|
By Ketta Brown
There is much talk about the proposed — but yet to be formally submitted — plan for the Neighborhood Congregational Church property at St . Ann ’ s and Glenneyre Streets .
Having observed this process as the former chair of the Housing and Human Services Committee , I would ask folks to pause and consider this topic from a broader perspective . What if we stopped to look at the risk of uncertainty versus the sure thing ?
The sure thing proposed by NCC is contributing an ideal site for 72 units of much-needed housing stock where families and individuals
|
can live and become part of our community . It ’ s a start at chipping away at the city ’ s required 394 low — and moderate-income living units by 2029 under the state Housing and Community Development directive for each community to help alleviate the dire housing shortage statewide .
The initial NCC presentation was a bit of a rush job , attempting to qualify for a possible state grant of $ 2.5 million . In that the actual details of the project were unclear , it ’ s perfectly reasonable that neighbors and others would be concerned due to the uncertainty over what was actually being proposed .
I suggest everyone take a beat and await the more specific description that NCC and Related California will provide . Worries over height , unit composition , and myriad other concerns just may dissipate with the submitted project . The actual proposal will answer many questions , and that will take time . Then , the “ normal ” design review process can ensue , with , hopefully , thoughtful discussions between the neighbors and the church .
A word of caution for those anxiously pressing to stop the project or scale it back to the point where it is untenable : be careful what you
|
wish for .
The proposed project is a joint effort by an ethical , communitysensitive church and a reputable , experienced developer with an excellent track record .
As to the unabashedly unkind , classist words that have been expressed about who will live here , I will avoid the urge to scold and instead offer facts . The thing about affordable housing is this : to become a tenant is like winning the lottery . There is absolute compliance with the rules and almost zero turnover . Tenants do not want to risk eviction . These properties are perfectly maintained to comply with funding contracts .
We do know that NCC does not have the resources to support the existing plant . Therefore , there is certainty that there will be a change of use on this site . If the proposed project is not allowed to go forward , what other kind of change of use could occur ? The property is extremely valuable . It is doubtful that the city would spend $ 5 to $ 7 million to buy the site , demo the buildings , and – what ? Perhaps build a new city pool , with parking ? Maybe throw in a couple of pickleball courts ?
The church would likely sell to
|
a developer for top dollar . That developer would seek to maximize the economics , possibly adding higher-density residential and added commercial . These days , a California developer can be very patient , able and willing to take years to obtain the entitlement . All the lawsuits necessary for a developer to get what it wants take time .
During that time , the lovely but empty church would sit there , a white elephant signaling our failure as a community to agree that housing and community are priorities .
While the type of project may or may not impact home values , uncertainty about future use will significantly affect property values . We have seen this occur with the state ’ s change allowing second-story ADUs , which could block views and have no power from the city to stop . Buyers are now cautious about future views being blocked by a second-story ADU . Unintended consequences bite .
Suppose the empty church sits there for five to seven years without certainty about what will happen . In that case , prospective home buyers will be very cautious . The NCC
BROWN , PAGE 18
|