​At issue were “impact fees,” a strategy used by local governments in California to pay for improvements associated with development, such as parks, road improvements, affordable housing, childcare and transportation alternatives. Such fees may be seen as a method to induce developers to pay for the costs of growth. The difference with our cohousing project is that future residents are developers too (with plenty of help from qualified professionals).

We started with a project designed to meet the best principles of residential development. Testimony from stakeholders and comments from Council members made the case for cohousing: higher density urban infill; residents invested in their community; walkable, bikeable, transit friendly development; market rate multifamily sustainable housing. One council member argued, as good neighbors, cohousing would make it easier to advocate for nonprofit housing developers (such as Jamboree and Mercy Housing) to build affordable housing in the future.

Tribe representatives expressed legitimate concerns about gentrification, where urban infill puts existing neighborhoods at risk. Because of a history of urban growth, when tribe representatives had been ignored and repeatedly undercounted, they came to advocate for a new, long overdue swimming pool in their neighborhood. They spoke against dividing the town between north (have nots) and south (haves). Tribe representatives recognized the importance of supporting business and technology if it meant jobs with living wages, and benefits and advocated for equity in the use of impact fees, to pay the real cost of housing. They reminded the Council that the riverine section, now called the Washington District, was once used by indigenous peoples. No doubt ancestral remains would be found there.

City staff supported us by doing their homework on this somewhat controversial issue. They had data comparing impact fees for different jurisdictions and recognized that infill development would not happen if fees (especially added to costs of construction) were prohibitive. 

In the end, it was a challenge from one of the elders who said, “how about some co-housing for us?” (The city council hears but did not reply to the public comment.)

We, Frances and Allyce, have been together since 1993 and have been legally married since 2013.  We both come from other parts of the U.S., but we have lived in Northern California for more than 35 years and consider ourselves Californians by adoption. 
 
Allyce is an attorney who spent more than 40 years representing workers and currently is a semi-retired attorney for Cal/OSHA. 
 
Frances spent 12 years as an aviation electrician, and in security and intelligence work for the U.S. Navy.  She subsequently worked in various electrical, computer, and managerial positions.  Frances is currently on VA and Social Security disability. 
 
Both of us are very involved in “tikkun olam” (“repairing the world” in Hebrew).  Frances is an active participant on our temple’s Board and its Disabled Access and Safety and Security committees.  She is also very involved with activities at the Oakland Veterans’ Center.   
 
Allyce founded and runs a weekly evening food pantry with temple volunteers at a Christian social service agency and has been involved in other interfaith community service projects.   
 
We both like working on projects with other people, as well as biking, traveling, cooking, and trying new foods.  The real team spirit at Washington Commons, as well as its location in a super-bike-friendly city, is what drew us to WCC and we’re really looking forward to moving in.  
 
Welcome, Frances & Allyce! 
We are so happy you have joined our Cohousing family!