SunCal Meeting at Airport Hilton Hotel
March 29, 2006, 6-10 PM

Opening Remarks
Larry Reid introduced himself as the council representative of the area being discussed. He described this as "one of the most exciting projects" in his district and thanked SunCal for both the first and second charrettes.

Pat Keliher, SunCal Project Manager
Pat Keliher echoed Reid's remarks about how this was an exciting project that had occupied his past 4-5 months. During this time, he said he has met with the city, Larry Reid, and has spent hours talking with neighbors. He said he doesn't everywhere see the passion folks seem to have about the project and city.

Keliher proudly announced that SunCal, as of the 29th, was the official owner, having just made out a final check for $90 million. This seems to show, he said, that SunCal is not a fly-by-night developer.

To the question people seem to ask about why SunCal is putting on public planning meetings, he said the impulse comes from respect for the community, and a desire to work together in order to have a better planning process. He continued to say that once agreement on the plan is achieved, the push through the City of Oakland will not be easy and that we need to work together here, too.

For the current meeting he urged participants to focus on planning big issues rather than specific issues. He noted that the first public meeting had been successful, but that SunCal had made no commitments at that time. In the interim, SunCal had received the handouts and tallied the results, and this shows that "we did listen." Among other things SunCal hoped to accomplish at this meeting was the introduction of two different site plans. Peter Calthorpe (the site designer) would be speaking more about the plan, presenting the number of proposed units--an issue many people had asked about. Affordable housing, density, traffic, the 5.5 acres owned by the city, among other issues, would also be discussed.

back to top

Keliher then began a series of summaries of key issues.

1. SunCal, he said, is involved in two different processes: "site planning," a process tied to the public meetings such as this one, and "site analysis" which is being undertaken at a geotechnical level. The site analysis involves finding out what can be built and involves analysis of problems such as soil stability and fault potential. In terms of the latter issue, Keliher noted that trenches have so far revealed no active faults.

2. With regard to the creek, Keliher noted that consulting biologists and hydrologists are being brought into the process to "restore the creek." They will then need to work with both federal and state agencies. It may be necessary to reroute the portion of the creek now culverted.

3. The 5.5 acre parcel owned by the city, adjacent to the base, is now under discussion. SunCal intends to buy this parcel by making an offer to the city, but obviously, the final decision is not theirs.

4. Regarding adjacent acreage owned by an individual, Keliher announced that SunCal doesn't have a great deal of knowledge. They had a meeting, probably with the person who is the owner, with no talk of selling to SunCal. SunCal remains open to the idea of getting into a discussion, but is not entirely certain who the relevant party would be.

5. Club Knoll, he said, is a building that people love, and exclaimed, "We do, too."

6. Tree surveys have revealed a number of historic oaks that are to be part of the finished site, but the eucalyptus trees, because they are fire hazards, will likely be removed. SunCal will work with the city on this project, acknowledging that the zoo apparently uses eucalyptus clippings as snacks for its elephants.

7. Demolition and grading was the next topic. Keliher noted that all the existing structure except Club Knoll will be taken away. This will be an extensive project requiring a long time and grading may involve areas that may not be built on. It is notable that cement foundations for buildings demolished in the "bunker area" need to be removed. Still, there are no plans to mass grade the site. In fact, SunCal will need to balance "cut and fill" in order to reduce costs. Keliher noted that the hospital, when removed, will leave a 15' - 20' hole that will need to be filled. In sum, the site itself has been extensively developed through past activities, and this is a complex problem that must be dealt with soon, although it is not yet clear how remedial action is to be done.

8. Regarding the "community center" (or village center), SunCal was said to have listened to where neighbors wanted it to be located, and heard the call that this not become another failure in two or three years of operation. SunCal is therefore aiming at extensive marketing analysis before moving forward. SunCal doesn't claim to have the answers yet. The basic question is not whether local residents would like to shop there, but rather whether a big anchor, such as Whole Foods or Trader Joe's, would move to the site.

9. Peter Calthorpe's analysis has led to the planned location of the village center at the Mountain Boulevard entry.

back to top

Keliher ended this part of this talk on a personal note about his uncle's earlier stay, during the Vietnam War, at the Oak Knoll hospital. This emotional link provided a transition to Kelihers' recent walk through the site.

According to SunCal and the Navy, the current structures are not in good condition. This includes a variety of buildings such as the bowling alley, pool, chapel, Club Knoll and hospital. In fact, from an inside tour of the structures, Keliher could personally report that essential nothing is left and all are in bad shape. The hospital, for instance, is now a spooky place. With no ceilings on each of the floors, electrical features gone, the impact is eerie even though federal police accompanied Keliher on the tour. Apparently, copper miners (a new term for him) have stripped the site. This, and other acts of vandalism, were previously the Navy's problem, but now are SunCal's problem, and SunCal plans to do something about it.

Keliher began to recount the long history of planning at the site. There was a certified Environmental Impact Report, a Reuse Plan, and other prior documents that had to be reviewed with a view to how they would impact SunCal's own plans for the site. There was also information about the Leona Quarry that needed review. The resulting plans, he argued, were not "ad hoc" but developed through critical analysis and research.

Traffic, he argued, is a key concern for every project, and especially so in the Bay Area today. SunCal has plans to mitigate the traffic problem, and indeed, is committed to a "fair share program" between the quarry site and Oak Knoll. With details to be provided by Peter, the traffic flows with mitigation, he claimed, will be better than they are now.

Regarding the proposed merger of the Oak Knoll redevelopment area (the former Navy base) into the "Central City East" redevelopment area, Keliher made clear that this was a "fiscal merger" which, if implemented, would result in the transfer of millions of tax increments dollars. Complex issues are involved. It will therefore take "smart lawyers" to understand the real impacts. Keliher said he would keep the neighbors informed about the topic.

State law, he commented, requires that there be an affordable home component of 15% (of which 6% would be very low income and 9% low to moderate income). Both plans that would be presented this night would assume that the affordable component would be on the site. SunCal, he concluded, was committed to doing the right thing.

The final topic, Club Knoll, was discussed in some detail. Keliher called this a beautiful structure that had been vandalized. He offered that a tour would be made in the next month of the facility, but reassured the public that SunCal now has "every intention" of restoring the building. Two questions still remain, however. What does SunCal do with the building after its is restored? What entity will pay for ongoing maintenance? Should the city have it? Would a home owner association (HOA) take it? It would be unlikely that the new residents would be able to sustain it. He asked the public for help, "We need to find an answer and we need your help here." He added, perhaps there is potential for a nonprofit during the day. Could there be a neighborhood library? Keliher reported that SunCal needs to talk with Larry Reid and find out who in the city would be interested in the building.

Keliher concluded his talk with a promise to discuss all these issues in greater detail at the third planning meeting, now scheduled for the end of April or early May.

back to top

Peter Calthorpe, Community Designer

Calthorpe opened his remarks with a question about how many people in the audience have not attended the first meeting. It turned out that about 50% were new. For this reason, he offered to first recap of the March 1 meeting, before going summarizing the public feedback from that meeting. Then he would introduce two different plans for Oak Knoll and explain how both grew from examining the site itself.

In his recap, Calthorpe returned to the four principles he uses to structure his creations: "Diversity & Balance" (building communities not projects), "Human and Pedestrian Scale" (walking and biking rather than automobile focus), "Conservation and Restoration" (respecting the site, preserving and enhancing distinctive, valued features), and "Connections and Interdependence" (creating seamless connections to the region).

Calthorpe appreciated the positive feedback he felt he previously received from the community for his basic principles and concepts, and for the broad uses proposed for the site including recreation, retail, mixed use, and a range of homes.

Calthorpe then proceeded to relate how the General Plan calls for a mix of open space, civic uses, commercial uses, and single family homes at the site. He quickly stated that zoning would allow for 4500 homes.

Next Calthorpe laid out the basis for building a plan that would arise "out of the nature of the site" stating that it would be inappropriate to cut up the site as a subdivision without basic topographic analysis. Turning to the plan, he noted that creek provided both the heart and historical center of interest for the property. With the exception of the knoll, all of the site had been previously disturbed. That said, there were mature trees in the northeast sector that the developers should attempt to respect. Indeed, he concluded that slopes 25% or greater should not be used very much.

With these basic elements described, Calthorpe presented an illustration of the "general footprint" he used to create his overall design. This footprint shows an open space area in the upland hill on the east and south of the site, a diagonal creek corridor across the site that expands into a meadow near Club Knoll, and a preserve area along the lower, northwestern knob near Seneca. Interspersed within these preserved areas or elements were clusters of different housing types, commercial uses, trails and smaller park features.

back to top

The next item was a summary of the March 1 meeting feedback. [A document on this subject was also provided by SunCal at the registration table.]

1. Calthorpe reiterated that there was great support for the outlined philosophy for develop the site, and widespread support for the open space, creek corridor and mixed us components.

2. Lesser, but interesting, support for issues such as green building techniques, high density buildings, certain architectural styles, wildlife, and concerns about security and traffic caught his attention.

3. Regarding the village center, there was support for the Mountain Boulevard entry which he consider a better site for retail than the Keller Avenue placement. Other important considerations presented by the public were calls for a high quality grocery store (which will be pursued as Whole Foods and Trader Joe's). Incidental other retail such as restaurants and child care might be contemplated if there is a suitable anchor. Neighborhood opposition to drive through restaurants and liquor stores was noted.

4. On the subject of housing diversity, Calthorpe noted that most participants seem comfortable with a range of types although there was strong opposition to apartments and rentals. Four groups also supported senior housing, an opportune use possibly near the village center. Live-work seemed to be acceptable, and many seemed to support a form of architecture compatible with a Mediterranean style. Regarding the affordable component, Calthorpe though it was extraordinary that the public would accept this at the site, if needed. Still, neighborhood objections to rentals would make this difficult. City norms dictate how affordable housing in defined. Whether senior affordable housing or stipulated Oakland workforce housing would be acceptable is ultimately contained in redevelopment agency regulations. At present all the options are not fully clear to the developers. In short, they don't know if all this is possible.

5. The discussion of public amenities took some time. Neighbors clearly supported full public access to open space areas, street and trails. Club Knoll was clearly a more difficult problem. Calthorpe agreed that "We want and need to restore" Club Knoll, but the question still lingers, "Who will make it work over time?" The meadow near Club Knoll, tennis courts and soccer field will probably also be available, while bike trails will be used to connect the site to internal and external places of interest.

6. Traffic was another key issue. The public and developer realize that Mountain Boulevard at Keller Avenue is an underperforming intersection, with inefficient stop signs. Potential mitigation includes on/off ramp lights and intersection lights to provide additional capacity.

7. Offsite issues were also raised. At the prior meeting, some neighbors indicated need for quality schools and preschools, a grocery store, post office, fire station, and BART connection. With the summary concluded, Calthorpe moved on to illustrations of his "Master Plans" for the site, a plan that would show variation later as Alternatives # 1 and # 2.

back to top

Here were the basic components.

First, the creek corridor would serve as the "spine of the community." This would require considerable work. Even where the creek is currently daylighted, it has not been well managed by the Navy. Other areas, too, would require restoration. The meadow would be retained for public activities. Club Knoll should be retained. Also there would be a series of parks including "pocket parks, neighborhood parks, the active recreation meadow, and the Club Knoll area." Finding the right user for Club Knoll was again termed a "challenge." The hillside would remain open, and in fact, although the General Plan called for 57 acres of open space, the Master Plan would call for 70 acres, nearly 40% of the site. The new trail system would extend about 2 miles through and around the site.

Regarding housing, Calthorpe explained that the numbers provided in the two plans (or maps) for public discussion would give numbers for both "for sale" and "affordable" housing. It was noted that the affordables may end up offsite.

Calthorpe went on to illustrate a number of different home styles with photos: townhouses, bungalows with green courts, hillside homes with green courts, single family homes with a range of types and lot sizes, and a Mountain Boulevard community (or village) center with about 15,000 square feet in a crescent shopping are on a village green. Here, he explained, one-story retail would spill into the common green, providing a "Main Street" component with hidden parking features. This, then, could be both a social and utilitarian place. In this community (or village) center, there could be three-story townhomes, multifamily dwellings over grocery uses, and the effect would be of a small town with different types of functions. The village center area would also contain the affordable housing.

[The illustration created by Calthorpe showed single family housing dominating the upland hill area, with more dense housing in the central portion of the site, and commercial/retail closer to the Mountain Boulevard entry.]

back to top

In the hospital area, Calthorpe continued, "green court housing" was envisioned. On slopes of up to 15% this would be achieved by have uphill step up of lots, and shared open space, but on flat areas, the common greens (lawns) would probably be attractive to empty nesters or families (as has been illustrated at other developments).

The north hilltop homes over the Seneca parcel, nearer the freeway, would be constrained by noise, but would retain views. The city property [presumably the 5.5 acres owned by Oakland, but not yet purchased by SunCal] was said to contain 20 lots. There would also be housing in an upland valley, and expensive hilltop housing which SunCal was considering expanding. [At this point, an illustration of an extended hilltop development was very briefly displayed.]

Calthorpe then briefly discussed the two alternatives. Alternative #1 offered 700 market rate homes plus 100 affordables. Alternative # 2 offered 850 market rate and 150 affordables, but the second alternative specifically contained a senior housing component.

Calthorpe continued with a discussion of traffic mitigation possibilities for installing traffic signals, and adding shared left- and right-through lane alternatives. He discussed both the Keller Avenue and Golf Links Road highway 380 exit areas, and the off-ramps to the west and east. Without mitigation, these would be unacceptably impacted, but with the proposed changes, he suggested that the traffic flows would actually be better than existing conditions.

Giving a nod to architectural images, Calthorpe suggested that the mixed style which commingles continuity and uniformity would work in a neighborhood as diverse architecturally as the one surrounding the site. Using photos, he demonstrated that the local area already supports a wide range of architectural mixes including Mediterranean buildings, standard ranch homes, neocolonial styles, Eichler homes, and eclectic designs. The multifamily area along Keller Avenue was noted for its uniformity.

back to top

In closing, Calthorpe began to focus the audience on the following issues.

1. Overall impression of design and approach.
2. Selecting a preferred alternative and offering comments about it.
3. Mix and placement of housing types.
4. Village center configuration and uses.
5. Open space, trails, and Club Knoll.
6. Traffic analysis and feedback.
7. Architectural approach.

According to Calthorpe, the process was headed toward design controls to establish both the look and feel of the eventual plan. Facilitators were cautioned to "act without opinion." He requested that remaining questions should be recorded on the large scale maps and response sheets provided each table. Any comments, ideas or questions were welcome. He then announced that at the end of the roundtable discussion process, a representative of each table would summarize their results, using the microphone, to the whole audience.

Summary of Public Comments

Community comments were varied. Many were pleased that the community was invited to participate in what appeared to be a somewhat meaningful and inclusive way.

Some groups were confused about the total number of units associated with each of the alternative plans. Questions were raised about whether the affordable units were to be included or excluded from the numbers shown. [Subsequent discussions with SunCal have confirmed that the affordable units were not included in the listed number. Therefore, depending on whether the affordable homes are located on-site or off-site, the total proposed number of homes at Oak Knoll would be 700 or 800 for Alternative #1, and 850 or 1000 for Alternative #2.]

back to top

Many groups made favorable comments about the open space and creek corridor, and some called for additional recreation opportunities such as an indoor swimming pool, dog park, and more park space at the top and on the southern border. One group called for a creek corridor width of at least 250-350 feet. Some called for the absence of housing in the high hill area, and asked for a connection to the East Bay Regional Parks system. Trails, it was noted, should connect to existing ones in the surrounding area, and should include loop connections as well as public parking sites at trailheads.

Some suggested that the green corridors within the dense housing areas might be too small. More than one group called for more green spaces or pocket parks typical of the model developments illustrated earlier by Calthorpe. Especially in the small-lot single family area, some noticed a compact development that seemed out of scale with the neighboring community. There was also some interest in questions of parking.

Native vegetation and tree preservation or native tree plants were also mentioned. One group worried about whether the detention pond below Club Knoll would become a source of mosquitoes and flooding. The question of maintaining the open space, trail and public amenities came up. Would this be a homeowner association, the city?

With regard to a grocery store, the results were mixed. Some doubted whether one could be supported by the community, but others thought that this would be a desired amenity. If such as grocery were to be built, some preferred one that would limit night time restocking because of noise issues. Some suggested that the village center could be the site of a health club, medical services, and small businesses or specialty shops. Disagreement jokingly arose over whether a Starbucks or Pete's Coffee shop would be most desirable. Other possible additions to the village included a post office, banking, and fire station. Inadequate parking in the village center was noted, with an underground facility offered. With a history of failed retail in the area, one group suggested the need for a long term lease commitment of perhaps 10 years, with the hope that SunCal would be trying to envision the future 15-35 years out.

back to top

Several different uses were mentioned in relation to Club Knoll, which it was agreed must be kept for public use. More than one group mentioned a library, police substation, community center or senior center, and one questioned whether Sequoyah Road would be an access point for Club Knoll. More than one group suggested that in view of the large about redevelopment money, it should be possible to use this or other tax money for public use and maintenance of Club Knoll. "Where is the public benefit at the site?" one group asked, given that enormous tax revenues that will be streaming to the city from the site.

The diversity of housing types seemed to be supported by most. Some wanted more information on how SunCal will enforce standards with its partnering builders. Some proposed a maximum housing footprint per lot size, and some wanted to know how large the lots actually were since this was not provided on the maps provided. Many deplored the "cookie cutter" look at the quarry project or the uniform appearance of the proposed townhomes at Oak Knoll. Some groups were also concerned by the "sameness" of the single family homes. A couple groups had difficulty understanding precisely what would be allowed in the "live-work" space. Again, the issue of rentals was viewed unfavorably. One group asked that the affordables be located off-site, others suggested that if the affordables were senior housing they should be integrated into various housing areas rather than concentrated. One group proposed that building codes here be sensitive to fire dangers, and therefore favor fireproof siding, stucco and brick.

The impact of Seneca on the new community was raised by many groups. One expressed the hope that SunCal could purchase the Seneca property, another wondered how the village center would fare with nearby Seneca uses, and saw a problem with the proximity of expensive homes to the Seneca property.

Many felt that the traffic issues had been inadequately described or planned and wanted more information and detailed maps next time. A few asked for various alternative transportation alternatives connecting either to BART, or express buses to city centers. Some felt that the number of entrances and exits for the plan was too small, given the fire dangers. A soundwall along 580 was proposed by one group. Widening Mountain Boulevard seemed an obvious need to some.

The meeting lasted from about 6PM to 10 PM.

back to top