Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Report from West Oakland Rally Against the "Central Station" redevelopment master plan
Oaklanders resist new upper-income mega-development around the historic 16th Street train station. Town Hall Meeting: 7 p.m., Wednesday, July 28, at the West Oakland Senior Center, 1724 Adeline Street. 1 minute mini-video.
100 West Oaklanders came out this afternoon to the old train station at 16th and Wood Streets, where developer Rick Holliday is planning a 1,500-unit condo development dubbed "Central Station." Although West Oakland has long been a relatively impoverished, working class neighborhood, not one unit of low-income housing has been planned for the new development flanking the train tracks and 880 freeway; condominiums will start at $300,000
and one-bedroom apartments will rent for $1,200.
Rick Holliday is infamous for kick-starting loft development in San Francisco, where public pressure and resistance to upper-income housing development eventually forced him to move his projects to the east bay. Two other developers are now involved in the project, Andy Getz of HFH, Inc., and BUILD West Oakland, a for-profit spinoff of Bridge Housing run by Carol Galante.
The grandparents of many residents of the community originally arrived in Oakland at the 16th and Wood station, and many were employed as Pullman Porters at the Porters' west coast headquarters. Thanks to years of union organizing and struggle, many train workers were able to buy homes in West Oakland and support their families.
Residents of the community now stand united in calls to preserve the train station as a community-controlled museum for the Pullman Porters, and to earmark at least 30% of the new development as affordable low-income housing.
The City of Oakland has been in discussions about funding to fix up the train station for use by the new development, possibly as a "toy train museum" or commercial space. The city will also be paying to restore infrastructure in the neighborhood, which will benefit the developers. Community activists say the developers can afford to meet their demands. Rick Holliday bought the property from the railroad at a bargain price and has already sold off parts of it at a handsome profit. Holliday is relying on the City to condemn and demolish the old victorian homes on Wood Street that stand in his path; many of these homes are even how being fixed up by their owners, in hopes of getting top dollar from the city as the redevelopment plan moves forward (local residents doing the fixup work earn $40-$60/day).
Local resident Monsa Nitoto came out to today's rally to call for West Oaklanders to organize and kick Rick Holliday out just as citizens in San Francisco did. Joanna Fitzpatrick says its time for her neighborhood to get together and "get the housing we need for our people." Baldwin Ladd, of Just Cause, says West Oakland needs housing for working class people, some of whom subsist on as little as $9,000 a year, not housing for people who can afford San Francisco condos.
Chen, representing Asian & Pacific Islander Youth Promoting Advocacy and Leadership (APAL), says his group is working to keep the community together after seeing too many friends and family get evicted. Bill Hutchins, also of Just Cause, described the development as yet another subtle plan to get poor people and black people out of Oakland. Old timers and the young generation alike see the development site -- surrounded by fences and guarded by a private security force -- as a racist invasion of the land, the train station and the history that is theirs.
Melissa, from Just Cause, invited residents of the community to "bum rush" next week's Town Hall Meeting, where she says developers will once again be lying to the people about their so-called "affordable" housing. That meeting is scheduled for 7 p.m. on Wednesday, July 28, at the West Oakland Senior Center, 1724 Adeline Street.
Many residents have lived in the neighborhood for decades, watching as the freeway went up and, years later, came back down. Elderly residents, including retired Porters spoke out today about the rich history of the neighborhood and the challenges they weathered as they supported and raised their families. In the words of one proud West Oaklander, "I can't afford a $350,000 home. This is my home."
|
The grandparents of many residents of the community originally arrived in Oakland at the 16th and Wood station, and many were employed as Pullman Porters at the Porters' west coast headquarters. Thanks to years of union organizing and struggle, many train workers were able to buy homes in West Oakland and support their families.
Residents of the community now stand united in calls to preserve the train station as a community-controlled museum for the Pullman Porters, and to earmark at least 30% of the new development as affordable low-income housing.
The City of Oakland has been in discussions about funding to fix up the train station for use by the new development, possibly as a "toy train museum" or commercial space. The city will also be paying to restore infrastructure in the neighborhood, which will benefit the developers. Community activists say the developers can afford to meet their demands. Rick Holliday bought the property from the railroad at a bargain price and has already sold off parts of it at a handsome profit. Holliday is relying on the City to condemn and demolish the old victorian homes on Wood Street that stand in his path; many of these homes are even how being fixed up by their owners, in hopes of getting top dollar from the city as the redevelopment plan moves forward (local residents doing the fixup work earn $40-$60/day).
Local resident Monsa Nitoto came out to today's rally to call for West Oaklanders to organize and kick Rick Holliday out just as citizens in San Francisco did. Joanna Fitzpatrick says its time for her neighborhood to get together and "get the housing we need for our people." Baldwin Ladd, of Just Cause, says West Oakland needs housing for working class people, some of whom subsist on as little as $9,000 a year, not housing for people who can afford San Francisco condos.
Chen, representing Asian & Pacific Islander Youth Promoting Advocacy and Leadership (APAL), says his group is working to keep the community together after seeing too many friends and family get evicted. Bill Hutchins, also of Just Cause, described the development as yet another subtle plan to get poor people and black people out of Oakland. Old timers and the young generation alike see the development site -- surrounded by fences and guarded by a private security force -- as a racist invasion of the land, the train station and the history that is theirs.
Melissa, from Just Cause, invited residents of the community to "bum rush" next week's Town Hall Meeting, where she says developers will once again be lying to the people about their so-called "affordable" housing. That meeting is scheduled for 7 p.m. on Wednesday, July 28, at the West Oakland Senior Center, 1724 Adeline Street.
Many residents have lived in the neighborhood for decades, watching as the freeway went up and, years later, came back down. Elderly residents, including retired Porters spoke out today about the rich history of the neighborhood and the challenges they weathered as they supported and raised their families. In the words of one proud West Oaklander, "I can't afford a $350,000 home. This is my home."
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
While this article shows some member’s of the communities concern about the proposed development, it offers little in the way of suggestion for making the proposal better. With a flat out ‘no’ to the concept, what is left for otherwise vacant and idle land of no utility to West Oakland.
Monsa Nitoto was at the City of Oakland’s Planning Commission meeting when HFH and BUILD presented the initial concept. As I recall, he had no objection to the project, but was concerned for the surrounding community and the employment of locals in the construction phases. This article states he now wants all involved to pull out, a seemingly grand change of heart. What does he suggest, and more importantly who do it, be built on these parcels?
While offering criticism, one should have a alternative that is workable to offer in exchange. While many that post on this site like to see the big bad developers kicked out of anywhere, they are the only one’s proposing a workable solution to these long-vacant lots. The key is to bring in those how might have ideas of how to increase the affordable units (at a variety of income levels) and find out about financing opportunities for non-traditional home buyers to get into some of these new units. Again, the contrarian view does little to work toward any of this.
For example: Is a Porter’s association raising funds, drawing up facilities ideas, or any other project oriented ideas that could make the museum work with the proposal? The museum is a great idea, one of national interest not just local appeal, but needs a proactive group that is willing to compromise to make it happen. Deriding a project for not having it at the initial proposal does little to foster a relationship that could get it incorporated into the final mix.
Instead of a "bum rush" at the project meeting, why not come with a clear set of proposals, be they personal or from a larger group. Give the to people at the meeting so every one have a record of your ideas. Don’t attack the people involved, but focus on the process and the project and what you think it needs to be better than the current proposal. If not, little will come, save for an acrimonious public process.
Finally, follow up with this event by getting involved in the land use planning process. Planning meetings are held every other week. Along with you basic permitting process, updates to the General Plan and other guiding documents are discussed. By learning what planning does for a community, you can lend you voice to help shape the future development. This future development, guided by these documents, is a reflection of the problems and things that did not work in the past, along with continuing the ideas that have been successful. However, without sufficient public input, these documents reflect a narrower experience of the community.
Monsa Nitoto was at the City of Oakland’s Planning Commission meeting when HFH and BUILD presented the initial concept. As I recall, he had no objection to the project, but was concerned for the surrounding community and the employment of locals in the construction phases. This article states he now wants all involved to pull out, a seemingly grand change of heart. What does he suggest, and more importantly who do it, be built on these parcels?
While offering criticism, one should have a alternative that is workable to offer in exchange. While many that post on this site like to see the big bad developers kicked out of anywhere, they are the only one’s proposing a workable solution to these long-vacant lots. The key is to bring in those how might have ideas of how to increase the affordable units (at a variety of income levels) and find out about financing opportunities for non-traditional home buyers to get into some of these new units. Again, the contrarian view does little to work toward any of this.
For example: Is a Porter’s association raising funds, drawing up facilities ideas, or any other project oriented ideas that could make the museum work with the proposal? The museum is a great idea, one of national interest not just local appeal, but needs a proactive group that is willing to compromise to make it happen. Deriding a project for not having it at the initial proposal does little to foster a relationship that could get it incorporated into the final mix.
Instead of a "bum rush" at the project meeting, why not come with a clear set of proposals, be they personal or from a larger group. Give the to people at the meeting so every one have a record of your ideas. Don’t attack the people involved, but focus on the process and the project and what you think it needs to be better than the current proposal. If not, little will come, save for an acrimonious public process.
Finally, follow up with this event by getting involved in the land use planning process. Planning meetings are held every other week. Along with you basic permitting process, updates to the General Plan and other guiding documents are discussed. By learning what planning does for a community, you can lend you voice to help shape the future development. This future development, guided by these documents, is a reflection of the problems and things that did not work in the past, along with continuing the ideas that have been successful. However, without sufficient public input, these documents reflect a narrower experience of the community.
The 16th & Wood Train Station Coalition, the Coalition for West Oakland Revitalization, Just Cause, and other groups are calling for Holliday, BUILD, and HFH to build 30% low-income housing on the site, and to help pay for the restoration of the station as a community-run museum. By "community-run," the groups are proposing that the developers and city involve the already-formed Train Station Coalition, which includes retired porters, in establishing and running the museum.
I just got home from the distric 3 town hall meeting where the proposed plan for the 16th st station redevelopement was dicussed,and i have to say-I'm all for it.Mr.Holliday is a big developer, but he does care about the community and what gets built on this historic site.This building has been empty for years doing nothing for the community or the city,and I for one am thrilled that someone other than an evil coporation (Im picturing Wallmart)bought the land and wants to bring life back to the station.Im all for low income housing-but am more interested in teaching and helping low income people how to buy a home.Why not help bring income levels up to meet housing prices, focus on job training and youth outreach instead of 'bum rushing' a community meeting.Empty decaying buildings do nothing for my community(which reminds me, no one is getting displaced by this project).Building an enviroment for people to live does.
"I for one am thrilled that someone other than an evil coporation (Im picturing WalMart)bought the land and wants to bring life back to the station."
I don't really think that LIFE is what Mr Holliday has in mind. I think that he is mainly interested in money, and that doesn't really have anything to do with bringing LIFE back to the train station, unless you factor in all the people that are pissed off and will be around the neighborhood protesting Mr. Holliday's whitewashing of the Bottoms and it's history.
"I'm all for low income housing-but am more interested in teaching and helping low income people how to buy a home."
How the hell do you teach a low income person to buy a home? It's not like there are easy ways to get around the fact that folks are low income and people are invading their neighborhood in a land grab move, meanwhile pushing up home and land values to levels beyond the reach of low income folks. That is unless they are able to buy or otherwise acquire land or a house under some sort of special program that the banks and developers have set up to appease the low income folks and make themselves as capitalists feel a little better.
"Why not help bring income levels up to meet housing prices, focus on job training and youth outreach instead of 'bum rushing' a community meeting."
Yeah, why not huh? And why not employ only local folks to help build the housing and plan the housing to match with the local history and building style so it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb(or an ugly temporary loft structure). Really who is "bum rushing" who? One group of folks has grown up in the bottoms, for better or worse - in sickness and in health, whereas one group is invading the commons simply for their own monetary interests...
Gee who is in the wrong and who is acting as if these folks need anymore patriarchal bs from someone like Mr. Holliday or other big moneyed interestes from outside the neighborhood...
Let the resistance continue and with any luck we will make sure that West Oakland does not become yet another SOMA, Emeryville, or Jack London.
I don't really think that LIFE is what Mr Holliday has in mind. I think that he is mainly interested in money, and that doesn't really have anything to do with bringing LIFE back to the train station, unless you factor in all the people that are pissed off and will be around the neighborhood protesting Mr. Holliday's whitewashing of the Bottoms and it's history.
"I'm all for low income housing-but am more interested in teaching and helping low income people how to buy a home."
How the hell do you teach a low income person to buy a home? It's not like there are easy ways to get around the fact that folks are low income and people are invading their neighborhood in a land grab move, meanwhile pushing up home and land values to levels beyond the reach of low income folks. That is unless they are able to buy or otherwise acquire land or a house under some sort of special program that the banks and developers have set up to appease the low income folks and make themselves as capitalists feel a little better.
"Why not help bring income levels up to meet housing prices, focus on job training and youth outreach instead of 'bum rushing' a community meeting."
Yeah, why not huh? And why not employ only local folks to help build the housing and plan the housing to match with the local history and building style so it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb(or an ugly temporary loft structure). Really who is "bum rushing" who? One group of folks has grown up in the bottoms, for better or worse - in sickness and in health, whereas one group is invading the commons simply for their own monetary interests...
Gee who is in the wrong and who is acting as if these folks need anymore patriarchal bs from someone like Mr. Holliday or other big moneyed interestes from outside the neighborhood...
Let the resistance continue and with any luck we will make sure that West Oakland does not become yet another SOMA, Emeryville, or Jack London.
Some corrections and additions:
The city of Oakland will NOT be doing any of the infrastructure improvements like sidewalks, lighting, sewers, etc. They are all costs that the developer is assuming in addition to the cost of toxic clean-up which is likely to be somewhere between $500,000 to 1.5 million.
The money being borrowed for the project from CAL-PERS Retirement Fund has a required return on investment of 12%. CAL-PERS Retirement Fund covers retirement for most city, school district, possibly county and state employees.
Some members of the community, particularly home owners including long time African American homeowners are very supportive of the project.
Negotiations will continue to develop a community entity to oversee the use of the train station itself which everyone (most community members and the developers) agree should be a museum and community space where the museum would be dedicated to the history of the Pullman porters.
The city of Oakland will NOT be doing any of the infrastructure improvements like sidewalks, lighting, sewers, etc. They are all costs that the developer is assuming in addition to the cost of toxic clean-up which is likely to be somewhere between $500,000 to 1.5 million.
The money being borrowed for the project from CAL-PERS Retirement Fund has a required return on investment of 12%. CAL-PERS Retirement Fund covers retirement for most city, school district, possibly county and state employees.
Some members of the community, particularly home owners including long time African American homeowners are very supportive of the project.
Negotiations will continue to develop a community entity to oversee the use of the train station itself which everyone (most community members and the developers) agree should be a museum and community space where the museum would be dedicated to the history of the Pullman porters.
I'm glad to hear there is momentum towards a museum for the Pullman Porters.. but I do question the complete lack of affordable housing in such a large-scale development. I'm not surprised that some homeowners support the gentrification plan, but what about renters and potential homeowners of modest means, particularly families, will they be priced out? What about the "ancillary retail," will it be rented to Emeryville-esque chains or local small business?
p.s. In our system, communities need developers' capital to rebuild anything, but the community's needs should be served-- possibly placing a limit on the developer's profits. Of course developers will fight this tooth and nail.. the only tools available to people who can't vote with their dollars are public demonstrations and the like. It bothers me that people protesting for a museum and affordable housing are misrepresented as fans of vacant, toxic-contaminated lots and empty buildings, stagnation, etc..
p.s. In our system, communities need developers' capital to rebuild anything, but the community's needs should be served-- possibly placing a limit on the developer's profits. Of course developers will fight this tooth and nail.. the only tools available to people who can't vote with their dollars are public demonstrations and the like. It bothers me that people protesting for a museum and affordable housing are misrepresented as fans of vacant, toxic-contaminated lots and empty buildings, stagnation, etc..
I can sympathize with the noble goal to secure low income housing in West Oakland. However, are opponents interested in a "low-income only West Oakland"? Besides the Mandela condos, the rest of W. Oakland is "low income galore". Yes, the constuction of BART and the 880 years ago devastated the district, but there is nothing that can be done about that. Its water under the bridge.
We need investment in the neighborhood now. Educate me..I know catholic charities sponsored a lot of low-income construction in the ealy 1990s. Are there other such properties? Is the area bereft of low income housing.
If people are against the Holiday project, is there any plan to bring investment and comerce to the area? There is simnply no investment in that area that can pull it our of the gutter. Of course the improvement of a district should not be the kind of gentrification that relacates current residents and the poor. But if some major plan that included investment such is Holiday is not undertaken, then you might as well bring in a fleet of bulldozers. The history of this area is visibly rotting away. The hour is late. Stop bickering and act!
We need investment in the neighborhood now. Educate me..I know catholic charities sponsored a lot of low-income construction in the ealy 1990s. Are there other such properties? Is the area bereft of low income housing.
If people are against the Holiday project, is there any plan to bring investment and comerce to the area? There is simnply no investment in that area that can pull it our of the gutter. Of course the improvement of a district should not be the kind of gentrification that relacates current residents and the poor. But if some major plan that included investment such is Holiday is not undertaken, then you might as well bring in a fleet of bulldozers. The history of this area is visibly rotting away. The hour is late. Stop bickering and act!
Condominiums at $300,000 is low-income housing in the bay area, even Oakland. I've lived off San Pablo Ave. for over 15yrs and modest 2Br homes in my neighborhood are now selling for over $500,000. These homes are--by and large--owned by African Americans who are selling and moving to the South where property is so much cheaper. Those of us who have lived in the hood for a while bought our homes for 100,000 and some of us for even less. But remember, in the 1980s the San Pable Ave/Emeryville border was not a desirable place to live. It was dangerous and there were very few businesses--small, medium, corporate or otherwise. The acceleration of gentrification in the 1990s led to many desirable developments in the neighborhood: it became safe to hang out with your kids, businesses moved in, etc. Hopefully this will happen in West-O as well.
Development is a Catch 22. West Oakland is a neighborhood with a rich history, but has suffered from serious setbacks like polution from the ports and freeway. Subsequently, the earthquake and port settlements has brought about a revival of this neighborhood, and that brings up the question of gentrification because on the one hand, people want good, clean, safe neighborhoods to live, work and recreate, but you cannot have your cake and eat it too.
There is a price for renewal and that ultimately means that some of West Oakland's messiest industry and poorest residents will leave. However, there are several things that need to be considered before you yell out "fuck you yuppies!" If you look at architecture and urban planning history,
1) concentrating poor people is not sustainable. A neighborhood will always suffer as long as its smartest, most talented residents, particularly its youth want to leave from that place. If they get mixed up with the wrong crowd, it becomes a prison for them.
2) If you want a viable neighborhood, you have to have diversity of skills, talents and backgrounds. No developers or commercial businesses like groceries want to invest in a neighborhood that is isolated, so people and jobs have to move in, plain an simple. Making West Oakland a safer, cleaner place cannot happen on its own, rather the soul of the place is affected both internally and externally. And if you look at cities around this country, the one city where there are the highest number of African-American millionaires is Portland. Why? Because they enforced an urban growth boundary that cut off development at the fringes and forced people to reinvest in their inner city, where many people who were dissadvanteged had the advantage.
3) Suburbs are the death of our country. We pay such a high price for gas, particulary in our soldiers lives. If we want to reduce dependence of foreign oil, we have to infill and redevelop our inner cities in order to stop building out.
4) Industry is changing. Steel mills and other industries in Oakland have been closed for years and will NEVER come back as long as China exists. That is not to say that jobs don't exist, rather, our new industries are in biotech, communications and more high tech fields. some of the land in west oakland is just sitting rather than converting it to residential and more realistic commercial/industrial uses. Numi Tea, Earthsource lumber, sharfenberger chocolate are all very viable too, and have to be alloted land, but that would require a clearer vision from our elected officials and planning department.
5) Finally, gentrification works beyond the poverty line. Many young, educated people can no longer afford to live in the places their parents raised them in. Building single family detached housing is not economical in california (except for in flood plains in sacramento). So many people who should be able to afford to live here can't and that is a reason to build both market rate and affordable housing in west oakland.
There is a price for renewal and that ultimately means that some of West Oakland's messiest industry and poorest residents will leave. However, there are several things that need to be considered before you yell out "fuck you yuppies!" If you look at architecture and urban planning history,
1) concentrating poor people is not sustainable. A neighborhood will always suffer as long as its smartest, most talented residents, particularly its youth want to leave from that place. If they get mixed up with the wrong crowd, it becomes a prison for them.
2) If you want a viable neighborhood, you have to have diversity of skills, talents and backgrounds. No developers or commercial businesses like groceries want to invest in a neighborhood that is isolated, so people and jobs have to move in, plain an simple. Making West Oakland a safer, cleaner place cannot happen on its own, rather the soul of the place is affected both internally and externally. And if you look at cities around this country, the one city where there are the highest number of African-American millionaires is Portland. Why? Because they enforced an urban growth boundary that cut off development at the fringes and forced people to reinvest in their inner city, where many people who were dissadvanteged had the advantage.
3) Suburbs are the death of our country. We pay such a high price for gas, particulary in our soldiers lives. If we want to reduce dependence of foreign oil, we have to infill and redevelop our inner cities in order to stop building out.
4) Industry is changing. Steel mills and other industries in Oakland have been closed for years and will NEVER come back as long as China exists. That is not to say that jobs don't exist, rather, our new industries are in biotech, communications and more high tech fields. some of the land in west oakland is just sitting rather than converting it to residential and more realistic commercial/industrial uses. Numi Tea, Earthsource lumber, sharfenberger chocolate are all very viable too, and have to be alloted land, but that would require a clearer vision from our elected officials and planning department.
5) Finally, gentrification works beyond the poverty line. Many young, educated people can no longer afford to live in the places their parents raised them in. Building single family detached housing is not economical in california (except for in flood plains in sacramento). So many people who should be able to afford to live here can't and that is a reason to build both market rate and affordable housing in west oakland.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$210.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network