SAN JOSE — Amid neighborhood backlash, city leaders have pared back one of San Jose’s most creative ideas for housing its thousands of homeless — erecting shed-like “tiny homes” for them — from 99 potential sites to just four.

Related Articles San Jose suggests ‘tiny home’ sites for homeless, neighbors balk

San Jose: New law would make city first to allow “tiny homes” for homeless The tiny homes, usually about 70 square-feet, are temporary sleeping cabins with doors and windows. Other states like Oregon have used them to house the homeless, and a bill by former Assemblywoman Nora Campos, allowed San Jose to build the unconventional structures to get people off the streets amid a housing crisis.

But finding sites for the tiny home villages — which could house up to 25 people — proved to be a major challenge. The city looked for publicly owned sites that were a half-acre in size, near transit and with access to utilities. But after an outpouring of complaints, San Jose officials added even more restrictions — 100 feet away from homes and creeks and 150 feet from schools and parks, leaving just a handful of potential sites.

“It’s a shame that we didn’t have more viable opportunities from this list,” said Ray Bramson, the city’s acting deputy director of housing. “But we were constrained because land is so hard to find in this community. Some of the major concerns that we heard were about the potential impacts, from traffic to noise to new people coming into the neighborhood. We’re trying to be respectful of neighbors and the community.”

Campos said Friday she’s “disappointed” with San Jose’s new criteria and that the city is missing an opportunity to use her bill to “lead the charge” on reducing homelessness.

Like our Facebook page for more conversation and news coverage from the Bay Area and beyond.

“They’re almost segregating homeless families from existing neighborhoods and that’s not what San Jose is about,” Campos said. “If we can do this right and not give in to NIMBY-ism, then we set the path for other cities in California to address the homeless crisis in their own communities. This sends the wrong message.”

The City Council will discuss the four remaining sites for tiny homes — Senter Road and Wool Creek Drive, Branham Lane and Monterey Road, Bernal and Monterey roads and near the Guadalupe freeway and Taylor Street — at its Aug. 29 meeting.

But there’s push-back on those remaining sites as well. Councilman Johnny Khamis said at least 30 people came to his “open house” office hours last Saturday to voice concerns about the tiny homes site at Branham Lane near Monterey Road in his district. Residents were concerned about security and the “vetting process for the homeless,” he said, fearing crime, especially related to drugs and assaults, will rise.

And Councilman Sergio Jimenez, often an outspoken advocate for the homeless, said it’s unfair that two of the remaining sites — Bernal and Monterey and Branham and Monterey — are either in or near his district. Council members last year had agreed to place tiny home communities in each of the ten council districts to equitably distribute the housing.

Jimenez said that the city’s recommendations “place the brunt of helping our unhoused residents on our District 2 community” and that he can’t allow his district to “disproportionately bear the responsibility.”

Bramson said the four remaining sites are just a start. The city will work with agencies like the county and Santa Clara Valley Water District to find other possible locations. Bramson added that the city tries to place homeless housing in every district, though they might not all be tiny homes.

Of the original list of 99 potential sites, one in particular drew fire from neighbors: A vacant lot near Thousand Oaks Park in the Cambrian district. Residents of the suburban neighborhood packed public meetings to voice opposition against putting homeless housing near their homes and the quiet park.

Get top headlines in your inbox every afternoon.

Sign up for the free PM Report newsletter.

Denise Florio, who moved to the neighborhood 13 years ago, said she’s compassionate for the homeless — she volunteers at a homeless shelter — but felt that plopping the tiny homes near her house would reduce its property value.

Under the city’s new criteria, the Thousand Oaks site is no longer an option.

“I feel like they did the right thing. It was such a foolish idea,” Florio, 44, said Thursday. “Their criteria to start with was not appropriate and I’m frustrated my neighbors had to get so upset.”

Despite the difficulties, homeless advocates applauded San Jose for pushing forward the tiny home villages.

“The reality is the homeless people are already in our neighborhoods,” said Bruce Ives, CEO of LifeMoves, the largest provider of homeless shelters and services in Silicon Valley. “The answer is we need to get them out of encampments and off the streets and get them into bridge housing like tiny homes.”