There is a plan to build new sports arenas and new housing in the area around the Oakland Coliseum and residents got a preview of that plan last week. Those attending expressed interest in developing the area in a way that benefits all residents, but there was also considerable skepticism.

The City of Oakland has been preparing what they call the Coliseum Area Specific Plan to guide the transformation of the area surrounding the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum into a sports, entertainment, residential and job-generating business district. The plan covers 155 acres, including areas on the west side of the 880 freeway, and will create new parks and restored natural habitat. This informative meeting, held at the 81st Avenue Library, was meant to set the stage before the City begins formal public hearings on the plan.

Some 50 Oaklanders showed up for the presentation and to ask questions, some heated. The demographic ranged from youth and young adults to aging seniors, many being long-time residents and homeowners in areas adjacent to future development. While the exchanges were polite and informative, there was an underlying tension about the possiCol-City-annotated-diagble negative impacts on current residents. These included increased traffic, pollution, and the possibility of soaring property values leading to higher rents and higher taxes.

The vision for the area is vast: 1 to 3 new sports venues, up to 3 new hotels, 4,000 residential units, BART station improvements, and the creation of a large center for science and technology.

That led to questions about funding. No public funds will be used in the construction of the sports arenas and new buildings. The planners propose that all of the City’s infrastructure improvements will be covered by regular taxes and business fees based on projected growth in future revenues from new housing and new business.

The Ghost of Prop 13

In the topsy-turvy world of property taxes in California under Prop 13, long-term homeowners pay taxes based on the original purchase prices of their homes, plus a small annual adjustment. This mixed blessing, compliments of Howard Jarvis and his tax revolt agitators in the 1970s, sets up neighbors to pay vastly different amounts to the county tax collector. It helps keep seniors in their homes, but their tax bills increase at less than the rate of inflation, and it starves the counties of revenues need to serve all residents, including the very seniors benefiting from Prop 13. In the case of the Jarvis tax revolt, preventing local governments from getting more resources was part of the agenda.

This one of the reasons that counties and cities favor new developments: when the projects finish, they are assessed at current market value. Then those new owners will be protected by Prop 13 and their tax assessments may increase only by a maximum of 2% per year.

The vision for Coliseum City includes 4,000 new homes and new retail businesses in addition to having flagship sports arenas. The planners assume that secondary businesses, like dry cleaners and supermarkets, will develop in nearby communities, as a sort of trickle-down development strategy. The residents commenting and asking questions were not convinced of that outcome, however.

More Questions

The Coliseum City plan calls for  over 400,000 square feet of new retail space, half near the new areas and half in the nearby neighborhoods. One questioner asked what businesses were planned for the neighborhoods and wondered how these businesses would succeed in an era of e-commerce with online purchases, even groceries, being delivered directly to people’s homes by Amazon and Google.

IMG_5306The plan also calls for developing up to 20,000 new jobs with new retail and a campus-like environment for tech companies along the waterfront. In asking for details about the proposed jobs, another resident voiced skepticism and noted that West Oakland plans for developing the area were supposed to net several thousand jobs, but so far only a few hundred jobs  had been created.

While residents were looking forward to detailed plans, the organizers explained that such detail could only come later, after negotiations with interested developers. First, they needed to develop overlapping plans for the different cases of one, two, or all three of the Oakland sports teams staying and agreeing to develop an arena in Coliseum City. They also need to complete an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) based on those plans. Then they need to get approval from the Planning Commission and the necessary zoning changes, all before negotiating specific projects with individual developers.

But the bottom line to all this planning, and the upcoming hearings, is to have a project plan ready to allow construction to begin on a new Raiders stadium in early 2015. The new stadium could then be completed and ready in 2017, a drop-dead date that the Raiders organization has been pushing  for some time now, according to the planners. That would serve as the first piece in a multi-project development scheme.

IMG_5342Said Scott McFarlan, one of the team of planners, “Whether it is specifically like those beautiful images you’ve seen or not will be dependent on future development applications.” Later he added that they were working to have “…as many of the planing tools that the city has at its disposal ready and available and complete throughout that process at the point that development agreements are set and new developers come forward with specific development projects. This is the best step forward for the  City.”

Next Steps

The Specific Plan, as it is called, and the EIR will be completed after changes based on questions at this and other workshops on the plan. During the summer months, there will be a short public comment period including hearings at the Planning Commission and other public boards. Then, in the late fall or early winter, the proposal will be sent to the City Council.

All the while, the deadline for a new Raiders stadium is looming.

Click here to see the presentation slides from the April 26, 2014 public workshop. Some of the photos from this event are below, and the full online photo album is here. A sampler of video clips from the event on YouTube is here.


About The Author

6 Responses

  1. R2D2II

    The corporate world takes on the hood. Soft-pedaling with promises (jobs, housing, a more beautiful environment).

    Once the foot is in the door, promises begin to wither.

    Corporations seldom lose; neighborhoods usually do.

  2. Naomi Schiff

    I believe that “Scott McFarlan” is generally known to himself as Ed McFarlan. You may want to correct this. Check JRDV website?

  3. Naomi Schiff

    I am very concerned that the area plans come too close to the fragile edge: We should not be building so close; it is low, marshy, could be restored as habitat and must provide for a pleasant experience on the Bay Trail, not inching around large residential highrises.

  4. Julia

    Prop 13 keeps lawmakers from bankrupting it’s citizens. Communists don’t like this.

  5. Naomi Schiff

    Julia?, I’m not a communist, and am benefiting from Prop 13 in that I’ve owned my home for a very long time. However, I believe the law should be updated so that commercial property has a separate tax rate and yearly increase percentage than residential. And I think the residential rates should get a second look too. Will my daughters ever be able to afford the taxes on a home? My young neighbors pay many times the property tax that I do. It seems unfair and penalizes those who through no fault of their own were born later. It does not seem to have anything at all to do with communism.

  6. Mr. Grumps

    “Prop 13 keeps lawmakers from bankrupting it’s citizens. Communists don’t like this.”

    This person, judging from the grammar error as well as the political one, failed to graduate from high school. In addition this person appears to be stupid.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.