City of Concord Asking Residents to Fill Out Housing Survey

January 11, 2014 16:00 pm · 69 comments

The City of Concord Planning Division is asking Concord residents to participate in an online survey to gather input about the current and future state of housing within the city. The survey data will be used to update the City’s Housing Element. Local governments are required to prepare and adopt a Housing Element as part of their General Plan. The Housing Element must include existing and projected housing needs, and the resources and constraints to address those needs.

The 20-question survey is available online by clicking HERE, from the home page of the City’s website at www.cityofconcord.org and in paper format at the Permit Center, 1950 Parkside Dr. The deadline for completing the survey is Monday, Feb. 10.

The City is interested to learn through the survey what residents see as the City’s most significant housing issues, how residents would address state-mandated requirements to plan for increased housing units, and what could be done to improve the City’s housing inventory.

State Housing Element law, enacted in 1969, acknowledges that, in order for the private market to adequately address housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt plans and regulatory systems which support housing development.  As a result, the successful growth of a community rests largely upon the implementation of local General Plans, and in particular, the Housing Element.

For more information, contact Senior Planner Joan Ryan, (925) 671-3370, joan.ryan@cityofconcord.org

{ 69 comments }

1 J. January 11, 2014 at 4:30 PM

Done. Taht suevry had a lto of typos and missed words.

2 Not sure... January 11, 2014 at 4:31 PM

what this means. Could this be a way of
calculating future low income housing
numbers. They will need those stats to
get as much fed. $’s possible. After more than
26 years here, I sadly think we will pull up
stakes while we can.

3 funny man January 11, 2014 at 4:36 PM

oh please, please, PLEASE city council can we have more high density housing! (and the problem tenants it brings with it)

4 The questions and answers on this January 11, 2014 at 5:06 PM

survey are slanted to towards a certain outcome. There is little room to deviate from the already concluded outcome of the survey.

Why waste the time? The decision has already been decided.

5 anonmtz January 11, 2014 at 5:27 PM

…It is the end of the whirled!

6 unknown January 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM

Use the crime rates that ought to tell where housing problems are located.

7 @Anonamtz January 11, 2014 at 5:48 PM

Not the end of the world, for sure. But I hope
the People with some equity can get out
before things drop. This has happened every
where this type of ” community planning”,
has been implemented .

8 Dredge January 11, 2014 at 6:04 PM

Selling us out to developers. Redlining.

9 Richardsfamily January 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM

It as very slanted, it wanted to to “vote” for low income housing. I voted the opposite. I for one am tired of the focus on the low income housing. That just means more money we have to pay out for them.

Not Sure.. if a survery is going to scare you into leaving this city I am surprised your still here.

10 Ian January 11, 2014 at 6:21 PM

Survey seemed like it was trying to rationalize more low income housing, high density housing, and housing development on the naval station.

11 truth January 11, 2014 at 6:25 PM

Get rid of section 8 or something

12 @family January 11, 2014 at 7:05 PM

I lived in the Ellis lake area for years,
so it’s not that, surveys, no. But watching
my property value drop, as in the last
burst, does. If you are a homeowner it
should concern you also.
We are selling this year and buying a new
home, for less than half of what our clear
title home will sell for. And 2/3 the tax burden.
Crime doesn’t scare me, but losing my
ass financially does.

13 NIMBY January 11, 2014 at 7:12 PM

This survey is NOT one that asks for input but rather directs you to answer the questions catering to the Cities already made decision to push massive structure and high density nightmares. Where is the survey that allows for an actual write in opinion not multiple choices that are designed to sway one direction?

14 Winthrop January 11, 2014 at 7:57 PM

I agree with the anti-high density housing sentiments here. Any new construction should be at least 2500 square ft and sit on a quarter acre. Anything less invites riff raff.

15 Anon January 11, 2014 at 8:17 PM

They need to stop building high density housing look at where our crime is today. The large apartment buildings with multiple families per unit breed crime and should not be allowed. My guess is the surveys will just make the trash or go to an assistants junk mail folder.

16 mutts January 11, 2014 at 8:22 PM

Is Obama behind this??

17 Agenda 21 January 11, 2014 at 8:26 PM

The plan is called “Agenda 21″ and just Google it. The plan is to have high density housing and take away our cars and shove everyone into a small area where we can walk to work and supplies. If you like the area around Todos Santos Plaza or the barrios down Monument Blvd,, no yard, a very limited life, close to your neighbors, very crowded, with government control and high crime, then it’s for you. I don’t see many takers of the apartments at 1825 Galindo Street and mostly Section 8 at the housing complex across from the Concord Police Dept..

18 Not an option January 11, 2014 at 9:00 PM

The City is required by the state to have X amount of housing. In-law units on existing lots is one way. High density is another. To get the ‘official’ regulations query the planning commission or the city council. Some info in this doc.. Page 4-5
http://www.cityofconcord.org/pdf/citygov/agendas/council/2010/1109/4A.pdf – 2010-11-05

19 @Mutts January 11, 2014 at 9:00 PM

They”The New World Order”, Rep. , Dem.,
are all behind it. It’s on Rockefellers
Money, we don’t controll anything, even
from the beginning. We can only strive to
survive.

20 Not an option January 11, 2014 at 9:14 PM
21 mutts January 11, 2014 at 9:24 PM

Key word “agenda”. It’ll be denied.

22 Caitlin January 11, 2014 at 9:27 PM

Did somebody not proof read before finalizing? I’m glad my city is so SMART!

23 eric January 11, 2014 at 9:32 PM

@ J (#1) – As a teacher, I totally agree with you. As I tried to complete the survey the bad grammar and spelling were very distracting. Of course, anyone that has looked at it or completed it can sure tell what answers they wanted people to click on. They are definitely trying to push the high density housing, low-income housing and develop the CNWS location. It couldn’t be more obvious. I completed the survey but I did my best to answer with my real (and oppositional) opinion.

24 Denise January 11, 2014 at 9:45 PM

I don’t live in Concord (WC), but I grew up in Concord, so I was curious.

What’s up with spelling and grammatical errors?

Proofreading would be nice……

25 ConPro January 11, 2014 at 9:49 PM

I’m so glad to see that some of the comments here echo mine. I was hoping I was not the only one to think that the “survey” was encouraging of low income, high density apartments. When has the solution to making a city better ever been to add more low income housing and lots of rentals? I don’t know why Concord actually wants to be the low income, renters-only city. I also agree with those here who have said the survey is poorly written and has typos. Way to be professional City of Concord.

26 Suzanne January 11, 2014 at 9:58 PM

@Agenda 21
That is some agenda.

27 Sinn Feiner January 11, 2014 at 10:41 PM

I just tried filling it out but it’s not working at all! Must have been set up by the same people running the Obama Care!

28 . January 11, 2014 at 11:24 PM

Nothing like having the questions and answers selected to guide you to what they want. Then they can say they’re “perfectly on touch with their constituents…”

Ring a bell about other local politicians?

29 RANDOM TASK January 12, 2014 at 1:28 AM

wow clear minds on this subject as many others yet the criminals still endure …..wonder why…….a ploy of course to assist their backers and secure more voters

30 Anonymous January 12, 2014 at 6:59 AM

This is a “do you walk to work or carry a lunch” survey. It will be used by the powers that be to provide their developer buddies with lucrative deals.
The open space provided by the NWS will be parceled out for section 8 housing and a few folks will get rich,

31 Just Another Concord Resident January 12, 2014 at 7:25 AM

That “survey” is nothing more than an attempt to justify some action already decided by the powers that be. I tried to ignore some questions because none of the answers reflected my opinion and was denied the ability. What a farce.

32 Shelly January 12, 2014 at 8:17 AM

What a load of crap !!! Were those typos, or just written by someone w/o a grasp on proper English? It states, the city of Concord is “required” to add 3470 units and where should they go? Multiple choice and no good answer.

33 Less is More January 12, 2014 at 9:02 AM

*12. What would be the best improvement to housing within Concord?

What would be the best improvement to housing within Concord?
• More senior housing
• More market rate rentals
• More affordable rentals (defined as affordable to households making less than 80% of area median income, for example a household of 4 with an income of less than $66,250)
•More high end, market rate housing
•More housing in the Downtown near BART
•More studio apartment
•More single family homes for sale
•More condos/townhomes for sale
•Building homes on the Concord Naval Weapons Sation

!!!!!!!!Sometimes LESS “is” MORE!!!!!!!

34 . January 12, 2014 at 9:02 AM

Sounds like these comments need to go the city council…

35 Off Barbrady January 12, 2014 at 9:35 AM

Having tome on my hands, I made a list of grammatical errors on this survey:
Question 5
Question 8
Question 10
Question 12
Question 13
Question 16
Question 17
Question 18

Did I miss any?

36 Off Barbrady January 12, 2014 at 9:38 AM

Before anyone else points it out tome should have been time. Can’t figure out how to scroll back on this new fangled phone thing to check spelling

37 Less is More January 12, 2014 at 9:47 AM

BTW…..
Who directed this survey??
Who proofed and approved this survey??
Shame on you City of Concord!!
Seems as if government smoke and mirrors has trickled down to the Concord City Counsel.
Which representative will take a stand or are their pockets too full of corporate promi$e$??

38 . January 12, 2014 at 10:03 AM

So you can “live where you worK”…..

Hey politicians, it doesn’t work that way. You née to have companies in the area first.

39 Always Right January 12, 2014 at 10:07 AM

Amateur hour at city hall. Who is Joan Ryan and why is she wasting our time with this poorly constructed survey?

I agree with the other posters. This looks like an agenda-driven survey looking for confirmation of a back room decision.

40 @#2 January 12, 2014 at 10:26 AM

We got out a few months ago and are glad to be gone from Concord. It’s swirling the drain and the City couldn’t care less about what the public really thinks. I’m surprised people didn’t jump all over you for mentioning it. There’s a pretty large contingent on here that go berserk if you point out any of the obvious problems in Concord. You’ll get called anything from paranoid to racist. So, there’s no problem in Concord, nothing to see here, enjoy your additional high density housing.

41 To the City of Concord January 12, 2014 at 10:40 AM

Since you did not invite comments on your survey, I am posting my thoughts here on Claycord.

First: please try to think holistically. Studies have found that people are happier in lower density homes, because they are quieter, more stable, less stressful, and less prone to attract transients, and criminal elements.

i realize that the State of California is pushing another unfunded mandate (or funds with strings attached) on to our already cash-strapped city, so I would like to propose an alternative. Abdicate. To find out more, contact the State of Jefferson.

If Concord joined Jefferson State, it would then have free-rein to convert high-density apartments into lower density condos.

On your survey you mention in-law units. You might need to “up Concord’s neighborhood preservation game” to ensure that the in-law units didn’t turn into overcrowded, multi-family units–that “we the City of Concord” can’t legally touch with a ten-foot pole due to the ACLU.

I get the reality that Concord has its hands tied behind its back. Concord will get the shaft, along with more bad housing. So maybe Concord could at least change its motto from:

“Where Families Come First”
to “We Build Slums, Because We Have To”

42 Anonymous January 12, 2014 at 12:00 PM

Equation :

Buillders pay politicians+Denude Wild space in weapons station=lots of section 8 housing = more crime in Concord. I think.

43 BCuzItzClaycord January 12, 2014 at 12:49 PM

High density housing = more ghetto trash/higher crime. Concord will become Richmond/East Oakland #2. Nobody of any monetary worth or of the upper middle socio-economic stratus will want to live in Concord. If you happy people of Concord think you have minor problems now just wait….you are being sold into the lower class/ghetto trash universe that high density/low income housing brings. If you can get our in the next 3-5 years do so

44 Cal January 12, 2014 at 1:40 PM
45 Silva January 12, 2014 at 2:35 PM

Yeah, what a survey! Funnels you right where they want you to go. No question with “None of the above”. Sure, while other challenged cities make great strides in improving their standards, Concord is determined to lower it’s. Let’s see, how can they turn the quickest buck? Don’t worry, they’ve got it all worked out. Do these people actually live here or, as I highly suspect, somewhere else? What do we do about it?

46 Csspaw January 12, 2014 at 4:58 PM

I agree with all the comments on the poor grammar and spelling error. Is this the image that the City Leaders want to project?

I also agree the choice of answers seemed to point to a limited set of choices and a lower standard of living. The Citizens of Concord voted in a sales tax to address the very issues that the responses would make worse.

47 . January 12, 2014 at 5:34 PM

Problem is that only the city council is elected. We gotta put up with these buffoons until they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

Then they get promoted…..

48 RANDOM TASK January 12, 2014 at 5:56 PM

what do we do …hmmm maybe oust the criminals on the council …abolish said council and fake mayor position give the power to the people ….the dems have had control of this state for 50 years and blown it ..destroying the once grand jewel of the west coast and succeeding in stealing billions from the taxpayers with bait and switch tactics as well as outright strong arming with proposed school closures …so they can fund their pet projects as well as secure contracts for their family members business and turn a blind eye to the scum that flocked here because the state decided to over tax to set up scams and under the table payoffs through tax payer and bridge toll raises as well as construction mismanagement and allowing unions to hold the state hostage for more public money to be filtered and then used to back dems to further their corruption and fleecing of the state ……….the dems are turning this state into a breeding ground for illegals who vote dem with their forged documents in return gain free money ..benefits…schooling…as well as housing as long as they vote dem the hand outs keep flowing ……and your surprised when the city of concord wants to sell the city to the highest bidder who will build more section 8 housing and commercial building all with tax loop holes that the middle class has to pay for ………..yeah great by the way #35 …you missed your own ……? lol just like a dem for shame the rest and tell them to not pay any attention to what they are doing wrong ……….so where do we send the check a shell company or rather front that is supposed to aid the hungry and homeless ……….lol ..your jokes are old and yet still you ask us to laugh

49 Not an option January 12, 2014 at 6:15 PM

You need to stay vigilant. Go to council and planning commission meetings. Use the public comment time to voice your opinions in person so it makes the official record. This does not need to be on the agenda to speak about it.

At one time when the City was looking at run down shopping centers to use in this process, the Estates center was on the list. The neighborhood association was all over it and it was either taken off the list or moved way down.

50 @Random task January 12, 2014 at 6:20 PM

Ronald Reagan( Repulican) did more to hurt
this state and country than Nixon(Republican)
did. Your posts are ranting and illogical.
As citizens we need to hold these Politicians,
On either side,more personally responsible
for how they represent their constituents.
Just bashing Unions, Liverals, etc., makes
you come off as fanatical.
And furthur more, ” n’ya n’ya”!
GO NINERS GO NINERS GO ALL THE WAY!

51 Silva January 12, 2014 at 7:18 PM

Not an option #49; yes, that is what we have to do, if we don’t want Concord sold down the river. I’ve been through this several times before in Oakland. It is very effective to go to their meetings and let them see and hear you. Learn what they have planned and how it’s going to affect you. They work for US.

52 Miguel January 12, 2014 at 7:23 PM

@ Random Task—48

Put down the pipe. And they say drugs destroy the mind?

53 Sunnymoon January 12, 2014 at 8:09 PM

One of the questions proposes the way to improve the city to build transitional housing. Really?? Really?? Who would vote for such thing?

54 . January 12, 2014 at 10:03 PM

#53…

WTH is “transitional housing”? Are those flophouse hotels with monthly rates….kinda like in the SF Tenderloin?

55 The4thBore January 12, 2014 at 10:48 PM

Downtown Concord near Bart could use some lofts similar to those next to the PH Bart station. Urban dwellers looking to save some coin from properties in Emeryville, Oakland, Berkeley, WC, and PH like these types of props as they are modern, spacious, and low maintenance compared to SFH’s. Concord has little to no nightlife entertainment, and these loft/mixed use apartments cater to more of the demographics that would support those businesses.

56 Marcus January 12, 2014 at 11:32 PM

@ . 54

Transitional housing is for homeless people, usually with alcohol or drug problems.

Men who are recently released from prison with substance abuse problems would be a good example.

Have you ever seen Building a Solid Foundation (Oakland) solicit for money in front of 99 Cent store on Clayton/Bailey?

They’re in a Christian Transitional Housing program.

57 @Fourth Bore January 13, 2014 at 5:18 AM

Night life? What, like more lil’wayne concerts?
This is exactly the point, I don’t mind things
being quiet here. Why would we want the
riff-raff associated with ” The Clubbin” scene?
People can’t behave with anything close to
self restraint as it is. Would we really want to
furthur stress an already strained Police Dept?
More crappy restaurants, and the low wage
jobs?
The City has lost it’s direction, and forgotten
it’s History.

58 . January 13, 2014 at 7:24 AM

@marcus #56….

Thanks – I had not heard of that term before……other than in SF, which other connotations. Just wanted to make sure…

59 . January 13, 2014 at 7:31 AM

@#55 and #57….

I think #57 hit it on the head. Concord has no viable/realistic/well-thought-out long term plan. They’re in a knee-jerk reactionary mode, except when it comes to developers. Then they come out of the woodwork in an attempt to make it look like they’re doing something.

They need to develop a long-term plan that has some focus on planned growth and development (and not just implementing ideas without planning). Implementing without thoughtful (and open) planning is a recipe for disaster….. and until the politicians get out of the developers’ pockets and can think for themselves, I don’t see it happening. Concord will just continue reacting and attempting to copy xxxxxx without thinking.

There’s more to life than a larger tax base….

60 RANDOM TASK January 13, 2014 at 7:47 AM

please the dems have run this state for 50 years ….but I guess you know that and like the way it is going so ….carry on as usual it is fine so far right. The fact that you can nopt see past your speculation of how I may be or come off is a reflection of your own agenda and bias. The simple task of bringing things to light in an open forum and establishing a beneficial objection to the norm may be beyond the scope of most. Not to fear I am ablaze with sympathy and empathy as to your delusions. Smile your on TV……!

61 Silva January 13, 2014 at 7:48 AM

@Sunnymoon #53; I seriously doubt any of this will be put on any ballot for the general public to vote for or against. It will be done by the City Councel and Planning Commission in their meetings (open to the public) and THEY will decide. If we don’t want this to happen, we MUST go and tell them so. As previously stated by #49, it they have time allotted for puplic comments, and it does not need to be on the agenda, so we can go to their meetings and sign up to speak, and tell them what we want, and what we DON’T WANT. We must appear in substantial numbers, four or five of us won’t cut it for this citywide issue. THEY work for US.

62 RANDOM TASK January 13, 2014 at 7:58 AM

@59 ty for that post ……this city is trying to copy instead of setting our city apart. The officials have no idea what they are doing accept for fleecing our dollars to further their time in office to keep up their cozy freebee style of living as they waste our resources ( money , outlook, city pride, potential ) for some press and kickbacks. So far it only took 5 years for them to drag our city into crime ridden demise.

63 Jim January 13, 2014 at 8:53 AM

Look at Question #8…read 3rd response…Can you say “spell check”….bonehead mistake

64 Julie January 13, 2014 at 9:50 AM

When I grew up in Concord in the 60′s and 70′s, people loved our town. I went to Clayton Valley, and there was very little crime at the time, at least in our part of town.

Granted, certain parts of Concord have gone downhill, especially Monument corridor. But Monument and Solano were never that nice anyway.

We live in WC so I’m not as concerned as would be if we still lived there. But I don’t think Concord has gotten as bad as people think.

Stay out of certain areas, and if you can’t tolerate Concord anymore, you can always move.

65 Idiocracy January 13, 2014 at 10:24 AM

What kills me about concord are the 100′s of homeless and unchecked punks roaming clayton to monument. Concord needs more cops. I say a BIG no to anymore low income housing… Are you kidding me Concord City Council? More broke families and broken homes with no values is the last thing Concord needs. Clean the darn City up! Geez give me 30 police and 20 ICE agents I’d have the streets swept cleaner than Danville! What is the Tactic Concord ? Let trash roam the streets? Get some Beat cops (25 of em) patrolling Monument and can we check citizenship while we are at it? It is still illegal to be here illegally last time I checked

66 . January 13, 2014 at 11:38 AM

Hey City of Concord….

Are you reading this?

This is one way you can really guage the opinions of the residents!

67 Sick and tired January 13, 2014 at 8:27 PM

Why don’t they focus on cleaning Concord up? Clayton road looks ghetto with stores putting their merchandise outside. Buildings in need of paint. Most buildings look like they are ready to fall down. Upgrade Concord! NO MORE APARTMENTS OR RENTALS WE HAVE MORE THAN OUR SHARE! I have lived in Concord for 50 years, use to be proud to say I live in Concord. Now I avoid telling people where I live, might as well say Pittsburg.

68 old concord January 13, 2014 at 9:09 PM

The next vote please put new people on city council . Stop the agendas .

69 Silva January 14, 2014 at 2:17 PM

If you don’t agree with the further distruction of Concord as we know it, you’d better get involved.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: