6 21-0829 Subject: Amendments To Oakland Planning Code Related To Accessory Dwelling Units
From: Planning & Building Department
Recommendation: Adopt An Ordinance, As Recommended By The City Planning Commission, Amending The Oakland Planning Code To: 1) Revise Regulations For Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) And Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) To Comply With State Law; 2) Amend The S-9 Zoning Overlay Zone That Identifies Areas In The City Where ADUs Are Restricted To One Internal Conversion ADU Or JADU Per Residential Lot; 3) Provide An Exception Mechanism For Allowing Attached And Detached ADUs In The S-9 Zoning Overlay Zone; 4) Provide Additional Wildfire Building Protections In S-9 Zoning Overlay Zone; 5) Make Conforming Changes In Various Sections Of The Oakland Planning Code Related To ADUs; And 6) Make Appropriate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings
I have questioned myself about rolling the dice and opening a new restaurant in Oakland and now the odds of success look very grim. Without police presence over the past year in the uptown district near The Block (23rd/Valdez) and other new developments in the area, our construction team has been held up 4 times, our location, even though not opened for business, our location has been broken into twice, our plumbers vehicle stolen and this is just my experience. The developers and new business are risking millions in investments to better Oakland, employ its citizens, create experiences for its residences, make a return on the investment and survive, literally, survive. Why would anyone risk coming to Oakland for dinner or a show or open an office when the surrounding East Bay communities are safer, cleaner and more welcoming? Needed are investments to dramatically increase the number of police in the department and ON THE STREETS, police and SAVE training, and a commitment to cleaning,: the abandoned cars throughout the city, garbage, graffiti and I'm sure that you have another list, must take priority as these other programs are meaningless if people die and business and residents flee the city with continued chaos. Thank you
I hope the city council will be honest about the homeowner’s loss of control when adding a rental ADU on their home property.
The homeowner loses substantial control of their home property. Tenants in an ADU are covered by the Just Cause ordinance. Although the lease may have a stated term, the tenant is not required to move simply because the lease ends. The tenant can decide to stay unilaterally. It is the homeowner’s property but no longer in their control. Absent material breaches of a lease, the tenant could stay for life. The lease signed by tenant and homeowner cannot restrict the number of tenants in the ADU located on the homeowner’s property. A one-bedroom ADU can be tenanted by up to 3 people- at the unilateral election of tenant. If you ask a tenant to move out for a family member to move (which can be allowed at the unilateral election of the homeowner) the tenant must be paid substantial amount relocation costs. If a homeowner opts out of renting permanently using the Ellis Act there will also be substantial relocation costs in moving your tenants out. The Oakland City Council supports revoking the Ellis Act to force landlords to stay in the rental business.
I have questioned myself about rolling the dice and opening a new restaurant in Oakland and now the odds of success look very grim. Without police presence over the past year in the uptown district near The Block (23rd/Valdez) and other new developments in the area, our construction team has been held up 4 times, our location, even though not opened for business, our location has been broken into twice, our plumbers vehicle stolen and this is just my experience. The developers and new business are risking millions in investments to better Oakland, employ its citizens, create experiences for its residences, make a return on the investment and survive, literally, survive. Why would anyone risk coming to Oakland for dinner or a show or open an office when the surrounding East Bay communities are safer, cleaner and more welcoming? Needed are investments to dramatically increase the number of police in the department and ON THE STREETS, police and SAVE training, and a commitment to cleaning,: the abandoned cars throughout the city, garbage, graffiti and I'm sure that you have another list, must take priority as these other programs are meaningless if people die and business and residents flee the city with continued chaos. Thank you
I hope the city council will be honest about the homeowner’s loss of control when adding a rental ADU on their home property.
The homeowner loses substantial control of their home property. Tenants in an ADU are covered by the Just Cause ordinance. Although the lease may have a stated term, the tenant is not required to move simply because the lease ends. The tenant can decide to stay unilaterally. It is the homeowner’s property but no longer in their control. Absent material breaches of a lease, the tenant could stay for life. The lease signed by tenant and homeowner cannot restrict the number of tenants in the ADU located on the homeowner’s property. A one-bedroom ADU can be tenanted by up to 3 people- at the unilateral election of tenant. If you ask a tenant to move out for a family member to move (which can be allowed at the unilateral election of the homeowner) the tenant must be paid substantial amount relocation costs. If a homeowner opts out of renting permanently using the Ellis Act there will also be substantial relocation costs in moving your tenants out. The Oakland City Council supports revoking the Ellis Act to force landlords to stay in the rental business.