Oakley Could See Vineyard Turned into 63-Homes

14

On Tuesday, the Oakley City Council will hold a public hearing after a request for a General Plan Amendment was requested that would place 63-homes along the 2300 block of Oakley Road in the City of Oakley.

The notice was issued to residents on Sept. 10 by MLC Holdings located in San Ramon requesting the General Plan amendment to re-designate 2.20 of the 9.87 acre cite from single-family residential, high density to multi-family residential, low density which would allow for the 63-homes.

The project will also include a Home Owners Association to be set up to maintain privately owned parcels—it may or may not include a gate to the community.

This comes after a Sept. 25, 2018 meeting where the council provided feedback to the developer after the developer had asked for maximum density which would have allowed 10 additional homes.

The council is being now being asked to approve the rezone.

  • Existing: Single-Family Residential, High Density (“SH”) – The purpose of the “SH” designation is provide for moderately dense single-family residential development that is consistent with suburban uses. Allowable density is between 3.8 and 5.5 dwelling units per gross acre.
  • Proposed: 1) 2.20 acres Multi-Family Residential, Low Density (“ML”) –The purpose of the “ML” designation is to provide a more affordable, small lot development and to increase the availability of rental or entry-level housing at a density range of 5.5 to 9.6 dwelling units per gross acre. 2) Remaining acreage as Single-Family Residential, High Density (“SH”). The mixed land use designations will set a maximum density that matches the proposed vesting tentative map. All proposed homes are single family detached residential units

Currently under the General Plan for an R-6 District, it allows for a minimum size lot of 6,000 square feet lot size. Under the proposal, it allows for a P-1 District which is project specific.   The lot sizes as proposed will be no smaller than 4,000 square feet.

According to the staff report, the applicant will be required to improve Oakley Road with an additional 15 feet of road widening, and a six foot wide sidewalk sandwiched between two eight foot wide landscape strips. Approximately 22 feet of the property at the Oakley Road frontage will be dedicated to public right of way use.  The applicant will also relocate some of the existing grape vines to another location.

Staff is proposing approval of the General Plan Amendment.

This comes at the same time where across the street, another developer is seeking to place 22-homes on 4.6 acres in the 2400 block of Oakley Road with homes ranging from 1,289 square feet to 2,399 square feet in size.  Back in January of 2018, the council provided feedback to the developer on this project during a work session.

Citizen Planning Advisors Summary of Comments on the project:

  • Is the 17 stall parking area accessible to visitors to Holly Park? Street A and B are indicated as private; will that hinder access to these designated parking spots?
  • I like the variety of structure plans and the relatively even mix.
  • Currently, traffic is onerous at the intersection of Oakley Road and Live Oak at the beginning and ending of school periods at Orchard Park School. This residential development has the potential to adversely affect this condition.
  • This project looks like it meets all the design guidelines. I am also happy that there are also single story houses planned in this subdivision.
  • My only comment on this one is that all the rear, left, and right elevations of the various plans lack any sort of architectural features, and are noticeably blank. Not a lot of aesthetic appeal. I don’t think these are very in line with the 360 degree architecture I believe the city is trying to achieve.

For the full staff Report, click here. For the agenda & accompanying documents, click here.


14 COMMENTS

  1. This is no surprise for the City of Oakley staff to recommend approval. No way the Council should approve this. Oakley Road is going to be packed in the coming years with all the projects in this area. It is time to replace this council and city manager. I can’t wait to leave this city when I retire in a few years. If I was not going to Idaho, I would run for city council.

  2. This is exactly the reason why people are beginning to advocate for the creation of a planning commission. It is projects like this that makes the city council and city staff incompetent and providing developers with special perks while taxing the hell out of everyone else who want to do anything. Why is there nothing about fire service in this plan?

  3. First, the title of this story should be “Oakley Could See Vineyard Turned into 63-HOUSES” … HOUSES are structures! They are tangible! A “HOME” is not tangible. Can’t these people get it right and stop maligning the ENGLISH LANGUAGE?

    Second, we need more vineyards here, not houses. We are being chocked to death with high-density residences.

    • Redevelopment is (eventually) unavoidable, but I agree with you about the high-density aspect. What is being considered is WAY too high density. At least hold the line at single-family houses, not the multifamily stuff the developer wants.

  4. Jesus H. CHRIST! More houses????? How much more can we be squeezed in? We’re already being strangled with horrific traffic and people spilling over! Enough already!

  5. The comments about the developers paying into the fire district are right on. How about contributing for a few extra police officers too, which will be needed to deal with all the things high density multi-family housing units will bring.

  6. STOP IT ALREADY WITH THE DAMN HOME BUILDING!!! We dont need more people living in the Brentwood Oakley area!!!!! STOP IT!!!😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡

  7. Oakley can’t survive unless it keeps building. It’s already chasing its tail for money. Heck the fire district loaned the city money for the new fire station. They need to focus more on jobs and industry.

    • Maybe Oakley’s time is up? Survival is not forever and we’re already squeezed to death here. Even with many people moving out of the area and the state, there are still way too many people in California and that’s why we are experiencing so many problems. I’m heading for Washington State . . The San Juan Islands!

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here