9.4 15-0357 Subject: Amendments To Transitional And Supportive Housing Regulations
From: Planning & Building Department
Recommendation: Conduct A Public Hearing And Upon Conclusion Adopt An Ordinance, As Recommended By The City Planning Commission, Amending The Oakland Planning Code To: 1) Change Transitional And Supportive Housing Regulations To Comply With State Law; 2) Revise Regulations For Secondary Units; And 3) Make Miscellaneous Minor Changes In Various Chapters Of The Planning Code, And Make Appropriate California Environmental Quality Act Determinations
Families will not have to leave their homes and neighborhoods when they retire or find that their incomes can no longer pay for rising housing costs. The addition of added units will help to prevent rental costs from continuing to skyrocket. This will contribute to diversity in the ages of Oakland residents, rather than Oakland becoming a city of affluent, middle-aged, successful professionals. There is strength and vitality in diversity. Affordability will also contribute to maintaining ethnic, racial and economic diversity among Oakland residents. There will be more continuity and stability in Oakland—people growing up here as children can stay and/or return as young adults, and elders will not be driven out when they retire without the benefit of a huge pension fund. Parking problems are here to stay; improved mass transit and increased services that are accessed by pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods are the needed, forward-thinking strategies to address parking problems.
I own a home in the Piedmont Ave neighborhood. I noticed that the secondary units map (Attachment D) does not include parts of the Piedmont Ave area served by AC Transit's Transbay bus. That Transbay bus service was not initially identified as a "Rapid Transit line," which is not explicitly defined, is an unfortunate oversight because nothing epitomizes this type of service better than Line C, which has a stop less than 2 minutes away from my house. It makes limited stops and bypasses congested traffic lanes on the Bay Bridge to drop off passengers in Downtown SF. My neighbors and I have taken this service to SF for years. Our proximity to Piedmont Ave also means our area's residents make more walking trips than most Oakland residents and with the development changes coming to the Rockridge Shopping Center, it is even more clear that new residents can also live a car-free or car-light lifestyle. Please amend the map to include Piedmont Ave blocks served by Transbay Bus Line C at least.
In a neighborhood already short of parking, reducing requirements for offstreet parking in developments in the Longfellow neighborhood near MacArthur BART would be a mistake.
On social media, my neighbors repeatedly lament their cars being vandalized and looted when parked on the street.
As garages have been lost to in-law units, more people are crowded together with less and less available off-street parking. The neighborhood needs more off-street parking, not less.
Creating cheap, dense housing may help satisfy the desire of San Franciscans to find more affordable housing in the East Bay and enrich developers, but does little for current Oakland residents.
I urge you to vote no on this short-sighted initiative.
Families will not have to leave their homes and neighborhoods when they retire or find that their incomes can no longer pay for rising housing costs. The addition of added units will help to prevent rental costs from continuing to skyrocket. This will contribute to diversity in the ages of Oakland residents, rather than Oakland becoming a city of affluent, middle-aged, successful professionals. There is strength and vitality in diversity. Affordability will also contribute to maintaining ethnic, racial and economic diversity among Oakland residents. There will be more continuity and stability in Oakland—people growing up here as children can stay and/or return as young adults, and elders will not be driven out when they retire without the benefit of a huge pension fund. Parking problems are here to stay; improved mass transit and increased services that are accessed by pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods are the needed, forward-thinking strategies to address parking problems.
I own a home in the Piedmont Ave neighborhood. I noticed that the secondary units map (Attachment D) does not include parts of the Piedmont Ave area served by AC Transit's Transbay bus. That Transbay bus service was not initially identified as a "Rapid Transit line," which is not explicitly defined, is an unfortunate oversight because nothing epitomizes this type of service better than Line C, which has a stop less than 2 minutes away from my house. It makes limited stops and bypasses congested traffic lanes on the Bay Bridge to drop off passengers in Downtown SF. My neighbors and I have taken this service to SF for years. Our proximity to Piedmont Ave also means our area's residents make more walking trips than most Oakland residents and with the development changes coming to the Rockridge Shopping Center, it is even more clear that new residents can also live a car-free or car-light lifestyle. Please amend the map to include Piedmont Ave blocks served by Transbay Bus Line C at least.
In a neighborhood already short of parking, reducing requirements for offstreet parking in developments in the Longfellow neighborhood near MacArthur BART would be a mistake.
On social media, my neighbors repeatedly lament their cars being vandalized and looted when parked on the street.
As garages have been lost to in-law units, more people are crowded together with less and less available off-street parking. The neighborhood needs more off-street parking, not less.
Creating cheap, dense housing may help satisfy the desire of San Franciscans to find more affordable housing in the East Bay and enrich developers, but does little for current Oakland residents.
I urge you to vote no on this short-sighted initiative.