Oakland, Berkeley, And East Bay News, Events, Restaurants, Music, & Arts
Damb Danny always hit me as solid and loyal to the core. Of course I didn't learn about this stuff till after the trials and all this was over, I'm just glad he didn't turn on me... He told me once that I was the downest dude he ever met and I was the only person he knew that followed his word when given every time.. couple months later I read this article.... Damb......
At 80% the median income for households. That is hardly affordable. Specifically because low income households usually only make about 60-70% of the median income. I as a builder who lives in Oakland. Would like to see the 90 units at 60%. That way the families that will be priced out of the surrounding area due to value increases can actually, what's the word, oh yeah, afford housing.
Goodness gracious me. I support the homeless in my neighborhood because not only do they help make the environs safer, by and large, keeping an eye out for strange criminals, suspicious activity and what not, they are also the only genuinely friendly people on my block, the rest of the houses and even some prime begging real estate having been gentrified by hostile, bitter, and suspicious children of afffluence, who cannot be bothered to make eye contact when passing another human being on the street, let alone demean themselves with the smallest of courtesies, like a friendly nod or wave hello. I have lived in Oakland my entire life, and if you can't suffer the folks who lived here and built up this city before you, whether they dwell indoors or out, I will happily direct you to the Caldecott tunnel
How can the children and community enjoy safe parks, when the majority of them are being overrun by what has now been refered as Homeless? Kids and adults alike should feel safe at public parks and im sad too say, thats just not possible with the hoarding of trash and the urine & feces odor over powering the parks and then the needles and other unhealthy materisls left laying around, not good... and lets be honest some of the adults at our parks allday and night watching kids as they play makes me uncomfortable as a parent. If you get my drift. Lets ju add t be serious, this is not a good look and im sad to say it well only g r ow worset if nothing is done to detour it. I dont have all the answers but, allowing our parks to be taken over by individuals who've burn down all there bridges or are not reachable or understan d ing enough to know parks are for kids and nieghbors to enjoy and parks have rules, and 1 rule is the parks close at 10 pm. There not to be used by anyone 24/7... id like to know what happened to the park rangers and how about letting the park staff go back to gardening and park maitenance & beautification, and not cleaning up continuously behind what has been labeled homeless incampments.... Hello there parks
Thanks Don, and the community benefits are tricky in this - what the developer COMMITTED to is around $300k - some of which has already been performed (street lights and an already determined $25k to Mosswood Park) What staff and Councilman Kalb SUGGESTED are $1.1 million. Unfortunately, the Commission moved this forward without adding the condition that the developers actually DO the things prescribed by Council and by Staff - which is a serious problem and leaves the developer able to not do them now.
Please, please, please, come back! How about the Fruitvale area?
I was there too (and spoke in favor of the tower, as I've done in the past.) Brandie Albright raised a few other points as well; why just report on this one? If Tom Limon's immediate and direct response to this request for recusal was accurate, then no: he has no conflict of interest. Albright, by the way, is a huge asset to the community and my neighbor; we may disagree on this project but her input isn't served well by this post, which appears to have cherrypicked the most potentially inflammatory statement (and the most readily refuted, at least in legal terms.) That was spotty and incomplete reporting. Over here in your utterly failed reporting column: ANY of the comments by ANY of the 46 people who spoke in favor of the project, including representatives of multiple unions, East Bay Forward, and the Greenbelt Alliance. You also forgot to note some (oh wait: I mean any) of the community benefits coming from the developers; was it half a million bucks for Mosswood Park improvements? Check your notes and get back to us on that OK? Then go find a current rendering of the building; the one you're using has been revised and (to my eye) significantly improved in the places it counts. I will look at this building every morning when I leave my house, and I can hardly wait.
Way more of the public comments were in favor of the project. As they should be really. 400 units of housing without displacing a single resident.
Youngdahl makes even less sense than usual with this editorial. As any one can see from thinking about it, and reading the story below, UBER providing rides WITHOUT surge pricing SUPPORTS the protesters by giving them a means to get to JFK. If you wanted to get to JFK from NYC and back with regular taxis on strike how would you do it???
And as noted by other letter writes, the diatribe to block UBER from moving to downtown is even more ridiculous. There hasn't been a major company
moving to Oakland since Pandora, and now they are laying off. Think very high salaries, benefits and community donations - they don't come from pizza shacks, coffee houses and tattoo parlors.
Scary there got to be a better way all that energy wasted cause it's easy to build a child's clubhouse, use energy to join with the city for clean living. Damn so sad.
Deau Hickey: if that was the case then why was he elected POTUS?
Matthew Lee: It is obvious to all with an open mind that Barbara Lee can speak for herself! Just because a minority of people used violence and destroyed property does not mean that the protest was not legimate. By any such analysis, your Trump could claim the support of all Americans - since only a minority voted for him; but the truth is, most people abhor him as well as people like you who close your eyes as he makes a fool himself, the idiots who voted for and support him, and most of all our country.
Oakland please clear out another homeless encampment @ E 12th Ave. and 14th Ave. It's so disgusting and such a health hazard.
There is a difference between free speech and hate speech. I applaud and support peaceful protest to the speaking engagement by this extreme right wing hater. However, what we saw again last night was the work of the professional anarchists who unfortunately reside in our midst. These are the same folks who are determined to tear up downtown Oakland every time there is a political issue at the top of the news cycle. I would surmise that these are mostly well off young white kids determined to destroy the same system that has provided them with an easy life with many options. At some point after their youthful exuberance passes, they will take off the hoodies, get haircuts, enroll in law school or take over the family business. What concerned me as I observed the news coverage, was the behavior of the UC Berkeley campus or City of Berkeley Police. I saw the anarchists boldly bashing in the windows of the building and setting fires. The reaction of the Police was to cower in the corner and allow this behavior to continue unchallenged. The news reporters stated they were allowing this out of control activity because they wanted to avoid personal injuries that would result from confrontation. Really? I could never imagine a scenario anywhere in this country when a group of black or brown kids in hoodies would be allowed to willfully vandalize and destroy public property and set fires because the police decided to not engage them in the name of public safety. There would be a battalion of cops with smoke bombs, batons, tanks and assault weapons taking on this "mob" in hand to hand combat. I guess white privelege also extends to professional anarchists.
This is profoundly irresponsible and transparently vindictive journalism. The author cites criticisms about an unpaid board membership at OBA representing a "conflict of interest" without following up. If there is some institutional definition of such a conflict over and above a financial stake in the project, where does this logically end? Would I be barred from ever serving on the Planning Commission if I had a discount membership with SPUR?
Please clarify what constitutes a conflict of interest, and if the allegations against Commissioner Limon are even remotely valid.
There is actually a definition of a conflict; it is not a she said/he said affair. Here it is (http://www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/conflicts-of-…).
It focuses on personal financial interest; not whether a person has previously exercised their rights of free speech and association.
At the end of the day, all cities in the entire bay area should be approving high density housing at BART stations. After all of these years, it is time to stop allowing residents in surrounding single family neighborhoods to control the political discussion based on density, height and affordability. With that being said, the urban design challenge for the developer is to smoothly integrate the height and scale of the proposal as much as possible so that those adjacent neighborhoods are not overwhelmed. Additionally, it is not unreasonable to require these projects to dig deeper in terms of affordability as a trade off to additional heights and densities. To provide only 10% of these units at 80% of median income, in my opinion is not enough. 80% of median in this case is nearly $100,000 a year for a family 3 or 4. Providing some percentage of the units to residents earning as low as 50% of median income seems more appropriate to me. Building height next to the freeway is not a problem, but the project could do a better job stepping down the mass of the buildings to the scale of the neighborhood.
I suggest a conference specifically geared to local restaurants in the medium price & affordable price ranges to help them buy rather than rent. That way they can transcend rent increases & property ownership changes. They would be the owners.
There are several organizations specializing in these type of programs. We've got to help them target & meet restaurants.
Dense housing doesn't need to be so, well in a word, ugly
I can't delete Uber. Because I never installed Uber. Because Uber was obviously, from day one, composed of and patronized by sociopathic douches. But sure, I'm glad to see everyone else finally realizing this.
East Bay Express All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation