00:06:19 Ken Rich: This is good enough no? 00:06:56 Steve Cook: Swap displays! 00:07:35 Jeff A.: its perfect! 00:18:42 Nicole Lazzaro | XEODesign: Good question Ronnie. It’s important for the community to be informed about initiatives in progress before they are codified. The next meeting for the Oakland Design Standards (Design Review Committee is on July 24 3PM City Hall. Current Draft is here: https://www.oaklandca.gov/topics/objective-design-standards 00:18:47 Nicole Lazzaro | XEODesign: More info: https://d2t4wx04.na1.hubspotlinks.com/Ctc/2N+113/d2t4Wx04/MW-7YQFtTP2W1gfB6p3vBXJqW7swsJQ5hzYCrN7zrx1C3qn9gW8wLKSR6lZ3q5V3Tmsm2z8rCkW8WxgWC1J6QqrVQ6Byl1G84CrW8wPCDB26D8prW37jvV18SP-7JW8Z7hHg6ZXLdfN1tHNR4D-rCpN46xHfjCHc-PW95Zhhc1HLZh0W8TyWDT3lNx2GW6wFbQ35V3xMlW7D-61h5ZXNZHW2w4kT-7vq6QtW190M454RBK7VW4LcXjh5q6lk2N8nW351Y8Ch5W5L9_HD4sGN4_W1hSG3Q6DFH9XW7HXfCp2gw62mW7wZzH_4mf8YHW6GCBS01CY_ljW8Y4NwN3FpZMRW2czV2P1cWkC4W4ns_wh5ZpDgMW67SZBd63gDM-W4RhKzp8JDy3JVSJ0Vt1jJw4PVxvP6v2lLz9zf8nG3bW04 00:21:13 Rockridge Community Planning Council: To clarify: The July Rockridge News included the RCPC letter which we submitted to the City on the Objective Design Standards 00:23:47 Ronnie: I wondered about how they are applying SB423 to Oakland. 00:24:12 Joe Johnston: Thanks Stuart F! Your excellent summary at the beginning of meeting helped me to better understand recent housing laws. 00:29:35 Stuart Flashman: They aren’t using SB423, what they ARE using is its predecessor, SB 35, which allows ministerial approval of residential projects if the jurisdiction hasn’t satisfied ALL of its RHNA goals (and almost no city has). However the DENSITY of the proposed project is way above what the density, even with maximum density bonus. 00:30:39 Stuart Flashman: The height limit is now 55 ft for College Ave. (CN1) - basically 5 stories. 00:30:56 Greg Pasquali: Clarification - you can get up to 3 waivers, but unlimited concessions. Concessions are defined as things that limit the ability to fit the bonus density; waivers can be anything. Height, setbacks, parking requirements, etc are all concessions, which are unlikited 00:31:52 Rockridge Community Planning Council: Next up: Ken, Star, and Myrna 00:32:47 Jeff A.: Are they claiming all the bonuses under AB 2334 or is there a law that is more current than that. 00:32:59 Greg Pasquali: Sb35 (and 423 which is an extension of that), don’t apply in Oakland 00:34:34 Ken Rich: Greg - clarification - SB423 can apply with 50% affordable units. This project isn’t at that level. 00:37:48 Greg Pasquali: Right, thanks Ken 00:38:00 Nicole Lazzaro | XEODesign: There are single family homes very close on the south side of the property on Clifton. Not just behind the property. 00:39:31 Ken Rich: The lawmakers were tired of CEQA being used to stop otherwise perfectly code-complying projects 00:39:39 Ken Rich: Yes weaponized is the word 00:41:33 Annette Floystrup: Homelessness is a major issue, and the level of required BMR units, that is units which are 20-50% of AMI, is not addressed by the levels of BMR housing required for density bonuses. 00:44:40 Ken Rich: But Stu - not if the project is not eligible for streamlining 00:45:19 Ken Rich: If it’s not eligible, than the city will not lose a lawsuit 00:46:54 Nicole Lazzaro | XEODesign: The housing crisis is an AFFORDABILITY issue. There are currently 4,210 rentals available in Oakland on Zillow.com. This is up from 3,965 June 28, 2024. And up from 1,400 one year ago. (There are 5,490 unhoused in Oakland now up 9% from 2022 https://oaklandside.org/2024/05/15/pit-count-oakland-homeless-numbers/ 00:50:52 Annette Floystrup: Reacted to "The housing crisis i…" with ❤️ 00:50:55 Ronnie: Casey, when the CCAC dorm on Broadway was proposed, the original City analysis of the parcel location and density was incorrect. I was acting Land Use Chair and sat down with some RCPC members and we worked through the zoning to identify the issues, and informed the City. 00:51:19 Barney Smits: As a 40 plus year resident of Rockridge, I feel that Tom Dolan’s comments are valid. A building 4 times the size of any other building on College Ave. makes no sense. The bait and switch concept that some have mentioned to increase the value of the property seems possible. The Hotel without parking does seem to be the deal breaker and I would hope that RCPC and the City would take a hard stand against it. 00:51:33 Tonya: Reacted to "The housing crisis i..." with 👏 00:52:48 Greg Pasquali: The hotel USE has none of the benefits of all these state laws that apply to housing exclusively. So if zoning requires hotel to meet certain standards (eg parking), the applicant doesn’t get the “get out of jail free card” benefits 00:53:34 Star Lightner: Regional Housing Needs Assessment 00:54:32 Nicole Lazzaro | XEODesign: Is it “Market Rate Units” What about workforce housing? 00:54:33 Ronnie: This is a harbinger of the future. I think this is a great opportunity to inform the community what's going on. 00:55:14 John Hanavan: You did great 00:55:45 Annette Floystrup: Reacted to "Is it “Market Rate U…" with ❤️ 00:55:57 Stuart Flashman: Regional Housing Needs Allocation. Oakland met its market rate goal and went 50% over it. However, it failed miserably on the other three goals. 00:56:36 Annette Floystrup: Oakland has seriously UNDER built affordable housing. 00:58:25 Greg Pasquali: Oakland is IN compliance according to current real time report from CA HCD (the state agency that determines this) 00:58:31 Ken Rich: Nope Stu. The allocation was dramatically increased this time around. Oakland will not meet it. It did meet its market rate allocation in the last RHNA 00:58:57 Stuart Flashman: HCD has raised all the goals sky-high for the new cycle. That’s in spite of the state’s population actually falling over the past few years. When the new goals kick in, EVERY city will have to allow SB 35/SB 423 projects. 00:59:01 Ken Rich: But again Oakland is not “graded” until 2026 00:59:05 Nicole Lazzaro | XEODesign: The number of Market Rate housing on Zillow is 3 times than a year ago. As I recall Oakland approved only a small fraction of affordable and deeply affordable units they are targeting. They approved many times more the number of units of Market Rate units than their goals. 00:59:12 Greg Pasquali: The 8 year cycle started January 2023, so 4 years is Jan 2027 00:59:54 Jeff A.: There is also value in pointing out where we don’t feel the project meets current state law. 01:01:15 Nicole Lazzaro | XEODesign: Agree with Ronnie 01:01:20 Ken Rich: Correct, Stu - eventually most jurisdictions will be subject to streamlining for almost all projects. Maybe some will meet the allocation and not be subject. The irony, of course is that economic conditions currently won’t allow much housing to be built at all 01:02:03 Stuart Flashman: It’s important to raised noncompliance issues even if the City ignores them. It’s a necessary element before you can challenge the approval. 01:02:28 Barney Smits: Yes. pointing out that the project is not code or State law compliant is very important for notifying the city. 01:02:35 Stuart Flashman: The project has just been submitted, so there’s no posting yet. 01:03:13 Ronnie: Appeal for ministerial goes to the Planning Commission, right? 01:03:20 Jeff A.: Need a position paper on all the project aspects that do not meet current state law or are a misinterpretation of state law. That would be good for talking points and written publicizing to any community groups. 01:03:32 Ken Rich: Appeal for ministerial goes to nobody 01:05:45 Rockridge Community Planning Council: Please note - the Rockridge News does not print in August. Thus, the article will come in September 01:05:47 Jeff A.: UBA sent out an email. Are you going to work with them or work independently? Seems like some synergy here unless the two groups are not in alignment. 01:07:28 Stuart Flashman: Civil Code Section 801.5 established a right to solar access for solar power generation. It appears the project may violate that right. 01:07:31 Ken Rich: RCPC has also sent out an email re this project 01:07:53 Jeff A.: PANIL resent the UBA email. 01:08:10 Rockridge Community Planning Council: Here is the statement RCPC sent to the community last week 01:08:59 Ken Rich: I don’t understand how renting out my house for 2 weeks or a month while I go on vacation affects the housing market? 01:09:13 Rockridge Community Planning Council: https://rockridge.org/rcpc-land-use-committee-zoom-meeting-july-17-730-900pm/ 01:09:21 Rockridge Community Planning Council: See statement in the link above 01:09:48 Star Lightner: I that a significant annual cap is fine, but allowing permanent Airbnb is what should be prohibited. And there should be enforcement. 01:10:30 Star Lightner: Significant annual cap meaning you can rent out <30 days per year, for example 01:11:09 Ronnie: Ken, I have rented Airbnbs in many locations over the world. Many are illegal, were either rental units that could not be made into an Airbnb or were in a condo development. I never see units rented out that owners occupied recently. 01:11:18 Nicole Lazzaro | XEODesign: LUC Meeting. Article in RR News in Sept to inform people. Discussing the matter. Come to a decision on how to approach Oakland. The process of collecting community feedback and communication is still to be determined. My personal view is that we need to involve the community heavily. Inform and let community members know how they can participate in the process. This kind of outreach and getting community feedback is RCPC’s role. The changes in laws are so significant. 01:11:36 Joe Johnston: On a lighter note: Inside Airbnb shows a listing for an Airbnb within the boundaries of Mountain View Cemetery. 01:11:58 Star Lightner: Ronnie, we have several friends in Oakland who rent out when they're on vacation only. 01:12:12 Jeff A.: The data is most likely being misinterpreted. The total number of units rented doesnt really paint a picture of what is actually available for long term rental. 01:12:18 Steve Cook: I think there would be many more ADA-type rental units available in Oakland if not for the onerous tenant protection laws. Several people I know are unwilling to rent to anyone due to concerns regarding the inability to evict bad tenants, and requirements to pay thousands of dollars in relocation fees to evictees, etc. 01:12:27 Annette Floystrup: Reacted to "I think there would …" with ❤️ 01:12:32 Ronnie: Replying to "Ronnie, we have seve..." Good that that happens. Just not in my experience. 01:12:41 Annette Floystrup: Reacted to "On a lighter note: I…" with 😂 01:12:49 Rockridge Community Planning Council: As a reminder - The Rockridge News only prints one time per month 01:13:16 Nicole Lazzaro | XEODesign: This is the Inside Air B&B site for details that was mentioned. https://insideairbnb.com/ 01:13:34 Annette Floystrup: Reacted to "This is the Inside A…" with ❤️ 01:13:42 Ken Rich: I have rented ones that are like you describe as well as ones where the owner is just on vacation. It seems to me no more or less difficult to enforce reasonable restrictions as it is to enforce a total ban. San Francisco requires an airbnb unit to be owner occupied and limits them to 90 days per year. That seems to me a reasonable way to go 01:13:48 Steve Cook: Renting out your personal residence for 2 weeks or whatever is not the problem, it's speculators purchasing multiple units and renting them out exclusively to AirBnB clients 01:14:06 Ken Rich: Exactly, Steve Cook 01:14:11 Star Lightner: Agree. Corporate renting should be prohibited. 01:14:46 Annette Floystrup: Thank you. Save chat? 01:15:10 Barney Smits: Thanks 01:15:18 Nicole Lazzaro | XEODesign: Thank you!