Introduction and Methodology

The purpose of this opinion research was to survey the attitudes of registered voters in the City
of Concord on features of the plan for the reuse of Concord Naval Weapons Station area.

Between November 5 and November 9, 2008 SA|Opinion Research conducted telephone

interviews with 600 randomly selected registered voters in the city. Respondents were asked a
total of 51 questions and the average interview lasted just under 19 minutes.

Respondents were able to take the survey in English or in Spanish. Thirty-four respondents
elected to participate in Spanish.

Results from studies of this size have a margin of error (95 times out of 100) of plus or minus
four percentage points for the sample as a whole. This is the margin of error for the results that
would be obtained if literally every individual in the population were interviewed. This margin
of error applies to aggregate results in the range of 40 percent to 60 percent. The margin of error
is greater for responses from numbers of respondents smaller than the overall sample.

This report is divided into three parts. The first section is a narrative describing key findings and
conclusions and includes selected charts and graphs. The second part includes the questionnaire
with the actual wording of all the questions and the results obtained from the sample as a whole.
The third section contains crosstabulations, information on how various subgroups within the
population surveyed answered each question. An introductory page in the crosstabulations
explains how to read these tables.

We wish to thank the City of Concord for commissioning this research with our firm. We
appreciated the opportunity to work with you and we stand ready to assist in further
interpretation of the results.
 Concord Naval Weapons Station 2008 Baseline Poll (259-001)
N = 600 Topline November 2008

Hello, I'm _________________ of SA Opinion Research. Weʼre conducting a public opinion survey of
residents in Concord. I am not selling anything. We are interested in your views on important local
issues. May I speak with you for a few minutes? All your answers will be kept confidential. Would you
prefer to do this interview in English or in Spanish? (IF SPANISH, TRANSFER CALL OR MAKE
APPOINTMENT TO CALL BACK.)

1. Generally speaking, would you say that things in your community are going in the right direction or
are things off on the wrong track?
% n
Right direction ............................................................................... 66.50 ........399
Wrong track ................................................................................... 18.83 ........113
Donʼt know/not sure ...................................................................... 14.67 ..........88
____________________________________________________________________________________

I am going to read a list of issues affecting our local community in Concord. For each one, please tell
me how serious at problem you think it is. Is it very serious, somewhat serious, not too serious or not
at all serious? (ROTATE)
Very Somewhat Not too Not at all
Serious Serious Serious Serious Not sure
2. Traffic on 680, 242 and Highway 4 ...................41.50 ........ 30.83 ..........15.33...........6.17 .........6.17
249 ........... 185 ............... 92..............37 ............37
3. Traffic on city streets ..........................................19.00 ........ 36.33 ..........33.67...........8.83 .........2.17
114 ........... 218 .............202 ..............53 ............13
4. The need for more job opportunities .................50.83 ........ 26.00 ..........10.50...........4.33 .........8.33
305 ........... 156 ............... 63..............26 ............50
5. The need for more homes..................................10.67 ........ 14.83 ..........32.33.........33.83 .........8.33
64 ..............89 .............194 ............203 ............50
6. The need for more affordable housing..............32.67 ........ 29.17 ..........17.33.........15.17 .........5.67
196 ........... 175 .............104 ..............91 ............34
7. The need for more city parks and recreation
facilities................................................................17.50 ........ 29.17 ..........28.50.........20.83 .........4.00
105 ........... 175 .............171 ............125 ............24
8. The need to keep land as totally undeveloped
open space .........................................................32.33 ........ 33.33 ..........18.33.........11.33 .........4.67
194 ........... 200 .............110 ..............68 ............28
9. The need for more neighborhood serving
stores...................................................................12.00 ........ 20.50 ..........33.83.........28.17 .........5.50
72 ........... 123 .............203 ............169 ............33
10. The need for more department and
specialized stores .................................................6.17 ........ 16.17 ..........36.50.........36.17 .........5.00
37 ..............97 .............219 ............217 ............30
11. The need for a new regional park......................16.83 ........ 27.33 ..........24.33.........25.00 .........6.50
101 ........... 164 .............146 ............150 ............39
____________________________________________________________________________________

12. Have you heard anything about the work that the City of Concord has been doing to formulate plans
for the land at Naval Weapons Station property?
% n
Yes ................................................................................................. 72.33 ........434
No................................................................................................... 25.33 ........152
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................2.33 ..........14
____________________________________________________________________________________
 Page 2

13. The city has held public hearings, formed a community advisory committee, developed alternative
plans and gathered public comments on those plans. How good a job do you think the city has done
in managing this planning process? Would you say the cityʼs work has been excellent, good, only fair
or poor?
% n
Excellent ...........................................................................................5.83 ..........35
Good .............................................................................................. 33.00 ........198
Only fair ......................................................................................... 23.17 ........139
Poor...................................................................................................9.50 ..........57
Donʼt know/not sure ...................................................................... 28.50 ........171
____________________________________________________________________________________

The city is developing plans for the inland portion of the Naval Weapons Station. The waterfront part
of the property will remain with the U.S. military. The inland portion is very large; it is eight square
miles or about a fourth of the total area of the city.

There are a variety of land uses and activities that could be chosen as the future of the Naval
Weapons Station land is decided. There is room for a number of different ones. For each of the
following types of land use, please tell me whether you would support or oppose it. (ROTATE.
PRESS FOR STRONGLY OR SOMEWHAT.)
Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Donʼt know
Support Support Oppose Oppose Not sure
14. Keeping some land in open space with picnic
areas, biking and hiking trails ............................72.50 ........ 19.83 ............ 2.67...........2.50 .........2.50
435 ........... 119 ............... 16..............15 ............15
15. Keeping some land totally wild and closed to
the public .............................................................43.17 ........ 26.50 ..........11.17.........15.83 .........3.33
259 ........... 159 ............... 67..............95 ............20
16. Building housing .................................................21.67 ........ 29.67 ..........18.17.........26.83 .........3.67
130 ........... 178 .............109 ............161 ............22
17. Providing space for businesses that provide
jobs ......................................................................46.67 ........ 32.50 ............ 8.50...........8.50 .........3.83
280 ........... 195 ............... 51..............51 ............23
18. Building retail stores and shops ........................25.33 ........ 27.00 ..........17.00.........27.17 .........3.50
152 ........... 162 .............102 ............163 ............21
19. Providing parks and sports facilities ..................51.67 ........ 31.83 ............ 7.67...........7.00 .........1.83
310 ........... 191 ............... 46..............42 ............11
____________________________________________________________________________________

These next questions deal with open space and parks in the Naval Weapons Station area.

20. If there were hiking, running or bike trails in the Naval Weapons Station area, how often would you or
family members use them? Would it be every week, a few times a month, only occasionally or not at
all?
% n
Every week .................................................................................... 18.33 ........110
A few times a month ..................................................................... 24.17 ........145
Only occasionally .......................................................................... 35.17 ........211
Not at all......................................................................................... 21.17 ........127
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................1.17 ............ 7
____________________________________________________________________________________
 Page 3

21. If there were picnic grounds in the Naval Weapons Station area, how often would you or family
members use them? Weekly, a few times a month, only occasionally or not at all?

% n
Every week .......................................................................................8.50 ..........51
A few times a month ..................................................................... 20.67 ........124
Only occasionally .......................................................................... 43.17 ........259
Not at all......................................................................................... 26.00 ........156
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................1.67 ..........10
____________________________________________________________________________________

22. If there were ball fields and sports facilities in the Naval Weapons Station area, how often would you
or family members use them? Weekly, a few times a month, only occasionally or not at all?

% n
Every week .................................................................................... 14.17 ..........85
A few times a month ..................................................................... 17.00 ........102
Only occasionally .......................................................................... 29.33 ........176
Not at all......................................................................................... 36.67 ........220
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................2.83 ..........17
____________________________________________________________________________________

23. Keeping a portion of the eight-square-mile Naval Weapons Station property as open space and parks
has been a theme expressed in the public meetings that have been held. Others say a large part if
not all of it should be developed to at least some extent. Can you please tell me what percent of the
property you think should be left as open space and parks?

percent undeveloped [NOT AVAILABLE FOR TOPLINE]

____________________________________________________________________________________

24. If you knew that the city would have to spend money to maintain and provide police and fire protection
for even the undeveloped portion of the Naval Weapons Station property, would you reduce the part
you think should be parks and open space?
% n
Yes ................................................................................................. 24.83 ........149
No................................................................................................... 67.83 ........407
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................7.33 ..........44
____________________________________________________________________________________

Now, letʼs turn to the portion of the property that may be developed.

25. Some of the property will be used to build homes. Discussion has focused on how these homes
should be planned. Some people have said that the homes should be detached single-family
residences with yards, like many of the homes in Concord are today so that the new part of Concord
will look like the rest of the city.

Others have said homes should be more urban in style, including town homes built more closely
together and located near the freeway entrance and the BART Station to cut down on sprawl and to
leave more open space. Which would you prefer, a more suburban look like much of Concord is today
or a more urban town house look occupying a smaller area of the property.

% n
Suburban look ............................................................................... 51.50 ........309
More urban town homes............................................................... 23.33 ........140
Both................................................................................................ 17.33 ........104
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................7.83 ..........47
____________________________________________________________________________________
 Page 4

26. One way to provide housing that is affordable is to ensure that there is a variety and mix of housing:
single family homes, townhouses and condominiums including larger homes, smaller homes and
homes for both sale and for rent. Would you support a mix of all these types of housing at the Naval
Weapons Station?
% n
Yes ................................................................................................. 68.67 ........412
No................................................................................................... 25.33 ........152
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................6.00 ..........36
____________________________________________________________________________________

27. The City of Concord currently has a policy that when new housing projects are built, 10 percent of the
units must be affordable, that is, priced below market. Is that 10 percent adequate or should it be
greater than 10 percent?
% n
Adequate ....................................................................................... 57.17 ........343
Greater........................................................................................... 34.00 ........204
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................8.83 ..........53
____________________________________________________________________________________

28. The question of building stores, restaurants, commercial and recreation facilities in the area also is
being considered. Some people feel that the development of shops should be limited to those
designed to serve the people who will live in the Naval Weapons Station area. This might include a
grocery or supermarket, a drug store and neighborhood services like a hair salon and a bank.

Others feel that the shopping opportunities should be expanded to include larger and more
specialized stores and facilities like a bowling alley or go kart track that would attract people from a
wider area. Which would you prefer, limited shopping to serve local residents or expanding that to
include stores that would attract people from a wider area?
% n
Limited shopping for local residents ............................................ 51.33 ........308
Stores attracting from wider area................................................. 39.50 ........237
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................9.17 ..........55
____________________________________________________________________________________

29. If you knew that forty percent of the cityʼs revenue comes from the sales tax charged on retail
purchases in Concord, then how would you feel about the question of limited shopping for local
residents versus expanding that to include larger and more specialized stores that would attract
people from a wider area? Would you want only limiting shopping or would you want stores that
attract customers from a wider area?
% n
Limited shopping for local residents ............................................ 49.17 ........295
Stores attracting from wider area................................................. 41.83 ........251
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................9.00 ..........54
____________________________________________________________________________________
 Page 5

Since the area weʼve been discussing is so large, additional uses have been discussed. Would you support
or oppose each of the following on the Weapons Station property: (ROTATE)
Support Oppose Not sure
30. Office buildings ..................................................................... 52.50 ............. 39.83 ............... 7.67
315 ................ 239 .................. 46
31. A university campus ............................................................. 66.50 ............. 28.17 ............... 5.33
399 ................ 169 .................. 32
32. A scientific research institute ............................................... 60.17 ............. 31.00 ............... 8.83
361 ................ 186 .................. 53
33. An outlet mall ........................................................................ 34.33 ............. 61.83 ............... 3.83
206 ................ 371 .................. 23
34. An industrial manufacturing plant or warehouse ................ 29.33 ............. 62.17 ............... 8.50
176 ................ 373 .................. 51
____________________________________________________________________________________

35. City planners and land use experts have said that by creating more density, by putting development in
a smaller area, there will be less development spread out and more of the land can remain
undeveloped or become park land. Please tell me if you think this is a sensible point of view or not?

% n
Sensible ......................................................................................... 65.17 ........391
Not sensible................................................................................... 23.67 ........142
Donʼt know/not sure ...................................................................... 11.17 ..........67
____________________________________________________________________________________

36. While the city has put the full range of land uses on the table for consideration, city officials have
made one point very clear. There must be enough development and tax revenue to offset the cityʼs
costs involved in providing police, fire and other services that will be required in this area. Do you
approve or disapprove of this point about offsetting city costs? (PRESS FOR STRONGLY OR
SOMEWHAT.)
% n
Strongly approve ........................................................................... 57.33 ........344
Somewhat approve ....................................................................... 27.83 ........167
Somewhat disapprove .....................................................................4.33 ..........26
Strongly disapprove .........................................................................5.17 ..........31
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................5.33 ..........32
____________________________________________________________________________________

Now I am going to read some things that other people have said about plans for the Naval Weapons
Station and then Iʼm going to ask what you think.

37. Some people have said that in todayʼs world and for the future, new development must be transit-
oriented with a mix of residential and commercial development that is dense enough or built closely
together to make public transit a practical way for people to move around.

Others have said the new development should be more spread out, less urban and more suburban in
style with more dependence on private automobiles.

With whom do you agree more, those who say new development should be relatively dense and
transit-oriented or those who prefer a more spread out suburban approach?

% n
Dense, transit-oriented ................................................................. 40.50 ........243
A more suburban approach.......................................................... 49.33 ........296
Donʼt know/not sure ...................................................................... 10.17 ..........61
____________________________________________________________________________________
 Page 6

38. Some people have said there should be a lot of new jobs created at the Naval Weapons Station. They
say people who live in Concord now have to commute, sometimes long distances, to get to work. We
already have a lot of housing in Concord but having more jobs locally in Concord would be very
desirable.

Others reply that they donʼt want to make the Naval Weapons Station into a lot of offices and light
industrial. They want to keep the suburban, residential character of Concord.

Do you agree more with those who want to see an emphasis on jobs and commercial development or
do you want the Naval Weapons Station to retain Concordʼs residential, suburban character?

% n
Emphasize jobs ............................................................................. 44.67 ........268
Keep residential, suburban........................................................... 44.17 ........265
Donʼt know/not sure ...................................................................... 11.17 ..........67
____________________________________________________________________________________

39. Hereʼs a different question on this subject. The city has just put a lot of effort into rejuvenating the
Todos Santos area in downtown Concord to make it an attractive place for Concord residents and
others to shop and work.

Plans for the Naval Weapons Station property reflect a desire to maintain a balance between
commercial and residential uses, creating both new housing and new commercial and job-oriented
development.

Do you feel these plans for balanced development move in the right direction or should there be a
greater emphasis on development that provides employment and job opportunities for Concord
residents?
% n
Balanced development right dir ................................................... 58.50 ........351
More emphasis on employment................................................... 30.83 ........185
Donʼt know/not sure ...................................................................... 10.67 ..........64
____________________________________________________________________________________

40. People have been discussing the traffic that development at the Naval Weapons Station would
create. If development is concentrated in just the one area near the freeway exit and the North
Concord BART station, there would be less traffic overall but there would be more traffic in that area.

If development were spread out over a wider area at the Naval Weapons Station, there would be
more traffic overall, but there would be less congestion near the freeway exit and BART station and
the expanded network of streets and the increased number of connection points would give traffic
more alternative routes,

In both cases the extent of the impact of additional traffic on existing local streets could be limited by
restricting the number of streets that connect the new and the existing parts of the city.

Which approach makes more sense to you, to concentrate development and traffic near the BART
station or to spread out development over a wider area with less near the freeway exit and the BART
station but more traffic over all?
% n
Concentrate traffic......................................................................... 41.17 ........247
Spread out but more traffic ........................................................... 45.50 ........273
Donʼt know/not sure ...................................................................... 13.33 ..........80
____________________________________________________________________________________
 Page 7

41. Traffic congestion on city streets is a primary concern. In 20 years traffic will be worse than it is today
even without the Naval Weapons Station being developed. Management of parking and subsidies for
public transit can significantly reduce reliance on the use of cars.

When traffic conditions deteriorate, people may want city officials to be able to do things like
eliminating employer-provided free parking, requiring larger employers to provide subsidized transit
passes and fund on-site frequent shuttle service. In general, do you approve or disapprove of these
ideas? (PRESS FOR STRONGLY OR SOMEWHAT.)
% n
Strongly approve ........................................................................... 44.33 ........266
Somewhat approve ....................................................................... 27.33 ........164
Somewhat disapprove .....................................................................8.50 ..........51
Strongly disapprove .........................................................................9.83 ..........59
Donʼt know/not sure ...................................................................... 10.00 ..........60
____________________________________________________________________________________

42. Another related issue is public transit. Bus service that connects new development with BART and
with downtown Concord will become a reality, whether the new development is concentrated or more
spread out. However, if the development is more spread out, the bus service for people in the existing
part of the city could be improved.

Do you think it is better to concentrate development at the Naval Weapons Station or to spread it out
in more than one area, which would help improve public transit for Concord residents in the existing
part of the city?
% n
Concentrate development ............................................................ 30.83 ........185
Spread out to help improve transit............................................... 58.17 ........349
Donʼt know/not sure ...................................................................... 11.00 ..........66
____________________________________________________________________________________

43. Finally, there is a possibility that the tax revenue that the city receives from the future property owners
and people who shop at future stores at the Naval Weapons Station may not be sufficient to pay for
all the public services that are desired there. For example, there may not be enough money for a
shuttle bus system or transit passes for seniors or lower income residents. Would you support the
idea of an assessment district so that only property owners in the Naval Weapons Station area would
pay an additional amount to support these or other services in the Naval Weapons Station property?

% n
Yes ................................................................................................. 56.33 ........338
No................................................................................................... 31.17 ........187
Donʼt know/not sure ...................................................................... 12.50 ..........75
____________________________________________________________________________________

44. Would you be willing to pay a tax increase to pay for these additional public services if they were
provided in the existing part of the City?
% n
Yes ................................................................................................. 42.00 ........252
No................................................................................................... 45.33 ........272
Donʼt know/not sure ...................................................................... 12.67 ..........76
____________________________________________________________________________________

We are about finished. I have just a few questions for statistical purposes.

45. May I have the zip code where you live? [NOT AVAILABLE FOR TOPLINE]
____________________________________________________________________________________
 Page 8

46. Do you own or rent your home?

% n
Own................................................................................................ 80.00 ........480
Rent................................................................................................ 18.00 ........108
Refused.............................................................................................2.00 ..........12
____________________________________________________________________________________

47. How long have you lived in Concord?

% n
Less than a year...............................................................................1.50 ............ 9
One to five years ........................................................................... 15.00 ..........90
Six to 10 years............................................................................... 15.33 ..........92
11 to 20 years................................................................................ 18.50 ........111
More than 20 years ....................................................................... 40.83 ........245
All my life ..........................................................................................7.83 ..........47
Refused.............................................................................................1.00 ............ 6
____________________________________________________________________________________

48. Are there children under the age of 18 living at home with you?
% n
Yes ................................................................................................. 31.17 ........187
No................................................................................................... 67.83 ........407
Donʼt know/not sure .........................................................................1.00 ............ 6
____________________________________________________________________________________

49. What is your age please? (READ CATEGORIES IF HESITATES.)

% n
18-24 .................................................................................................5.17 ..........31
25-34 .................................................................................................9.50 ..........57
35-44 .............................................................................................. 16.67 ........100
45-54 .............................................................................................. 22.17 ........133
55-64 .............................................................................................. 27.67 ........166
65+ ................................................................................................. 15.83 ..........95
Refused.............................................................................................3.00 ..........18
____________________________________________________________________________________

50. Is your racial or ethnic heritage white, Latino, African-American, Asian, or Pacific Islander?

% n
White .............................................................................................. 74.17 ........445
Latino ............................................................................................. 11.50 ..........69
African-American..............................................................................1.50 ............ 9
Asian .................................................................................................4.83 ..........29
Pacific islander .................................................................................0.17 ............ 1
Other .................................................................................................3.83 ..........23
Refused.............................................................................................4.00 ..........24
____________________________________________________________________________________

51. Finally, I am going to read some income levels. Please stop me when I get to the category that
includes your householdʼs approximate gross annual income.
% n
Under $35,000............................................................................... 11.83 ..........71
$35,000 to $49,000 ....................................................................... 13.00 ..........78
$50,000 to $74,000 ....................................................................... 17.83 ........107
$75,000 to $99,000 ....................................................................... 14.67 ..........88
$100,000 to $149,000................................................................... 11.67 ..........70
$150,000 or more.............................................................................7.00 ..........42
Refused.......................................................................................... 24.00 ........144
____________________________________________________________________________________
 Page 9

That completes our interview. May I have your first name or initial in case my supervisor needs to verify
that this interview actually took place?

________________________________ Phone:

Thank you very much for talking with us today.

************************************************************************************************************************
52. POSTCODE: Sex (BY OBSERVATION)
% n
Male ............................................................................................... 50.00 ........300
Female ........................................................................................... 50.00 ........300
____________________________________________________________________________________

53. POSTCODE: Survey conducted in English or in Spanish

% n
English ........................................................................................... 94.33 ........566
Spanish .............................................................................................5.67 ..........34
____________________________________________________________________________________

54. POSTCODE: Party Affiliation

% n
Democratic .................................................................................... 46.83 ........281
Republican..................................................................................... 32.67 ........196
DTS or other party......................................................................... 20.50 ........123
____________________________________________________________________________________

55. POSTCODE: Voting History (Flag 44)

% n
Voted once .................................................................................... 17.00 ........102
Voted twice .................................................................................... 19.17 ........115
Voted three times .......................................................................... 20.17 ........121
Voted four times ............................................................................ 28.17 ........169
Did not vote ................................................................................... 15.50 ..........93
____________________________________________________________________________________

Interviewer Certification

I have reread this completed questionnaire and certify that all questions requiring answers have been
appropriately filled in and that this interview has been obtained from the individual designated.

Interviewer: _____________________________ Date:

Attitudes toward the Naval Weapons Station Reuse Project

A Survey of Registered Voters

prepared for

The City of Concord

by SA|Opinion Research

November 2008
 Summary of Findings and Conclusions
In reviewing this report, it is important to consult the actual questionnaire included with this report in
order to know how each question was worded and be able to put the responses in proper context.

• The need for more jobs and freeway traffic are the two greatest problems facing city residents
among the 10 issues survey respondents were given.

• More affordable housing and preserving undeveloped land were next in priority. The need for more
market-rate homes and more department and specialized stores were seen as least serious.

• Seventy-two percent of respondents have heard of the reuse project; a plurality of respondents give
the city good marks for managing the planning process while others rated it only fair.

• Open space and recreation are the most highly supported uses. Seventy-three percent support this
strongly and parks and sports facilities are strongly supported by 52 percent.

• The amount of land that respondents believe should be in open space and parks averages 44 percent
among all respondents. Seventy-two percent said 50 percent or less should be left in open space
and parks, while 27 percent wanted more than 50 percent and two percent were unsure.

• Reducing the amount of open space to provide for more tax-generating property was rejected by
two-thirds of the respondents. However, were clear that there must be sufficient tax revenue
generated by development in the reuse project area to cover the city’s costs.

• Nearly 80 percent of respondents would use trails at least occasionally, 75 percent would use picnic
grounds and 60 percent would us ball fields and other sports facilities. Trails and sports facilities
would get more regular, weekly use than picnic areas.

• Respondents are somewhat more comfortable with housing that is suburban in nature, like the
existing portion of the city, as opposed to a denser, more urban environment. However, there is
support for denser housing near the freeway entrance and the North Concord BART station.

• There is strong support for a mix of housing, including single-family, townhouses, condos, larger
and smaller units and homes for both sale and rent.

• A majority feel the city’s present policy of 10 percent affordable housing is adequate, although a
third would support increasing the percentage.

-2-
-
• Respondents are divided on the issue of what kind of retail should be located in the reuse area. Half
want shopping limited to neighborhood-serving stores while 40 percent favor larger and more
specialized stores that would attract people from a wider area.

• The prospect of more sales tax revenue did not significantly change their views on the type of retail
that should be developed.

• Beyond housing and retail, a university campus and a scientific research institute are supported by
60 percent or more of the respondents. A majority support office buildings but only a third support
an outlet mall and less than a third would favor an industrial manufacturing plant or a warehouse.
• City policies to encourage denser development to enable more land to be left as open space and to
ensure that the cost of services is covered by tax revenue generated are both strongly supported by
survey respondents.

• The concept of balance is strongly supported in plans for the reuse area. Respondents want both a
suburban approach and development that creates jobs. When asked to choose between a balanced
approach and one that emphasizes jobs, the balanced approach is preferred by nearly a two-to-one
margin.

• With regard to traffic, respondents were evenly split between a plan that concentrated traffic near
the BART station or a plan that would spread traffic out over a wider area but create more of it.

• When informed that spreading out development could improve public transit in the existing part of
the city, respondents approved spread out as opposed to concentrated development by nearly two-
to-one.

• When told that traffic would be worse in 20 years, respondents strongly supported giving the city
power to mitigate traffic by regulating employers’ policies with regard to employee parking and
public transit.

• Respondents supported the concept of an assessment district in the reuse area to raise taxes for
services not covered by other revenue. They narrowly rejected a tax increase in the existing part of
the city to pay for services there.

-3-
-
 Report of Findings
Attitudes toward Concord in General

Two thirds of the respondents believed Concord was moving in the right direction while 19 percent
thought it was off on the wrong track and 15 percent were unsure. These results were virtually identical
to what respondents thought in April 2006 when the earlier public opinion study on the Naval
Weapons Station reuse project was conducted.

Respondents were given a series of 10 issues affecting the community and asked to say how serious a
problem each of them was. The need for more job opportunities and freeway traffic were considered
the most serious problems with 50 percent and 40 percent, respectively believing they were very
serious problems. The need for more affordable housing and the need to keep land as totally
undeveloped open space followed with a third of the respondents believing these were very serious
problems. Just under 20 percent thought street traffic, the need for more parks and recreation facilities
and a new regional park were serious issues. The need for more stores and more homes were
considered the least serious problems of those tested. More neighborhood stores was rated as a greater
need than the need for more specialized or department stores, which only six percent considered a
serious need.

-4-
-
Attitudes toward the Reuse Project
When asked if they had heard anything about the City of Concord’s work to formulate plans for the
Naval Weapons Station property, 72 percent said that they had heard, 25 percent had not and two
percent were unsure.

-5-
-
Those most likely to be aware of the city’s planning for the Naval Weapons Station area were
respondents who vote most frequently, those with the highest income levels, those who have lived in
Concord the longest and those who want most of the land at the Naval Weapons Station left
undeveloped. Those most likely to be unaware included Latinos, especially those who preferred to be
interviewed in Spanish rather than English, those who were registered to vote but had not voted in
recent elections prior to November 2008, those aged 18-to-34 and those with the lowest incomes.

When asked how good a job the city has done in managing this planning process, respondents gave the
city good to fair marks.

Those who thought the process was excellently managed were most likely to be those who have voted
most frequently in the past, those who want 50 percent of the area to be open space and those aged 55-
to-64. Those who thought the process was good were most likely to include 11-20 year city residents,
Latinos and those who favor concentrated development at one location in the area. Those who rated the
process only fair were most likely to include those who thought things in Concord were off on the
wrong track and those who wanted all or most of the area to be open space. Those who said the
planning process was poor were most likely to include those who thought things are off on the wrong
track, those who opposed a mix of housing types to enable more affordable homes and those with the
highest incomes.

-6-
-
Respondents were given information about the size of the inland portion of Naval Weapons Station
and told that a variety of land uses and activities could be accommodated. Then they were asked
whether they supported or opposed a number of different land use ideas.

Land uses related to recreation were by far the ones receiving the most support. Open space for
picnics, biking and hiking trails was strongly supported by 73 percent of the respondents. Only five
percent opposed this use of the land. Parks and sports facilities were strongly supported by 52 percent
with only 15 percent opposed. A smaller number, 43 percent, strongly supported keeping land totally
wild and closed to the public but 27 percent opposed this.

Forty-seven percent strongly supported land for businesses that provide jobs while 16 percent were
opposed. Only 25 percent strongly supported retail stores and shops and only 22 supported building
housing.

-7-
-
Attitudes toward Open Space
Respondents were asked how much of the Naval Weapons Station should be left in open space and
parks. When all responses were totaled and divided by the number of responses, the average or mean
was 44 percent.

Zero to 25% open space 33%

26 percent to 49 percent 19
50 percent 20
51 percent to 75 percent 14
76 percent to 100 percent 13
Not sure 2

When respondents were asked if they would reduce the amount of land that should be parks and open
space if they knew the city would have to spend money to maintain and provide

-8-
-
police and fire protection for undeveloped land, two thirds would not reduce the size of the
undeveloped portion while a quarter of the respondents would. The remaining seven percent were
unsure.

Those most likely to reduce the portion left undeveloped included Latinos, those age 65 or more, those
for whom jobs are important and those with incomes of less than $50,000. Those most likely to keep
the percentage of undeveloped land even if city costs were involved included those with incomes of
$100,000 or more, those who wanted 50-75 percent of the land left in open space, those who wanted a
focus on residential as opposed to job-oriented development, 11-20-year Concord residents and those
willing to pay higher taxes for city services.

Respondents were asked how often they would use the open space for various activities, hiking,
running and bike trails, picnics and sports.

Nearly 80 percent of the respondents said they would use hiking, running and bike trails at least
occasionally, just under 75 percent said they would use picnic grounds and 60 percent said they would
use ball fields and sports facilities. However, trails and sports facilities would get more regular, weekly
use than picnic areas.

Attitudes toward Residential Development

Turning to the type of development that should be built, housing issues were explored in some depth.
When asked if housing in the Naval Weapons Station area should be suburban detached, single-family
homes or more urban town homes near BART and the freeway entrance leaving more open space, 52
percent of the respondents preferred the suburban approach and 23 percent preferred a more urban one.

-9-
-
However, when this 23 percent is combined with the 17 percent who preferred both a more urban look
and a suburban approach, those wanting at least some denser, more urban development is 40 percent of
the total.

This result was confirmed later in the survey when respondents were asked whether they agreed with
supporters of dense, transit oriented development or supporters of a more suburban approach.

Respondents who preferred the suburban single family detached approach tended to include residents
of the 94519 zip code, those opposed to more affordable housing, people with incomes in the $50,000
to $100,000 range, those who thought things were off on the wrong track and those who wanted more
than 50 percent open space.

Those who preferred a more urban town home approach tended to include Latinos, supporters of
concentrated, transit-oriented development and those with incomes less than $50,000.

Those who wanted both suburban and more urban housing types tended to include those who wanted
25 percent to 50 percent open space.

-10-
-
There also was strong support for a mix of housing.

When asked if there should be single-family houses, townhouses, condominiums, larger and smaller
homes and homes for rent and for sale, more than two-thirds of the respondents supported such a mix
with only a quarter opposed.

Those respondents most likely to favor a mix of housing included those who wanted both suburban and
urban housing types, those who wanted 50 percent open space and those willing to pay higher taxes for
city services. Those opposed to a mix of housing were most likely to include those who wanted more
than 50 percent open space, those who thought things were off on the wrong track and those who rated
the city’s work on the reuse project as only fair or poor.

Respondents also were asked if the city’s policy to require that 10 percent of housing should be
affordable is adequate or if the percentage should be increased.

-11-
-
Fifty-seven percent thought that 10 percent was adequate while 34 percent thought it should be
increased. Those who thought that 10 percent was adequate included residents of the 94519 zip code,
those who supported a more suburban approach, residential more than job-oriented development and
less than 25 percent open space and Republicans. Those who were more likely to want the 10 percent
increased were Latinos, renters and supporters of a more urban town home approach.

Attitudes toward Commercial Development

Respondents were asked whether retail development at the Naval Weapons Station should be designed
to appeal only to local residents or whether it should attract shoppers from a wider area. Opinion was
divided with a slight preference for offering limited shopping that would appeal to local residents.

Respondents who preferred limited shopping for local residents were more likely to include those who
wanted more than 50 percent open space, relatively frequent voters, those who preferred residential
over job-oriented development and opposed a mix of housing types. Those who wanted shops that
appeal to a wider area included Latinos, those who wanted less than 50 percent open space and
respondents who were registered to vote but had not voted in past elections.

Respondents were asked a follow-up question, which noted that 40 percent of the city’s revenue comes
from sales taxes and then again asked whether respondents would want limited shopping or stores
appealing to a wider area. There was not a significant change in responses. Forty-nine percent now
preferred limited shopping for local residents and 42 percent now favored stores that would draw
shoppers from a wider area.

-12-
-
Respondents were asked about other kinds of development.

A majority of respondents supported having a university campus, a research institute or office

buildings on the Naval Weapons Station property with more than 60 percent supporting the campus
and the institute. An outlet mall and a manufacturing plant or a warehouse received support from well
under half the respondents.

Dense Development vs. Suburban Approach

Results from earlier questions indicated that respondents preferred a less dense, more suburban look to
the Naval Weapons Station property. However, when asked if city planners’ and land use experts’ idea
of creating more density and thereby enabling more open space was a sensible point of view, there was
very strong agreement.

-13-
-
Those most likely to support the view that a denser approach enables more open space included those
who supported a more urban town home and transit-oriented approach, 50 to 75 percent open space,
job-oriented development and those who believed the city’s work planning the reuse project has been
excellent or good. Those who did not think the planners’ idea was sensible tended to include those
opposed to a mix of housing types, those who wanted 75 to 100 percent of the land left in open space
and those with incomes of more than $100,000.

When asked if respondents approved the city’s position that there must be enough development and
generation of tax revenue to pay for all city costs in providing services at the Naval Weapons Station
property, there was near unanimous approval. Eighty-five percent supported this city position and only
nine percent disagreed.

Respondents also were asked two questions about the balance between building projects that generate
employment and those that build homes. One question was whether development should emphasize
jobs and commercial development or whether the new development should retain the residential,
suburban character of Concord. The other question noted the work the city has done to rejuvenate
Todos Santos in downtown Concord and the current plans for the Weapons Station area to include a
balance of both commercial and residential development. Respondents were asked whether this
balanced approach or a greater emphasis on job-producing development was desired.

-14-
-
Results from both questions confirm the importance of balance in the nature of future development.
Respondents are equally split between those who want commercial or job-producing development and
those who want to retain a residential suburban character in the reuse area. When the concept of
balanced development was tested against a greater emphasis on job-producing development,
respondents preferred a balanced approach by nearly a two-to-one margin.

Respondents that preferred a more employment-oriented approach tended to include Latinos,

especially those who took the survey in Spanish, renters, those who preferred shops that draw people
from a wider area for the tax revenue and those with incomes less than $50,000. Respondents that
wanted to retain the city’s residential, suburban character in the Weapons Station area tended to
include those who wanted 50 to 75 percent open space, those aged 65 or more and those who wanted
stores serving the local area only. Respondents favoring a balanced approach to development tended to
include those favoring a residential emphasis on the previous question, those who thought things in
Concord were off on the wrong track, those favoring denser, transit-oriented development and those
with incomes of $100,000 or more.

Attitudes toward Traffic and Transportation

The survey included a series of questions on traffic management and public transportation.
Respondents were asked whether it makes more sense to concentrate development and traffic near the
BART station and the freeway exit or to spread development out over a wider area with less traffic
near the freeway exit and the BART station but with more traffic overall.

-15-
-
Respondents were evenly split on this relatively difficult choice between concentrating traffic and
spreading it out but having more if it. Forty-one percent favored concentrating traffic. They were most
likely to include those who also favored concentrated development and a more urban town home
approach. The 46 percent favoring spreading out but having slightly more of it included those who
took the survey in Spanish, those aged 55-to-64, those who believed things were off on the wrong track
and residents of zip code 94520.

Respondents were advised that traffic will become worse in 20 years and asked if city officials should
be given the authority to institute programs such as eliminating employer-provided free parking,
requiring larger employers to provide subsidized transit passes and fund on-site frequent shuttle service
when traffic conditions deteriorate.

Respondents strongly approved giving city officials this authority. Forty-four percent gave it strong
approval, another 27 percent somewhat approved it, nine percent somewhat disapproved and 10
percent strongly disapproved. The remaining 10 percent were unsure.

-16-
-
The final question in this series focused on the effect of development on public transit. Respondents
were asked whether they wanted development in the reuse area concentrated or spread out in more than
one area if spreading it out would help improve public transit for residents of the existing part of
Concord.

With the prospect of having more suburban “spread out development” and better public transit for
existing Concord residents, it is not surprising that survey respondents chose this option by nearly two-
to-one.

Those that preferred spread out development included a broad cross section: Latinos, those preferring a
residential rather than a more employment-oriented approach to development and those in the 18-to-34
age range. Those that preferred concentrated development were most likely to include respondents who
preferred more urban town homes and a denser transit-oriented development approach in the reuse
area.

Attitudes toward Taxes

The final two questions in the survey were on taxes. Respondents were informed that possibly the tax
revenue it receives from property owners in the reuse area may not be sufficient to pay for all the
desired public services in that area. They were asked if they would support an assessment district so
that property owners in the area could pay the additional amounts needed for city services in their area.

-17-
-
A 56 percent majority of present city residents supported the idea of an assessment district for future
residents in the Naval Weapons Station area. Those most likely to favor an assessment district included
respondents who took the survey in Spanish, those who preferred 25 to 50 percent open space and
those who preferred concentrated development. Those most likely to oppose an assessment district
included opponents of a mix of housing and those preferring 50 to 75 percent open space.

Then, respondents were asked if they would be willing to pay higher taxes for public services if those
services were provided in the existing part of the city. They split on this idea, rejecting it by three
percentage points, 42 percent for a tax increase and 45 percent against it.

Those most likely to support a higher tax included 6-to-10 year city residents and those who supported
dense, transit-oriented development. Those most likely to oppose a tax increase included opponents of
a mix of housing types, opponents of an assessment district in the reuse area and those who rated the
city’s work on the reuse project as only fair or poor.

-18-
-