Walnut Creek council affirms planning commission, approves 422‑unit Mitchell Townhomes 4–1 with dust‑mitigation and notice conditions

The Walnut Creek City Council on April 7 denied two appeals and approved the Mitchell Townhomes project, a 422‑unit townhome development in the Shadelands executive park, ratifying the Planning Commission’s decision and certifying the project’s environmental impact report by a 4–1 roll‑call vote.

Staff presented the project as a 22‑acre redevelopment of an underused office park into 82 buildings with 422 three‑story townhomes, 955 parking stalls, and 55 low‑income units—roughly double the city’s inclusionary requirement. Senior Planner Simmer Gill told the council the EIR found potential impacts but that mitigation, monitoring and reporting provisions would reduce those impacts to less‑than‑significant levels.

Appellants raised legal and technical objections. Steve Elster of Friends of Walnut Creek argued the city should not have processed the application under the state "builder’s remedy" framework and asked for a supplemental traffic analysis and a senior‑living alternative. Elster said, “We’re not here to oppose housing,” but urged fuller review and broader notice. Mike Heller, speaking for ViaMonte residents, pressed for stronger protections for seniors across Shadelands Drive, asking for an “8‑foot solid dust barrier,” advance notice of asbestos removal and demolition dates, and continuous air‑quality monitors.

Project representatives and the environmental consultant defended the EIR and the proposed mitigations. Jonathan Fern of Signature Development described project changes made after community input—revised open‑space design using subsurface stormwater cells, added trees and widened sidewalks—and said the applicant would follow asbestos and hazardous‑materials protocols and hire qualified demolition contractors. Jackie Winkel, the EIR air‑quality scientist, said the analysis required Tier 4 construction equipment for heavier machines and Bay Area Air District best practices for fugitive dust; she told the council that “Tier 4 construction equipment reduces PM2.5 emissions by more than 90%.”

After public testimony from dozens of residents and organizations on both sides—ranging from ViaMonte seniors concerned about particulate exposure to housing advocates and labor unions urging approval—the council debated several targeted conditions. Council approved staff’s recommendation to deny both appeals and imposed two additional conditions agreed to on the record by the applicant: (1) install an 8‑foot green‑screen (non‑porous) construction fence along Shadelands Drive during demolition and major earthwork, and (2) provide written advance notice of demolition and major grading activities to the property owner/manager of ViaMonte so the facility can notify residents.

The final roll call was Mayor Pro Tem Francois Aye, Council member Silva Aye, Council member Darling Aye, Council member Divini Aye, and Mayor Kevin Wilk No. Wilk said he opposed the approval until a supplemental directional peak‑hour traffic study is prepared and considered as part of broader planning work, but his dissent was insufficient to change the outcome.

The vote authorizes certification of the EIR and the project entitlements subject to the conditions recorded in the resolutions and errata. Next procedural steps include finalizing conditions of approval and permit processing; the project team indicated some office buildings would remain occupied during phased demolition and construction and committed to a construction liaison for ViaMonte. The council’s decision ends the appeal before the city but leaves open ongoing community oversight of demolition and construction mitigation and a request by the mayor for further corridor traffic analysis in the city’s planning process.