Questions by the North Hills Phoenix Association

Our area is largely built up; what remain are mostly ‘hard-to-build’ lots surrounded by existing homes.  Our streets are narrow and winding and offer little parking.  The current trend is to permit construction of huge homes without on-street parking. Visitors to these homes crowd the streets, burden neighbors, and create a safety hazard.  How would you address this problem? Would you support rules to limit house size as it relates to lot size? Would you support requiring additional safe parking on narrow streets?

Ron – I am aware that many people feel developers are currently given preference. Given the complaints I hear from developers, it may be that neither group is being properly served.   

My understanding is that the city provides two classes of plan approval service: expedited (for a substantial additional cost); and normal.  Typically, developers are more likely to be able to take advantage of the expedited service.  The Alameda County Grand Jury investigated the expedited service two years ago and found a number of irregularities.

I have a strong belief that city services need to be delivered competently, fairly and equitably to all residents.  This means that delayed or inadequate processing is unacceptable for either individual residents or developers. 

I am a strong supporter of development in Oakland. One serious limitation is the lack of clear rules for project approvals. Far too many proposals are treated as variances and wind up being processed through the Planning Commission and then subject to the political intervention of the Council.  A major priority is to develop clear and transparent rules for all development activity that clearly define what is, and is not, acceptable in the various parts of the city.

After the fire, the city was lax in imposing restrictions on new building.  Homes were substantially overbuilt for the sites, views weren’t protected, and the character of the homes and neighborhood was substantially transformed.  In part, insurance settlements provided incentives for this overbuilding and there was pressure on the city to allow for expedited rebuilding without sufficient concern for regulations on house/lot ratios and parking. 

I’m not clear why this process has continued.  My preference is to limit house/lot size ratios and to require substantial off-street parking.  I am particularly concerned with emergency preparedness in the broadness sense, and we need to ensure that streets are passable in times of emergency.  In 1991, a number of deaths resulted from people being trapped by blocked, narrow roads.  Since we can’t predict when those emergencies will occur, we need to ensure that streets are passable at all times, which will require providing for additional off-street parking.  As a frequent visitor to homes of friends on these narrow streets without sufficient, or at times any, parking, I’m well aware of the concern.  

During the campaign, I have been calling for a major re-study of the general plan as well as zoning and building regulations.  Oakland needs a coherent vision of its future development.  The current reality of routine variances and ad hoc land conversions in response to specific developer proposals is no way to guide Oakland’s future.  As important, local communities need to be actively involved and empowered in the decisions which affect their communities.

Ignacio – As elected officials, it is our responsibility to balance the goals and rights of property owners, existing residents, and neighborhood organizations.  In the Oakland Hills, there are special challenges with proposed developments, so we must be extra vigilant to balance all considerations.   Public safety should be the highest priority, including protection from fire hazards, landslides, and traffic accidents.  As a homeowner for decades in Oakland, I know firsthand that we have invested a lot of time, money, and “TLC” into our homes.  As Mayor and the C.E.O. of our city government, I will have a greater ability to protect existing homeowners from developments that are not good for Oakland.

As you may know, I supported an increase in the design review powers for existing residents throughout City Council District 1 which includes the North Hills (also known as S-18 or “mediated design review”).  For one and two-unit residential proposals, neighbors can now review architectural plans before the owner submits them to the City.  In addition, the City offers a mediation process to resolve disagreements with minimal time and cost. 

I also believe we can simplify the design review guidelines, so that it is more clear to homebuilders and our own Planning Staff what is required for a good project.  The important issues of safety, parking, views, privacy, solar access, and the input of the neighbors should not be obscured by a mass of regulations.

Yes, I would support limiting the house size so that it makes sense based on the lot size.  If a lot is hard to develop because of the land’s topography or if the streets are particularly narrow, we should require additional mitigation measures to ensure adequate safety and parking.   We should also explore the concept of “Floor Area Ratios” (F.A.R.) used by many cities to limit development in certain areas.   Using this quantifiable tool, both homebuilders and neighbors would know upfront the maximum house size allowed on hard-to-develop lots. 

Nancy – I believe that the city could and should have been getting better community benefit agreements from our developers. I have proposed an inclusionary zoning ordinance for several years. Now that I have articulated its importance on the campaign trail, suddenly the council president is speaking in favor of it. Behind closed doors he is drafting an ordinance with two other council members and the advice of developers, rather than getting input from the community as I did and discussing the pros and cons of deeper subsidies.

As mayor, I will participate in the negotiations for new developments so they have an affordable component, they have a local workforce component and an environmental enhancement component (green building techniques, park or open space and low water use landscaping, etc.)

The parking issue in the hills is one that can no longer be ignored. This will not be an easy issue on which to reach consensus but it is a safety issue such that fire and ambulance vehicles must be able to traverse the hills roads in an emergency. We will have to limit the cars in some places to only one side of the street. I do support limiting home sizes if the appropriate parking cannot be accommodated on the lot itself.

CRIME–There is much less crime in the North Hills than in other areas of Oakland, but Police have little time to work on the thefts, break-ins, and other crimes that we do experience regularly. While rarely life threatening, these crimes are of great concern to us. What ideas do you have for improving police service to the North Hills.

Ron – The current system of police deployment must be immediately changed.  Oakland has the absurd reality that while it employs over 700 police officers, only 35 are typically patrolling city streets at any point in time.  Worse, because of existing labor agreements, the Chief is powerless to re-deploy officers in rational ways.  Even the recent “compromise” following the threatened “state of emergency” doesn’t substantially re-deploy officers for most hours of the day.  The current labor agreement expires in June and for the safety of Oakland this must be substantially renegotiated.  Since this is long before the new mayor takes office in January 2007, I’ve been calling on all Oakland residents to get actively involved in making your views known to your representatives.

Politicians typically respond to perceived emergencies and at present the rise in homicides and other violent crimes has become the main police priority.  Fortunately, these crimes are not occurring in your neighborhood. That said, all residents are entitled to be safe in their homes and to have access to sufficient police services, including the hill areas. 

I have been calling for re-deploying police manpower to focus on community policing so that each area has an increased police presence with good knowledge of the area and known by the neighborhood.  The hill areas are no less entitled to access to community policing resources. For community policing to be successful, neighbors need to be organized so that there can be better communication between neighbors and the police.  As indicated in the prior question, I am committed to seriously involving communities in the city’s decision-making processes and I am very open to getting your ideas on addressing these problems.

Ignacio – One of my top priorities is improving public safety for everyone in Oakland.  When your home is burglarized or your car window is broken, it is a big deal.  Although the vast majority of our police officers work hard for public safety, our Police Department’s seemingly slow response to the cat burglar in the Oakland Hills several months ago was unacceptable.  You pay taxes and deserve the highest quality service.

As Mayor, I will ensure that every police beat – including each police beat in the Hills -- has a dedicated community policing officer who will quickly and thoroughly investigate property crimes.  These new officers are authorized under Measure Y, passed by voters in November 2004, and I will make sure you have them quickly.

As Mayor, I will personally visit your Neighborhood Watch meetings (Home Alerts) and Neighborhood Crime Prevention Council meetings to hear the public safety concerns directly from the residents.

Nancy – I support a community policing officer for every beat and a career track in community policing; the latter is currently not possible with the existing police union contract. Every community pays taxes and every community should have an assigned officer. As the originator of Measure Y which will pay for more officers, there is no reason not to assign one to each hills beat.

EMERGENCY ACCESS – Crowded streets are given as one reason for the delayed response to the 1991 Fire, with tragic results. Illegally parked vehicles can cause fatal congestion. During evenings and weekends, there is literally no provision for enforcing parking regulations in our area.  Even during the workweek, enforcement is rare and sporadic. Do you have a plan to provide parking regulation and enforcement to our area?

Ron – As I stated above in the Development section, for reasons of our emergency preparedness, we need to ensure that streets are passable at all times.  Given the topography of the hill areas and the constraint on city resources, there is no simple answer.  One response would be to have random drive-by parking enforcement; another is to have neighbor reporting of violations, coupled with real city responsiveness to these reports. This would apply to both contractors as well as other illegal parking.  I was puzzled to read in a recent Newsletter that Mayor Brown seemed to think he had nothing to do with parking enforcement, particularly give its relationship to emergency preparedness. 

As with the other issues, I’m interested in your views on how to address these problems and am committed to ensuring your involvement in the handling of these issues.

Ignacio – I agree that illegally parked vehicles, especially those from contractors, compromise public safety in the Hills.  As I mentioned earlier, I will ensure that community policing officers dedicated to the Hills enforce the parking regulations, so that contractors who park illegally will get tickets.

In addition, we should make it a condition of design review approval that contractors must keep their vehicles off the streets during specific times of the day on narrow streets (by requiring the contractor to build a temporary staging area on site, if necessary).  This can be enforced by our building inspectors, so that if the contractor violates the condition, the City can withdraw the building permit.

As Mayor, I will also create a Call Center open 24 hours a day / 7 days a week that you can contact for any city issue.  Instead of searching through hundreds of government phone numbers, simply dial 3-1-1- to get a live operator who can direct you to the appropriate problem-solver.  In addition to granting you direct access to your city government, the tracking information for every 3-1-1 call will show up on my computer in the Mayor’s Office.  If City departments do not provide you with fast, high-quality customer service, I will know about it and I will be accountable for fixing it.  As the Chief Executive of the city government, the buck stops with me on every issue from pot holes to permits to parks.

Nancy – This is an issue that your community must prioritize with your neighborhood service coordinator. He or she can coordinate off hours enforcement with the parking enforcement division. I have done this in problem areas in my district and would definitely support it as your mayor. After some intense enforcement, illegal parkers will no stop their practices. This intensive enforcement will have to be repeated periodically.

When I am mayor, there will be a responsible contact person for the community to call for every development project, a parking and construction mitigation plan and city inspectors to enforce it. If you are having a problem with this currently, Don Smith is the person to call in the city’s CEDA department.

DRAINAGE – Aging infrastructure, poorly planned or badly maintained public and private drainage structures have resulted in floods, landslides and erosion. Although a master plan for storm drainage was recently completed, lack of funding continues to prevent Oakland from halting the deterioration of its facilities.  This results in dangerous threats to public health and safety and damage to the property of residents. Are you committed to taking appropriate action to address drainage issues across the city, including upgrading facilities and insisting new development prevent increased run off and pollution of our waterways?

Ron – Water, sanitation, and drainage are key to healthy, urban life.  Oakland needs to urgently address its aging water, sewage, and storm drain infrastructure as well as to protect and restore its creeks and give special attention to drainage in the hills and throughout the city.  I am committed to making this a high priority.

 Historically, Oakland had combined storm drain and sewage systems, which puts Oakland residents at particular peril in the case of infrastructure failure.  Even in areas where systems are separate, storm waters can infiltrate sewage systems and put added stress on aging sewage pipes.  These need to be closely monitored and replaced where necessary.

 Oakland must aggressively monitor development projects to ensure that these projects don’t increase pollution or block run-off as happened recently in the Leona Quarry project.

Ignacio – Yes.  I am the candidate for Mayor who cares about storm drains and pot holes.   Before chasing after a pie-in-the-sky vision in the Year 2020, Oakland must excel at the basics of good schools, safe neighborhoods, clean parks, and modern infrastructure.   How can we solve the great problems of the world before we take care of the basics in our own city?

I believe we must implement the Storm-Drain Master Plan and we should make sure it includes technology that protects homes, prevents landslides, and preserves our creeks.  Yes, this will cost money, but it is a wise investment in our city’s future and it can ultimately reduce on-going maintenance costs.  If we do a better job managing our existing resources and resist expensive experiments (like providing government health care solely on the backs of our local taxpayers and businesses), we can identify the revenues we need.   I also have the strong relationships needed with the State government to ensure that Oakland gets funding from Sacramento to upgrade our city’s infrastructure.

I also believe we must make sure new developments do not negatively impact our waterways.   Our network of creeks – from the Hills to Lake Merritt to the San Francisco Bay -- are one of our city’s most precious assets and we must protect them.   The City Council passed a Creek Ordinance and, as Mayor, I will enforce it.

Nancy – As a geologist and geophysicist by training and experience, these issues are extremely important to me. I absolutely agree that we need to bring the funding strategies for a new storm drainage system back to the front burner to discuss with the public. We are fast approaching taxation levels on property that are difficult for owners to sustain. We are about to ask the voters for additional funds for the Landscape and Lighting Assessment District. I hope to have something before the voters on drainage by next year.