TEXT NEWSTIPS/PHOTOS - 925-800-NEWS (6397)
Advertisement
Home » Concord Community Meetings To Focus On Rezoning For High Density Housing

Concord Community Meetings To Focus On Rezoning For High Density Housing

by CLAYCORD.com
26 comments

The City of Concord is holding additional community meetings on Monday, Oct. 28 and Wednesday, Oct. 30 to discuss the properties being considered for rezoning under the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) program.

You are invited to a community meeting to learn more about this program and to offer feedback.

Attend one of the following:

Advertisement

  • Monday, Oct. 28 at 6 p.m. at Centre Concord, 5298 Clayton Rd.
  • Wednesday, Oct. 30 at 6 p.m. via Zoom – register here.

Based on the feedback we have already received from the community, the total number and location of sites being considered for rezoning has been refined. The purpose of the upcoming meetings is to receive public input on this smaller list of sites.

The properties ultimately selected by the City Council will undergo changes in allowable land uses to enable the development of residential housing at greater densities than what is currently allowed. Importantly, the rezoning program will not affect any of the land uses currently permitted on the properties under review.

As required by the State of California, the AFFH program is part of Concord’s Housing Element and commits the City to rezoning at least 20 acres in higher resource neighborhoods to allow higher density multifamily development (up to 60 units to the acre). These 20 acres will be distributed across various sized parcels within the study area.

To view the properties and learn more, please visit the AFFH web page.

Advertisement

Subscribe
Notify of

26 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

High density equates to low income.
But it doesn’t matter.
The decisions have already been made.
The people no longer have a voice.
Whoever offer$ the mo$t get$ what they want.

41
9

Concord has an obvious problem and wants/needs tax money, build build build cram as many people in a square acre as you can. Don’t worry if parking will be a problem or traffic they don’t care we need more people in Concord they yell.

25
14

WORKS925,
.
This is being mandated by the state.

19
5

Mandated my butt…

6
12

WORKS925,
.
Wrong!!! Read AB686 and AB1304 of 2021, which made changes to California’s “Housing Element” law. This is part of the “Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence” provision. These areas of East Concord, Southeast Concord, and parts of South Concord have been deemed too wealthy and having a concentrated population of individuals of European ancestry that has been deemed to high. The end goal is to lower the income/wealth levels of these areas of Concord and to change the racial demographics of these areas of Concord so that they equal/resemble the income/wealth and racial demographics of North Concord, West Concord, and parts of South Concord. If you don’t like what’s being forced on the City of Concord, then complain to State Senator Steve Glazer and the lying, crooked, corrupt, preacher and Assemblyman Tim Grayson, as he’s supported most, if not all, of the new housing requirements forced on cities and counties by the State of California.

19
1

It’s all BS, Concord can fight it but they don’t, Clayton has been fighting that same BS for years and it will never be finished, actually it’s been stalled at tree cleaning stage for years cause citizens fought it, screw that so called state mandated BS.

4
7

WORKS925,
.
The City of Clayton only updated their “Housing Element” under these new provisions of the law in 2023.

they need to even thew crime out to every area…true end goal.

4
6

Concord won’t get tax revenue, it will be subsidizing the low income apartments, right?

17

Walnut Creek does it too.
Look at the new project on Minert Rd. near Arkell – 17 homes on less than 2 acres.

3
11

I voted for Myles, he’s a local business owner, a young man and realizes that the city blew it with the recent “rent stabilization” ordinance. Even the sitting councilmembers are now saying that ordinance “needs work”, THEN WHY DID YOU APPROVE OF IT IN THE FIRST PLACE?!

Yeah, I’ve never met Myles, but he can’t be worse than Edi. Time for a change, Edi had his shot and Concord is worse, not better. Large signs don’t make you an effective politician, and having work done on the TERRIBLE roads just prior to an election does not make you effective. This should have been happening 4 years ago.

Also, Edi…why have all these illegal food trucks and parking lot restaurants been allowed to pop up on Monument? I’m embarrassed when visitors drive in to Concord and say it reminds them of Tijuana. Costco brings in thousands of cars a day down Monument and we look like the bad part of Mexico City. These food sellers don’t have to have parking, ADA requirements, food inspections, seating, restrooms, hand wash facilities, signage….Nothing. Yet Edi and the city have done NOTHING but let it mushroom. I counted 6 of these food sellers just between the city limits and Systron one weekend night. Absolutely ludicrous. The first one should have been shut down the moment they set up shop.

I don’t care about the NWS, I care about THIS district, unlike Edi.

Yeah, let’s try Myles for a change. What’s the worse that could happen? Things get better?….maybe.

41
2

Clayton rd too they are everywhere,and there is no law in sight,the police dont want to get involved in law enforcement,Concord is an embarrassment but its not east county where there is no shame and nobody cares what happens right in front of their eyes

12
9

To fout all with a brain and usher in the dirtbags

6
9

this has nothing to do with helping people its is to group together bands of liberals in areas where they need more to continue to destroy the country,this is just for voting and redistricing..pack em in and get more seats.Its just another cheat in a failing communist agenda

21
10

typo-to out…….

1
11

The concerns of hundreds of residents regarding rent control fell on deaf ears. Why would we think they’d listen to our concerns now. They have their agenda, and their constituents input means nothing to them.
How many years will the taxpayers be subsidizing these apartments?

29

15 minute cities people

12
7

So that Concord can begin looking like Vancouver, BC? 😎

4
6

I was thinking more like China and their high density housing. Ugh!

1
2

MIKA,
.
The City of Concord’s future is definitely urbanization. It was about a decade or so ago when ABAG and the MTC adopted their “Plan Bay Area,” also known as “One Bay Area,” housing plans, and the Concord City Council agreed with the plan to build enough “high-density housing projects” in downtown Concord to house 22,000 individuals. We also have the development of the former CNWS which the City of Concord estimates will house 28,000 individuals, with 27,000 permanent jobs, and a university with a population of thousands, the development of the former USN/USCG housing property to house an estimated 2,500 individuals, development of the Downtown Concord BART properties to house several thousand individuals, development of the North Concord/Martinez BART Station property to house several hundred individuals, the redevelopment of large parcel residential properies throughout the city with “infill housing to house thousands of individuals, the push to add thousands of ADU’s to existing residential properties, and now we have the state mandated rezoning of commercial properties throughout East, Southeast, and parts of South Concord to add 1,000 high-density housing units to house an estimated 2,500 individuals. The City of Concord is definitely on the fast track of changing from a suburban city to an urban city.

With all the rent control rules trying to get passed, who would want to be developing multi-family homes as a viable business. The state is trying to get this pushed through to ‘solve a problem’. Will it?.

3
5

WC—CREEKER,
.
The State of California believes for-profit and non-profit builders will use tax exempt bonds issued by the “California Public Finance Authority – Affordable Housing Bond Program” to build these “high-density affordable housing projects.”

10

“Edi Birsan; the empty hat” His silly advertising makes it easy to remember.

Building trades has to get a return on those campaign contributions or they may reduce amount of contributions.

10

Bonus density laws and amendments typical reverse racist garbage to try and unseparate the affluent areas with the non-afluent areas they tried that in the 60s with bussing school students to schools out of the more affluent areas that didn’t work back then either.

Politicians for the most part are all of the problems we are facing today is directly put on them and they’re stupid liberal ideas.

2
4

Hmm, additional utilities added to existing properties. Electrical transformers have a limited capacity to supply additional customer, refereed to as load. If new little houses are made to be all electric that’s even more of a load. As load increases and approaches transformers capacity it must be changed out to a larger transformer. Guess who gets to share the cost of that upgrade ? ? ?
.
Added traffic and where are they going to park one or two more vehicles? There are a all kinds of additional what if’s that you can be assured the politicians never even thought of. This is yet another of their EXPERIMENTS and if they are again wrong, no consequences will befall them.
.
After all, it’s not like they are spending their money.
Don’t ya just love being the ones experimented on ? ? ?
Plus you get the privilege of paying to be experimented on.
Remember democrats have never encountered a problem they couldn’t throw your tax dollars at.

Advertisement

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter!

Latest News

© Copyright 2023 Claycord News & Talk