OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Oakland Planning Commission Meeting July 15, 2026: General Plan EIR Scoping & Public Comment on Claremont Senior Housing

City CouncilWednesday, July 15, 2026
BodyOakland, California
SessionCity Council
DateWednesday, July 15, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 59:26

Transcript — Verbatim
3:34

Hello, hello, everybody.

3:36

It's good to see you.

3:37

I know it's a new new actor in front or new player in front.

3:42

I am I'm uh chairing the meeting today uh because our new chair, Commissioner Arnes is not here, so uh I get to step up uh as the new chair to uh call the uh planning commission meeting for July fifteenth um to order.

4:00

Um, if we can get um a roll call.

4:03

Commissioner Sandoval.

4:05

Here Commissioner Rob is absent.

4:08

Commissioner Rank.

4:10

Here.

4:10

Commissioner Lee.

4:12

Here.

4:12

Vice Chair Randolph.

4:14

Here.

4:14

And Chair Ahrens is absent.

4:20

Um agenda items to discuss.

4:30

And then uh a director's report.

4:36

Any uh committee reports.

5:02

I know this is the first meeting you're sitting somewhere else uh or leaving the commission entirely, but we will be honoring um you know your service, I think at the September 2nd Commission meeting, um, as well as potentially Commissioner Rob who officially left the commission.

5:22

Right.

5:23

So we have two commissioners myself.

5:28

It's always good to have a very smart person sitting next to you.

5:32

Thank you, staff.

5:33

Uh so we have two commissioners who are leaving after their first term.

5:38

So, as we know, Commissioner Sandoval, thank you very much for your service.

5:42

We'll be leaving after today's meeting.

5:44

And Commissioner Rob just announced yesterday he'll be leaving as well.

5:49

We will have um we were a little concerned about today's agenda.

5:52

We had an item on the agenda that's now been moved, continue to the future.

5:58

We were concerned that we wouldn't have enough time, uh and we have a commissioner who needs to leave at five o'clock.

6:04

So knowing we would lose our quorum at five o'clock, we have opted to um force our two wonderful commissioners to come back because we love seeing their faces in order to honor them at a future meeting, and that will be in early September.

6:17

Great.

6:18

Thank you.

6:19

Um, any city attorney's report.

6:24

Uh no city attorney's report.

6:26

All right.

6:27

Um moving on to open forum.

6:30

We currently have 10 speakers for open forum.

6:33

I'll call you in groups of three.

6:35

Please state your full name for the record when you get to the mic, and you will have two minutes to speak.

6:40

Um, we have Leela Ken and Jack.

6:54

Hi, I'm Layla Goss.

6:56

I'm representing Rocker Ridge Neighbors for Sensible Housing.

6:59

We represent a neighborhood group with 500 weekly listsserv supporters and over 2200 petition signers requesting a reduction in height and mass for PLN 26025 at 6230 Claremont.

7:14

Today I'm gonna set the stage for our comments.

7:16

First and foremost, we support housing at the site.

7:21

So why do we keep coming before you?

7:23

I'm sure you're asking that question.

7:25

We believe this project represents a shot across the bow regarding new state density bonus law legislation under AB 2694.

7:35

Developers are increasingly leveraging these senior housing projects to build market rate developments with massive density bonuses.

7:43

The city of Oakland is already fully compliant with housing element, has already upzoned to achieve this, and we want you to understand the devastating precedent this project will set for the neighborhoods across the city.

7:56

As proposed, this building rises up 85 feet straight up against our neighborhood with zero step backs.

8:03

This is not an either-or situation.

8:06

We can have housing and integrate into the neighborhood.

8:09

It must be both.

8:10

If the city properly applied its own zoning laws and its design review guidelines, this building could be built compatibly.

8:18

Today we want to focus on how planning staff can ensure housing is built at this site while reducing neighborhood impacts fully within the confines of the law.

8:28

Specifically, we believe the standing the city planning staff is incorrectly applying the state density bonus law, failing to apply the city's own design review guidelines, and allowing luxury senior housing to be built at the direct expense of the existing neighborhood.

8:45

We urge the planning commission and staff to lawfully apply Oakland zoning rules as permitted under state law to reduce the height and mass of this development and protect our community.

8:57

Thank you.

8:58

Thank you.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Land Use and Zoning█████████████████████████████████████████41%
Environmental Protection█████████████████████████25%
Procedural████████████12%
Engineering And Infrastructure████████8%
Historic Preservation██████6%
Arts And Culture███3%
Public Safety██2%
Parks and Recreation██2%
Racial Equity1%
Summary of Proceedings

Oakland Planning Commission Meeting July 15, 2026: General Plan EIR Scoping & Public Comment on Claremont Senior Housing

The Oakland Planning Commission convened on July 15, 2026, at 11:00 AM. Vice Chair Randolph chaired in the absence of Chair Ahrens. The meeting featured public comments on a proposed senior housing project at 6230 Claremont Avenue and a public hearing to receive scoping comments for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Phase 2 of the General Plan Update (Oakland 2045). The Commission also approved minutes from June 3, 2026, and learned of recent City Council actions on SB 79 and ADU amendments. Commissioners Sandoval and Rob were recognized as departing members.

Public Comments & Testimony

Open Forum – 6230 Claremont Senior Housing Project

  • Layla Goss (Rockridge Neighbors for Sensible Housing): Expressed support for housing but opposition to the proposed 85-foot height and mass with zero stepbacks. Alleged that city planning staff is misapplying the state density bonus law (AB 2694) and failing to apply design review guidelines. Urged reduction in height and mass to integrate with the neighborhood.
  • Ken Jong (resident, 6201 Auburn Avenue): Supported housing but asked for confirmation that the project meets the city's design review standards for compatibility, sunlight, privacy, and transition to lower-density neighborhoods.
  • Jack Gerson (Auburn Avenue resident, Rockridge Neighbors for Sensible Housing): Stated that the city is misinterpreting the state density bonus law to allow a 112% density bonus (instead of 20%). Explained that staff incorrectly applied neighborhood center mixed-use density and gross-to-net area conversion, which if corrected would reduce the project by over 30 units. Warned of precedent for other sites like Trader Joe's.
  • Tanya Smith (Auburn Avenue resident): Concerned about the mass dwarfing nearby homes and shops, removal of mature trees, and setting a bad precedent. Urged adherence to zoning standards.
  • Carrie Goloff (Auburn Avenue resident, retired litigation lawyer): Highlighted conflicting interpretations of density bonus calculations between the developer (Ellis), staff, and neighborhood experts. Urged compromise to avoid litigation.
  • Robert Broco (North Oakland neighborhood activist): Argued the project is a "ruse" and will not be senior housing; criticized state-level housing policies by Democrats Buffy Wicks and Scott Wiener. Called for public investment in affordable housing.
  • Alexis Whitkey (Rockridge resident): Asked the Commission to preserve Rockridge as a neighborhood rather than allowing a transit district with tall buildings under SB 79 integration into the General Plan.

Public Hearing – General Plan Update Phase 2 NOP Scoping

  • Jennifer MacElrath (25-year Rockridge resident): Emphasized the importance of neighborhoods, cultural/historical resources, and arts. Concerned that the plan underemphasizes green space and that chain stores in high-rises would replace unique neighborhood character.
  • Naomi Shift (Oakland Heritage Alliance): Requested a longer comment period for the draft EIR (60 days instead of 45). Urged study of historic and cultural resources beyond Native American sites, including the Estuary Policy Plan revision process.
  • Delana Castillo (Communities for a Better Environment): Asked for a correct baseline, thorough cumulative impact analysis, appropriate mitigation, and consideration of alternatives to advance environmental justice.

Discussion Items

General Plan Update Phase 2 – Notice of Preparation (NOP) for EIR

  • Staff: Daniel Finley, Laura Kaminsky, Cleela Haynes, Rajiv Patiya (consultant), Elizabeth Canner (ESA) presented the Phase 2 update elements: Land Use and Transportation (LUTE), Open Space Conservation and Recreation (OSCAR), Infrastructure and Capital Facilities (new), Noise. The EIR will be programmatic. The draft elements will be released in fall 2026, draft EIR in spring 2027, final EIR summer 2027, adoption by City Council fall 2027. The NOP comment period closes August 3, 2026.
  • Commissioner Lee requested that the EIR evaluate equitable park access for lower-income multifamily zones, cumulative pollution burdens along freight corridors, infrastructure deficit prioritization, and preservation of historical/cultural resources.
  • Commissioner Wink requested a health risk assessment under air quality and robust analysis of historic and archaeological resources.
  • Vice Chair Randolph asked about the infrastructure element's complement to LUTE and wildfire analysis. Staff clarified that wildfire was already studied in Phase 1 and not being re-analyzed. Commissioner also requested a 60-day comment period for the draft EIR and inclusion of heat island/open space equity analysis.
  • Commissioner Rank seconded the 60-day comment period request.

Key Outcomes

  • The Commission received public and commissioner comments on the NOP. No vote was taken; comments will be considered in the EIR process.
  • The Commission approved the minutes from June 3, 2026, unanimously (4-0, with Commissioner Rob absent and Chair Ahrens absent).
  • Staff announced that a second agenda item (specific project) was continued to September 16, 2026.
  • City Council actions since last meeting: SB 79 and ADU amendments approved, with SB 79 decision differing from the Commission's recommendation.
  • Commissioners Sandoval (last meeting) and Rob (departing) will be honored at the September 2, 2026, meeting.

Meeting Transcript

Hello, hello, everybody. It's good to see you. I know it's a new new actor in front or new player in front. I am I'm uh chairing the meeting today uh because our new chair, Commissioner Arnes is not here, so uh I get to step up uh as the new chair to uh call the uh planning commission meeting for July fifteenth um to order. Um, if we can get um a roll call. Commissioner Sandoval. Here Commissioner Rob is absent. Commissioner Rank. Here. Commissioner Lee. Here. Vice Chair Randolph. Here. And Chair Ahrens is absent. Um agenda items to discuss. And then uh a director's report. Any uh committee reports. I know this is the first meeting you're sitting somewhere else uh or leaving the commission entirely, but we will be honoring um you know your service, I think at the September 2nd Commission meeting, um, as well as potentially Commissioner Rob who officially left the commission. Right. So we have two commissioners myself. It's always good to have a very smart person sitting next to you. Thank you, staff. Uh so we have two commissioners who are leaving after their first term. So, as we know, Commissioner Sandoval, thank you very much for your service. We'll be leaving after today's meeting. And Commissioner Rob just announced yesterday he'll be leaving as well. We will have um we were a little concerned about today's agenda. We had an item on the agenda that's now been moved, continue to the future. We were concerned that we wouldn't have enough time, uh and we have a commissioner who needs to leave at five o'clock. So knowing we would lose our quorum at five o'clock, we have opted to um force our two wonderful commissioners to come back because we love seeing their faces in order to honor them at a future meeting, and that will be in early September. Great. Thank you. Um, any city attorney's report. Uh no city attorney's report. All right. Um moving on to open forum. We currently have 10 speakers for open forum. I'll call you in groups of three. Please state your full name for the record when you get to the mic, and you will have two minutes to speak. Um, we have Leela Ken and Jack. Hi, I'm Layla Goss. I'm representing Rocker Ridge Neighbors for Sensible Housing. We represent a neighborhood group with 500 weekly listsserv supporters and over 2200 petition signers requesting a reduction in height and mass for PLN 26025 at 6230 Claremont. Today I'm gonna set the stage for our comments. First and foremost, we support housing at the site. So why do we keep coming before you? I'm sure you're asking that question. We believe this project represents a shot across the bow regarding new state density bonus law legislation under AB 2694. Developers are increasingly leveraging these senior housing projects to build market rate developments with massive density bonuses. The city of Oakland is already fully compliant with housing element, has already upzoned to achieve this, and we want you to understand the devastating precedent this project will set for the neighborhoods across the city.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com