Oak to 9th from the Jack London District Perspective
I just realized that I've never posted an article about the proposed Oak to 9th development, and since there's an article in today's Oakland Tribune and since there was a City Council Meeting dedicated to the project recently, and since I'm working on an article for May's print edition on ALL of the local projects, I thought I'd take some time today to talk about Oak to 9th (O29).

Oak to 9th is a 3100 unit residential development slated for the area along Embarcadero between Oak Street and 9th Avenue. That's 64 acres of prime waterfront property. The O29 project does not include the 5th Avenue area.

There are quite a few issues that go along with O29, and it's rather complex to try to explain all of the issues in one go. I'll leave the main political issue of land aquisition for another posting. Other issues include historic, massing, density, green space, and low income housing.

For this posting, I'm only going to cover the density and green space issues. Not that the other ones don't matter, but I'm trying to get others that are more knowledgeable to post about them. Like I said earlier, this is a very complex project with many layers.

SO... density, and a comparison to our own district. Currently there are approximately 2,000 people living in the Jack London District in approximately 1,250 units. There are 357 units under construction in four projects. There are two projects that have been approved in the pre-construction phase that have 245 units. There is another development that is looking to get approval later in April 2006, and it could have 250 units. So let's just say that there will probably be between 3,000 and 3,500 people living in the Jack London District in 3 years. There's no guarantee that we'll have a grocery store, our on-street parking situation will be worse and traffic congestion in areas that are already considered dodgy will obviously get worse. And that's not taking into consideration any changes with 880 where construction could have a serious impact, nor is it taking into consideration any of the Jack London Square Redevelopment impacts.

So in roughly one-third of the entire land space as the Jack London District has in total, you have Oak to 9th on 64 acres of prime waterfront property. If you use the same 1.6 per unit as we used above for the currect number of residents in our area now, then you're looking at almost 5,000 people in a tiny area with limited entry into and out of the area. Our parking and traffic congestion issues might seem like a cake walk in comparison. Oh, and that 5,000 figure doesn't include the current number of 5th Avenue residents.

And all that green space that the developer is providing? Well, it is definately true that there are no parks there now, so yes, anything would be an improvement. And yes, the developer has said that the future property owners would be forever responsible for the green space. But think about that. Doesn't that say to you that they'll look upon that as their green space? If it belongs to the City, then wouldn't it be the City's problem? There's another aspect to the green space to consider, which is that there are Measure DD funds available to build a park. That's what the City voted for.

This project is much like the Jack London Square Redevelopment. At first glance everyone says how great it is. The logistics of having 3100 units in such a small, severely access deprived space isn't so great. The green space sounds great - until you think of 64 acres of parkland. Or even just half that in a big mass, not strung out along the Bay Trail, which is required and not something the developer is "giving" to the citizens of Oakland. Before allowing the City to give their stamp of approvals, I would hope that you take the time to see what the City is losing. Try not to get too overwhelmed in the process of finding out more. It's not an easy thing to get your head around.
Posted 4/09/2006