presented at today’s regularly scheduled meeting of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Bay Area Housing Finance Authority Oversight Committee.

About Enterprise Community Partners 

Enterprise is a national nonprofit that exists to make a good home possible for the millions of families without one. We support community development organizations on the ground, aggregate and invest capital for impact, advance housing policy at every level of government, and build and manage communities ourselves. Since 1982, we have invested $54 billion and created 873,000 homes across all 50 states – all to make home and community places of pride, power and belonging.

About the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority

Established by the state legislature in 2019, BAHFA’s mandate is to create regional solutions that meet the Bay Area’s affordable housing needs. It is the first regional housing finance authority in California. BAHFA works together with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting, sans Mayor Lamar Hernandez-Thorpe, the Antioch City Council heard about two proposed new-home developments, one in the Sand Creek Focus Area and one on the far north side of the city. The mayor was in Washington, D.C. for the annual American Public Transit Association Legislative Conference, representing Tri Delta Transit for which he currently serves as chair.

Not all of the council members were supportive of the Richland Communities – Leung Property project adjacent to The Ranch development but all four offered enthusiastic support for the DeNova Homes’ Rancho Meadows project.

435-Home Leung Property Project in Sand Creek

Kyle Masters with Richland Communities spoke about the proposed 160-acre project on what’s known as the Leung property in the Sand Creek area across Deer Valley Road and south from the Kaiser Antioch Medical Center. (See Agenda Item 6)

The developer is proposing 435 units which includes 50 conventional single family detached units, 385 clustered single family detached residential units, and 159 row townhomes, according to the staff report and developer’s presentation.

“We’re looking at it more as an extension of our project, The Ranch project,” which is located just to the north. The first phase of that 1,100-home development was approved by the council last June. The proposed project is labeled, The Ranch – Phase 4.

“This provides more of a range of housing,” Masters continued. “A price point we may not have seen out there in Sand Creek. We see this as a second phase to The Ranch project.”

He said the project will, “provide a more affordable community. Lowering the entry point to homebuyers.”

During council discussion, District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica shared of his displeasure that neither developer had reached out to him prior to the council meeting.

“I really wish someone would have picked up the phone. But that didn’t occur. I learned of them by pulling up the agenda on Friday afternoon,” he stated. “So, developers, please communicate with us. Give me a call, so we have time to go over them and see how the developments will affect the community.”

Both District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock and and Mayor Pro Tem Monica Wilson, who chaired the meeting, spoke of the desire for inclusionary housing. District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker wanted to update the City’s General Plan which was last updated in 2003 before approving more housing in the Sand Creek area.

“The council adopted a housing element in 2023,” Acting Community Development Director and City Planner Steve Scudero responded. “We are almost to the point to bring a contract to hire a consultant to develop that (inclusionary housing) ordinance.”

“I live in a development that’s cluster housing. If you can figure out a way to make garbage service work, because it’s not working in my neighborhood,” Wilson shared.

“When I talk about inclusionary housing it doesn’t have to be there. It could be a credit for somewhere else,” Ogorchock added.

Asked by Wilson about not seeing any single-story homes in the plan, Masters responded. We’re just not at that level of detail, yet. We’re probably two to three years before coming back to you with this.”

“Most people are hoping we won’t be here, by then,” Torres-Walker responded. “But we’ll see what happens.”

143-Home Project with 6 Affordable Rental Units in Northeast Antioch

The other project proposed by DeNova Homes, is for a 143-home development off Vineyard Drive north of E. 18th Street. It includes six affordable rental units working with Yellow Roof Foundation. (See Agenda Item 7)

According to the city staff report, the residential development consists of 137 single family detached homes on approximately 2,600 square foot lots and six renter-occupied homes on 4,200 square foot lots designed for people who are at risk of being unhoused. The non-profit foundation is proposed to own and manage the six rentals.

Trent Sanson of DeNova Homes spoke during the presentation and responded to the councilmember’s questions.

Resident Andrew Becker, who usually opposes market-rate housing developments, spoke in support of the project.

During the council discussion Ogorchock spoke first saying, “I truly like the project. I think the lots are way small on this one. I think the park’s small. I’d like to see a bigger park. I’d also like to see a community garden.”

Agreeing with Torres-Walker, she said, “We have to have bathrooms in our parks.”

“I’m happy with Yellow Roof coming to town,” Ogorchock continued.

“I’d like to see walkability and trails,” she added.

Torres-Walker also liked Yellow Roof’s participation and hoped the homes would provide for transition into home ownership.

She advocated for larger sized back yards.

“I’m not a big supporter of gated communities,” Torres-Walker continued. “You can’t have a public park in a gated community. If it is, then you might want to rethink it being a gated community.”

“Is it affordable. I could be like everyone else saying you need a better paying job. People saying, ‘we need housing for all income levels. There has not been enough housing for low-income working families.

“15-minute cities. We use to live in those communities until we were pushed out with increasing rents,” Torres-Walker stated. “I just hope it actually has a pathway to home ownership.”

“I like the location…the fact that we’re doing this, that you put Yellow Roof in there,” Barbanica stated. “When a developer steps and does that and puts six units in there with ADU’s the money has to come from somewhere, either market-rate homes or smaller lots.

“You’re taking six units and saying, ‘come in here and pay whatever you can afford,’” he continued. “I do appreciate the fact that you are doing this in Antioch.”

“A little bit larger lots, if you can,” Barbanica added.

“They did call me, because it’s in my district…for the record,” Torres-Walker interjected.

“The individuals that go into these houses with lower rents, part of the money is set aside for them to get into home ownership,” Wilson inquired.

Confirming what she said, Sanson shared, “We try to keep it to a three-year program so people can get their financial affairs in order. We want to help more and more people that we can. Then they graduate on to home ownership.”

“I love that program but if you could add a couple more affordable units,” Wilson added. “I can support this project.”

Sanson then stated his company will work with city staff and include what was shared by the council members to finalize the project plan. Once ready, it will then be heard by the Planning Commission before returning to the council for a final vote.

Supervisors suspend all-electric requirements following U.S. Court of Appeals ruling

(Martinez, CA) – The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Tuesday suspended enforcement of its requirement that most new buildings be constructed as all-electric buildings.  The County’s all-electric building requirement, as part of the County’s building code, had prohibited the installation of natural gas infrastructure in most new buildings and required developers to use electricity as the sole source of energy in the building.  With Tuesday’s action, the County’s all-electric building requirement will not be enforced.

Last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit invalidated a City of Berkeley ordinance that prohibited natural gas infrastructure in new buildings. The court held that the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act precludes cities and counties from adopting building codes that prohibit the installation of gas plumbing in buildings.

Contra Costa County’s all-electric building requirement, like the invalidated City of Berkeley ordinance, prohibits the installation of gas plumbing in new buildings.  The County is therefore suspending this requirement in response to the Ninth Circuit’s decision.

At the same time, the Board of Supervisors remains committed to the goals that prompted it to adopt the all-electric requirement: improving public health and fighting what they believe contributes to climate change. The Board referred the topic of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from buildings to its Sustainability Committee and directed staff to report on alternatives for advancing this objective at the Committee’s next meeting.

“Contra Costa County remains committed to reducing the use of fossil fuels in buildings and continues to support the construction of new buildings using all-electric technologies,” said Board Chair Federal D. Glover, District 5 Supervisor.  “We are eager to identify new and innovative ways to continue to pursue our goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from buildings.”

The County encourages residents and businesses to continue to install all-electric building systems and appliances. There are many benefits of all-electric construction, some of which include:

• Cleaner air and better health outcomes from eliminating the emissions associated with burning fossil fuels, particularly indoors.
• Not having to pay to install gas pipes in new buildings.
• Taking advantage of financial incentives and rebates for all-electric appliances.
• Resilience against power outages, particularly when electric technologies are paired with battery storage.
• Hedging against high electricity costs by being able to schedule electric appliances to operate at times of day when electricity costs are lowest.
• Preparing for the potential discontinuation of gas appliances in the future that could occur from possible regulatory actions by regional, state, or federal agencies.

There are many good resources on the benefits of all-electric buildings, including:

The County’s sustainability web site has information on state and federal incentives, rebates, and other ways to fund all-electric upgrades.

The Bay Area Regional Energy Network has information on training opportunities, rebates and incentives, and contractors.  

MCE, the community choice energy provider for most of Contra Costa County, offers rebates and incentives.

The Switch Is On, sponsored by the Building Decarbonization Coalition, is a collaborative campaign to support all-electric home conversion by providing tools, support, and resources to Californians.

Rewiring America provides information about the benefits of all-electric technologies, and helps generate a personalized plan for individuals, including costs and savings.

PG&E also has resources on all-electric buildings, including rebates, incentives, rate plans, and design guides.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Include non-transit transportation, environment, housing and economy strategy refinements

Will impact Antioch’s BART Station and industrial areas

The Joint Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Planning Committee with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Administrative Committee on Jan. 12, 2024 approved the revised Plan Bay Area 2050+ Draft Blueprint strategies and Growth Geographies.  This action enables staff to further study the strategies’ performance in meeting critical regional goals for an affordable, connected, diverse, healthy and vibrant Bay Area for all. Staff are aiming for adoption of the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Final Blueprint in summer 2024.

Given Plan Bay Area 2050’s solid foundation of 35 strategies, the Draft Blueprint phase for Plan Bay Area 2050+ is focusing on making targeted refinements to select plan strategies. These refinements reflect Plan Bay Area 2050’s implementation progress, the post-pandemic planning context and insights gathered during engagement with the public and partners in summer 2023.

What is the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Blueprint?

The Plan Bay Area 2050+ Blueprint will integrate strategies across the four elements of the plan — the economy, the environment, housing and transportation — to create a more equitable and resilient future for all.

Beginning in summer 2023 and wrapping up in late 2024, staff will develop the Blueprint over two phases: the Draft Blueprint and the Final Blueprint. Given Plan Bay Area 2050’s solid foundation of 35 strategies, the Draft Blueprint phase for Plan Bay Area 2050+ will focus on making targeted refinements to select plan strategies.

What are Growth Geographies?

Priority Development Areas — Places nominated by local governments served by transit and planned for new homes and jobs at densities necessary to support effective transit service.

Priority Production Areas — Industrial areas of importance to the regional economy and local communities that support middle-wage jobs.

Transit-Rich Areas — Places near rail, ferry or frequent bus service that were not already identified as Priority Development Areas.

High-Resource Areas — State-identified places with well-resourced schools and access to jobs and open space.

Staff previously shared proposed Draft Blueprint strategy refinements in October and November 2023, detailing which of Plan Bay Area 2050’s 35 strategies were likely to see major, minor or no changes in Plan Bay Area 2050+. This month, the MTC and ABAG committees approved moving forward with revisions for further study and analysis, including:

• Non-transit transportation strategy refinements focused on prioritizing equity considerations, adapting to tighter fiscal constraints, promoting active transportation and safety, and expanding pricing strategies;
• Environment strategy refinements focused on further reducing greenhouse gas emissions and proactively adapting to climate change; and
• Housing and economy strategy refinements focused on addressing pressing challenges of housing affordability, homelessness and access to opportunity.

At this time the Draft Blueprint only includes a handful of modified transportation strategies, pending the development of a fiscally constrained Transportation Project List, which will integrate recommendations from the ongoing parallel Transit 2050+ effort. The complete suite of revised transportation strategies will be integrated as part of the Final Blueprint in summer 2024.

The Joint ABAG and MTC Committee also approved targeted updates to the Growth Geographies that were adopted as part of Plan Bay Area 2050. Growth Geographies are places that Plan Bay Area prioritizes for future homes, jobs, services and amenities and serve as a component of the plan’s housing and economy elements. Specifically, draft Growth Geographies for Plan Bay Area 2050+ will include five new Priority Development Areas (PDAs) and 16 modified existing PDAs nominated by local Bay Area jurisdictions; reflect up-to-date information on transit service, natural hazards and demographics; and integrate areas subject to MTC’s revised Transit Oriented Communities Policy.

The Draft Blueprint approval comes six months after MTC and ABAG kicked off the limited and focused update to Plan Bay Area 2050. In November 2023, staff shared progress-to-date with policymakers, including findings from the first round of engagement, core planning assumptions, the draft Regional Growth Forecast, a financial needs and revenue analyses and proposed strategy refinements.

The next round of public and partner organization engagement activities, which will inform the development of the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Final Blueprint, is planned to begin in spring 2024. MTC and the ABAG Executive Board are expected to approve Final Blueprint strategies in summer 2024.

Learn more about the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Draft Blueprint strategies and Growth Geographies. For additional technical resources, please visit the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Draft Blueprint Documents page on our website.

Vineyard Crossing Preliminary Development Plan includes 71 homes, 70 ADU’s

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2024, the Antioch City Council will consider a new type of residential development consisting of 71 single-family residences (SFRs) and 70 accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on 71 residential lots. The 14.6-acre project site is located north of Oakley Road and west of Phillips Lane. ADU’s, formerly referred to as “in-law units” or “granny units” have become a significant form of in-fill development in the past two years following approval of new state legislation.

According to Selna Partners law firm, “In 1982, California allowed the construction of ADUs statewide, but gave local governments control over where to locate and how to regulate them. That changed in 2016 when the State Legislature approved bills requiring cities and counties to allow ADUs on most residential lots, preempting local zoning. More than 24,000 ADUs were permitted in 2022, up from 1,000 in 2016. State data indicates that currently 20% of the housing units built annually in California are ADUs, which is the equivalent of 20,000 new homes.”

Furthermore, “in 2022, the Legislature passed yet another round of bills to combat local resistance. The most impactful were those that enabled ‘mandatory’ ADUs: structures that met specific, basic criteria essentially could not be denied by a local government. 2022 bills, AB 2221 and SB 897 resulted in amendments to the California Government Code dictating that an ADU with the following characteristics, must be approved by the local planning and building department(s) with no discretion from a zoning board or planning commission:

• A detached structure that does not exceed four-foot side and rear-yard setbacks for a lot with an existing or proposed single-family dwelling.
•  800 square foot floor area limit.
• 18-foot height limit, plus two feet for a single family residential zoned parcel to accommodate a roof pitch aligned with the pitch of the existing house.”

According to the City staff report on the agenda item #, “The proposed unit mix includes three different SFR floor plans that range in size from 1,492 to 1,697 square feet (sf) and two different ADU floor plans that range in size from 603 to 750 sf. Each SFR included in the proposed project would have an attached two-car garage with a driveway and each ADU would include a driveway for one vehicle parking space.”

Also according to the City staff report, “The Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) the council will review is a non-entitlement action and does not require environmental review. The future project application review would require compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The purpose of a PDP is to gather feedback from the Planning Commission and others in order for the applicant to become aware of concerns and/or issues prior to final development plan and tentative map submittal. As standard practice, preliminary plans are not conditioned; rather a list of needed items, information, and issues to be addressed is compiled for the applicant to address prior to submitting an entitlement application.”

The meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers inside City Hall at 200 H Street following a 5:30 p.m. Closed Session on four legal matters. See the complete meeting agenda. The meeting can be viewed online via livestream on the City’s website or on Comcast local cable channel 24 or AT&T U-verse channel 99.

By Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development

From land use and housing to climate change and environmental justice, residents are invited to explore drafts of the General Plan and Climate Action Plan to ensure they reflect the community’s collective aspirations for Contra Costa County’s future.

View the plans and provide comments on the project website at envisioncontracosta2040.org through Jan. 31, 2024. 

The Public Review Draft of the Contra Costa County 2045 General Plan is the County’s primary policy tool to guide physical changes in the unincorporated areas over the next 20 years. It serves as the basis for planning- and infrastructure-related decisions made by County staff and decision makers. It is built around the themes of environmental justice, community health, economic development, and sustainability.

“Our General Plan establishes the policies that will move us towards a more equitable, healthier, safer and stronger future,” said John Gioia, Chair of the Board of Supervisors. “Public participation and input is vital in creating sound policy and guiding our public decisions on the issues that impact every facet of our lives.”

The Public Review Draft Climate Action Plan 2024 Update is the County’s strategic plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and to adapt to changing climate conditions, such as extreme heat, flooding, droughts, and wildfires, in the unincorporated areas of the County. The 2024 Climate Action Plan implements the General Plan policy guidance and addresses behaviors, regulations, and investment decisions that directly reduce GHG emissions or promote climate resilience.

Community feedback has been the driving force behind these planning efforts. County staff have held over 130 meetings with community members, advocates, stakeholders, and officials. This collaborative effort, including almost 50 community meetings and over 20 with community-based organizations, has shaped the shared vision for Contra Costa County.