By Tony Hicks – The Walnut Creek City Council wants to proceed with at least one six-home development of micro-houses through a special permitting process instead of creating a new zoning designation, to give the concept a test drive.
The council took no formal action on a proposal to build a half dozen home for low-income residents in the parking lot of Tice Valley’s Grace Presbyterian Church just outside Rossmoor, as no official application has been filed with the city.
Tuesday’s presentation to the council was a joint effort between the city’s homeless task force and the groups its working with, including HomeAid of Northern California, Firm Foundation Community, and Hope Solutions (formerly Contra Costa Interfaith Housing).
“The (housing) crisis, you’re aware of it. It’s exponential,” said Jake Medcalf, the founder of Firm Foundation Community and the lead pastor at First Presbyterian Church in Hayward, which hosts a similar development. “Every person we get housed, two more are becoming homeless. That’s the reality that we’re facing.”
A city staff report for the meeting said declining state and federal resources has helped fuel the Bay Area’s housing shortage, which is one of the worst in the United States.
As a result, more cities are turning toward micro-housing, including Oakland, Berkeley, Hayward, and Livermore.
Sections typically come from a factory and are assembled on concrete slabs at a site. Some have small kitchens and restrooms, while others have only living areas and rely on communal resources. Buildings are held to state building and fire standards, and residents are screened by partner organizations specializing in helping low-income and homeless people.
Each unit would shelter one or two people. Monthly rents would not exceed rents that are affordable to households earning up to 50 percent of area median income. Construction costs typically come from a mixture of private and public sources.
Though there’s no formal plan yet, Tice Valley residents showed up to express concern over potential crime, drug use, and property values. Mayor Kevin Wilk had to halt the meeting at least twice over comments from the small audience.
“I think the concerns are real but I do think that with some time, and the vetting process does work itself out,” Medcalf said, who described similar concerns from the Hayward community when his group built a similar project there, near the church’s daycare program. “Even after 12 months, we had zero calls for (police) service and zero issue with parents.”
Mark Burnham, pastor at Grace Presbyterian in Walnut Creek, said the church wants to reach out to neighbors.
“We’re very excited about the possibilities of this project,” Burnham told the council. “We still have some processes to go through – getting approval and getting word out to (neighbors) about details.”
All five council members endorsed the idea of the city using a special permitting process, rather than creating a new zoning classification. Cindy Darling said nearby residents had similar concerns when the city approved a winter shelter in the armory downtown, which the city addressed by scheduling regular meetings to hear from neighbors.
“It ended up being something that really worked … nobody goes to that meeting anymore because nobody thinks it’s a problem,” Darling said.
The staff report said, if everything proceeds as planned, the project could officially apply for a development application this fall.
30 comments
To bad for homeowners and businesses more city taxes to pay for it.And don’t say it’s a special fund from the government.It’s coming out of you pocket.
MicroBrew > MicroHome
First of all, I do not like the idea of these micro-neighborhoods springing up in parking lots. Let’s get real – somebody is making $$$ off of this and it’s going to create more filth, crime and another eye-sore in the cities. But beyond that, I’ve never gotten the point of these “tiny homes” in any situation. Wouldn’t basic, travel trailers be better? They’re self-contained, roomy, and easily movable. What is the point of these silly doghouse-looking things?
.
The above written by a typical NIMBY stricken by fear?
.
Exactly! Follow the money ….
@Exit 12A, Politicians are the ultimate NIMBies. The only reason they approve this stuff is because it won’t ever touch them.
I believe politicians should be first in line living with what they approve. Let’s put the micro-houses for the homeless in the driveways of the WC city council and see how they like it.
@ Exit 12A – Not quite sure what you saw in my post that makes you think that I am “stricken with fear”. However, you are correct in your assumption that I have a backyard. Those of us who are stable residents, and have backyards, usually care about their community and want a safe, clean environment. Perhaps you look at it from a different perspective. I can only assume that under “Exit 12A” is your permanent address.
.
A special land use permit is decided on case-by-case basis. There will be conditions of approval, operational standards, compliance checks, and likely a time limit on its existence. Renewal of the permit is subject to a public hearing and yes, public comments.
.
Faith-based and non-profits are better qualified to handle homelessness than government programs where administration and oversight is more or less a paperwork exercise rather than actually helping people. The usual excuse by government is a lack of funding. Again, faith-based organizations and non-profita usually make every dollar count. A hand up is better than a handout.
.
The other option is to do nothing and continuance of people living under bridges, along the creeks, and other public places. Is the status quo acceptable to you? This is a much better alternative to doing nothing.
.
As stated in the article, the winter shelter at the armory was greatly feared by the local residents… crime, vagrancy, and diminished property values were all cited and none of that came to fruition due to careful management by the sponsor (Trinity Center) and periodic checks by the WC Planning staff. The WC Planning Commission does an excellent job at reviewing these types of land use applications. How many of you ever attended a hearing and actually listened how each member comes to his or her decision?
.
“Follow the money”? That kind of myopic thinking really clouds objective reasoning. Faith-based organizations depend on donations and fundraising. None of the Councilmembers are members of that church nor the non-profit. There is no “there” there…. only your fear and baseless conspiracy theories exist in that vacuum.
.
Respectfully, Exit 12A
I am 100% in favor of doing whatever it takes to assist disabled people, foster children, veterans, seniors, mentally ill individuals, and, even, animals in need of care. In other words, anyone who is in need of help through no fault of their own. But when a person chooses to abuse drugs or alcohol and live in a tent – I find it the same as people who choose a life of crime. Sorry, but I have no sympathy for either.
I voted for no one on that council and this is another reason exactly why…
Unbelievable the mental instability they all have.
WC you now deserve what you get voting these infandels in.
This is unbelievable. I feel for the Rossmoor residents and surrounding businesses when the transients come out to play. The Church will lose money when people are afraid to come. Why can’t these be built on a hillside somewhere out of residential areas?
Walnut Creek rents are so out of control and that’s what should be addressed. All those ugly overpriced multi-coloed pillboxes downtown, that not many can afford.
More lawsuits on the horizon!
The real story is PC(USA) is losing members to PCA due to their liberal policies and see this as a way to virtue signal to a younger generation. The problem is the young families are gravitating to the more traditional PCA, since PCA maintains the traditions the young people remember from their own childhoods.
Go woke, go broke applies to religion as well.
.
Faith-based organizations and non-profits, with special use permits and operational standards, are reasonable processes for this temporary land use. There will likely be periodic reporting and compliance checks.
.
Would you all rather have the homeless residing under bridges, in parks, and along the side of the road like Oakland? Is it not better to give this people a hand up rather than a handout?
.
Think about it.
.
Let’s do it right after Concord and Pleasant Hill, otherwise this will just draw their homeless to Walnut Creek.
108RS
A hand up instead of a handout, and equality versus equity.
A hand up and equality are altruistically motivated.
Perhaps you can explain the difference to our Governor and other elected officials. They prefer hand outs and equity as they are politically motivated.
Thought about it Bad idea!
How does the city council even think Hayward is comparable to Walnut Creek? Obviously the homes aren’t being set up in their neighborhood. .
I was an Alameda County paramedic for a long time. Even in the ’90s, Hayward was a very violent city. It hasn’t changed much either.
The behavior of government officials never ceases to amaze. Hayward is not Rossmoor. What does it even mean they are testing this? So they have the arrogance to experiment with an older population’s health, safety, and investments? Why not just wait and see how places like Arcadia in southern California work out, but no, its trendy and progressive so lets do it as long as the politicians themselves do not suffer the consequences. I’ve been in planning meetings on other issues and you just cannot make someone care or show good judgement.
This council of loons sounds like they think having homeless people take over Civic Park is just fine because “nobody is complaining”
Really? Do they read Claycord?
WTF?
I encourage them to take Bart over to West Oakland and gaze at all that undeveloped land crying out for a large multi faceted project to house and employ homeless and low income people
It doesn’t need to be here
WC is built out for the most part and they need to get over it
The gravy train has departed
The Marxists want to make a political statement and insert disruptive elements into the community
They don’t care about housing homeless
Get real
I love it when the Democrats who vote for these type of social policies don’t want it in their backyard. You get what you vote for….
It’s not only Walnut Creek, it will be coming to your neighborhood too. Newsom is spending $12 billion of our tax money on the homeless. He said anybody that is homeless is welcome to California, that they will be taken care of. Think about not only American citizens that are homeless, think about all the illegal migrants that will be heading to California.
This act is nothing more than revenge, it’s Newsom’s way of getting even to the Californian’s that are recalling him. He really is an evil man.
Well, now… Mr. Medcalf (though a man of cloth and all that) is being less than honest.
First, there are only 6 units in the parking lot of his church in Hayward.
Second, all of them are fully plumbed, wired, and have small kitchens. That’s a far cry from sheds with a shared kitchen and bathroom, is it?
Third, Hayward site is specifically designated as transitional housing. Meaning that the residents will be allowed to stay for up to 18 months and booted afterwards. The idea is that after the first quarter half of their rent ($400/month) will be deposited into a savings account, so by the end of 18 months they’ll have $6000 in savings to cover first/last/deposit on a market-rate apartment. And presumably live happily ever after.
The only question is, if these people became homeless because they couldn’t afford market rent before, how would they be able to afford it 18 months later? Crickets…
So in all likelihood this housing in Hayward is indeed “transitional” – from homelessness to homelessness. But Mr. Medcalf won’t tell you that, will he now?
There goes that neighborhood.
Money would be better spent on training for jobs, no excuses everybody can do some kind of work, love people but what a dumb idea to build shacks.
We all knew this would be the case. The left wishes to destroy the relative peace and safety of the suburbs, it has been an openly stated goal since at least the Obama administration.
Typical of liberals destroy tradition and impose your whacked beliefs on others to virtue signal. Exit 12a is either in on the grift or missing a screw or two and nice try flexing your lib speak lol your quite the gibberish spokesperson. Bottom line council and libs is most ppl move to the suburbs to escape city lifestyles do you understand that? Stop converting concord, pleasant hill, and wc into Oakland or Hayward… we don’t want that nonsense those city’s are dumps.
Did we elect groups like HomeAid of Northern California, Firm Foundation Community, and Hope Solutions (formerly Contra Costa Interfaith Housing) to come in and solve what they consider our community problems? When they approach the council that we elected, the council should tell them to take a hike. The council should be listening to what the voting public of walnut creek is asking them to sole. Not some outside bunch of advocates.
Welcome ALL homeless to Walnut creek (get out of my town) ! they will house you and care for you!!!
Great idea. This will be ideal because the predatory less Will be within walking distance of Rossmor and the vulnerable older adults living there. Just wait for the burglaries and assaults to go through the ceiling. The Walnut Creek City council is literally selling their people out.
Comments are closed.