Developers of two new East Bay housing developments hear that affordability is key
City Council gets first peak at plans for new housing communities on opposite sides of town.
One thing was clear at a hearing this week to gather feedback for two new proposed housing projects on opposite ends of Antioch: people want at least some of them to be affordable.
Preliminary plans unveiled to the City Council on Tuesday include a Richland Communities’ proposal to build 435 homes at the city’s southernmost edge at the 160-acre Leung property just east of Deer Valley Road. Part of the Sand Creek Focus Area, the proposal is just south of Richland’s The Ranch, where 1,177 homes are planned.
Across town, in Antioch’s older northern waterfront, DeNova Homes is asking for a rezone to construct 143 homes, including six low-cost rentals with accessory dwelling units. The project is on 17.1 acres of the former Gonsalves property, north of East 18th Street and south of the Santa Fe Railroad. Dubbed Rancho Meadows, the project includes a vineyard but it is not currently harvested, according to city staff.
Council members and residents generally were supportive of the north Antioch proposal with some exceptions about lot sizes, but had many questions for the larger developer at the city’s southern edge. The Planning Commission, which met in February, supported the affordable aspects of DeNova’s plan but not its narrow roads or small park and also questioned Richland’s proposed density, street designs and community amenities.
Devin Williams, a 22-year resident of Antioch asked about Richland’s affordability. Antioch, unlike some cities, does not have inclusionary housing policies that require developers to include affordable homes within their market-rate communities.
“I think that it’s incredible that we’re still building homes that I can’t afford,” he said. “That’s my major gripe here.”
Though no prices were given, Richland’s preliminary designs show the single-family homes ranging from 2,100 to 2,600 square feet while the clustered units are from 1,850 to 2,150 square feet.
Williams said he would like to see condos and said many residents here would love to get into homes in the area but they have long been out-of-reach.
“So we’re stuck, living with our parents, sharing rooms with roommates or having to live with relatives, which is all well and good, but you want your privacy,” he said. “You want your own space at the end of the long work day. So, I feel like if we do want more projects like this to come in the future, let’s ask the hard questions about affordability and who’s it for?”
Kyle Masters of Richland noted that the project does include 159 row townhomes as well as a recreation center, two neighborhood parks and walking trails.
Resident Andrew Becker was not impressed.
“I’m strongly against this project,” he said. “In June of 2023, another phase of The Ranch was approved. That had zero affordability commitments.”
The developer could have used state density bonus laws to increase the density of the project instead of asking for a general plan amendment, but that would have required committing to some affordable units, Becker said.
Some union construction workers, however, said they supported the development because it would bring local jobs to the area.
“It’s the right project in the right location,” Rachel Shoemaker said. “The project offers home types that complement the surrounding neighborhoods. With options for attached townhomes and clustered homes, it gives more opportunity for homeownership beyond the traditional family homes.”
Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock said she’d like to see the housing density lowered and senior and inclusionary components or credits added for more affordable homes, but likes townhomes and condos being included.
Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker said she was glad to see the project would offer opportunities for trade jobs. But she questioned amending the general plan, which hasn’t been updated since 2003.
As for affordability, “even a $550,000 mortgage is not affordable for a lot of people here,” she said.
Councilman Mike Barbanica, meanwhile, said he wasn’t ready to make a decision on the project but supported the local union jobs. The councilman said he only learned about the projects on Friday and the developers should have reached out to him beforehand.
Mayor Pro-Tem Monica Wilson said she was “torn” about the project but liked the clustered homes design.
“There’s some parts of this project I would really like if we can just get this affordability piece in place,” she said.
Acting City Manager Kwame Reed said an affordability component or inclusionary clause or in-lieu fees could be included in a final development plan.
Rancho Meadows, in north Antioch, would also require zoning changes as it is currently zoned as “planned business center.” The developer is looking for medium-density lots or 6 to 10 units an acre, Kerry Watts, a DeNova spokesman said.
Plans include 137 homes on 2,600 square-foot lots and six rental units with ADUs on 4,200 square-foot lots. The latter would be developed by DeNova Homes’ nonprofit, the Yellow Roof Foundation, and based on one’s ability to pay, Watts said.
One resident, however, questioned affordabilty of the homes that will be for sale in the planned gated community.
“There’s so many tents everywhere, with people living on the street, but yet we’re steadily building houses that people who live in houses can’t afford,” Nicole Arrington said.
Others suggested the proposed homes should have bigger lots or bigger backyards for kids to play and families to gather.
Ogorchock also wanted larger yards, and a larger park with bathrooms. Torres-Walker supported the project, but stressed the need for larger backyards even if the house footprint would have to be smaller. She also addressed affordability.
“I think what you’re hearing from people throughout the night is that there has not been enough housing for low-income, working families and I think that’s where the frustration is honestly.”
The developers for both projects will now tweak their proposals and bring back final development plans for council approval at a later date.