STOP High Density Residential Development on Laurel & Mercedes Ln, Oakley, CA

The Issue

STOP THE PROPOSED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (58 LOTS) ON EMPTY LOT AT LAUREL & MERCEDES LN. 

THIS IS THE SAME DEVELOPER (O'HARA PROPERTIES) WHO BUILT THE MCDONALDS THAT OUR COMMUNITY VOTED AGAINST. HISTORY IS GOING TO REPEAT ITSELF IF WE DON’T ALL TAKE ACTION. 

O'HARA PROPERTIES IS PROPOSING TO CONVERT THIS EMPTY LOT FROM COMMERCIAL (C) ZONING TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. 

SIGN THIS PETITION TO SHOW YOUR OPPOSITION FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT 

---------------------------------------------------

WHY SHOULD THIS BE REJECTED?

⦁ Conflict with Oakley’s General Plan and zoning ordinances
⦁ Lower property values
⦁ Detrimental social and economic consequences for the community
⦁ Increased traffic congestion
⦁ Not enough parking in area
⦁ Overcrowding of existing neighborhoods
⦁ RH zoning would be located right across from a school entrance
⦁ Loss of local character
⦁ Strain on Laurel Elementary School, local utilities, infrastructure, parks, and emergency services
⦁ Increased noise and pollution
⦁ Degradation of the quality of life for residents
⦁ Poor air quality
⦁ Violation of property rights to enjoy the neighborhood
⦁ Irreparable alteration of neighborhood character
⦁ Environmental and health impacts
⦁ Potential spot zoning
⦁ Negative impact on mental health of residents and increased stress
⦁ Safety concerns
⦁ Lack of public services and businesses
⦁ City Council’s duty to prioritize the residents' interests, not just the developer’s
⦁ The developer and city will still profit while keeping the lot commercial
⦁ The city would benefit more financially by maintaining commercial zoning (e.g., revenue from future businesses, taxes, jobs, sales taxes, property tax revenue - encouraging even more businesses and investments in Oakley in the future)
⦁ Potential for up to 95 dwelling units, leading to overcrowding and pressure for higher-density development on nearby vacant properties
⦁ Potential cascading negative effects and other high density developments built in the future on surrounding empty lots or properties
⦁ Increased costs for the city in terms of infrastructure and utility upkeep
⦁ Property owners’ right to protect home values, based on the understanding of commercial zoning
⦁ Rezoning violates Oakley’s land use goals and intended use
⦁ Possibility of further action from residents if the rezoning is approved


⦁ The community has witnessed this before with the Mcdonalds and Quick Quack Car wash on Laurel that O'hara properties built. The community had outright rejected these developments - over 900 residents. The proposed McDonald’s restaurant and Quick Quack Car Wash at the Laurel Plaza Shopping Center had both been denied conditional use approval by a previous City Council in May 2022 and rejected this proposal. Following the denials, the property owner, O’Hara Properties, sued the city in county Superior Court. Afterwards, a group of new city council members voted with O'hara properties to build those developments.

History may repeat itself again or continue to repeat itself. This may set the wrong tone for future local or foreign developers to sue the city or hold the city hostage, each time they don't get their proposed rezoning or developments accepted by the community and the city.   

491

The Issue

STOP THE PROPOSED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (58 LOTS) ON EMPTY LOT AT LAUREL & MERCEDES LN. 

THIS IS THE SAME DEVELOPER (O'HARA PROPERTIES) WHO BUILT THE MCDONALDS THAT OUR COMMUNITY VOTED AGAINST. HISTORY IS GOING TO REPEAT ITSELF IF WE DON’T ALL TAKE ACTION. 

O'HARA PROPERTIES IS PROPOSING TO CONVERT THIS EMPTY LOT FROM COMMERCIAL (C) ZONING TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. 

SIGN THIS PETITION TO SHOW YOUR OPPOSITION FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT 

---------------------------------------------------

WHY SHOULD THIS BE REJECTED?

⦁ Conflict with Oakley’s General Plan and zoning ordinances
⦁ Lower property values
⦁ Detrimental social and economic consequences for the community
⦁ Increased traffic congestion
⦁ Not enough parking in area
⦁ Overcrowding of existing neighborhoods
⦁ RH zoning would be located right across from a school entrance
⦁ Loss of local character
⦁ Strain on Laurel Elementary School, local utilities, infrastructure, parks, and emergency services
⦁ Increased noise and pollution
⦁ Degradation of the quality of life for residents
⦁ Poor air quality
⦁ Violation of property rights to enjoy the neighborhood
⦁ Irreparable alteration of neighborhood character
⦁ Environmental and health impacts
⦁ Potential spot zoning
⦁ Negative impact on mental health of residents and increased stress
⦁ Safety concerns
⦁ Lack of public services and businesses
⦁ City Council’s duty to prioritize the residents' interests, not just the developer’s
⦁ The developer and city will still profit while keeping the lot commercial
⦁ The city would benefit more financially by maintaining commercial zoning (e.g., revenue from future businesses, taxes, jobs, sales taxes, property tax revenue - encouraging even more businesses and investments in Oakley in the future)
⦁ Potential for up to 95 dwelling units, leading to overcrowding and pressure for higher-density development on nearby vacant properties
⦁ Potential cascading negative effects and other high density developments built in the future on surrounding empty lots or properties
⦁ Increased costs for the city in terms of infrastructure and utility upkeep
⦁ Property owners’ right to protect home values, based on the understanding of commercial zoning
⦁ Rezoning violates Oakley’s land use goals and intended use
⦁ Possibility of further action from residents if the rezoning is approved


⦁ The community has witnessed this before with the Mcdonalds and Quick Quack Car wash on Laurel that O'hara properties built. The community had outright rejected these developments - over 900 residents. The proposed McDonald’s restaurant and Quick Quack Car Wash at the Laurel Plaza Shopping Center had both been denied conditional use approval by a previous City Council in May 2022 and rejected this proposal. Following the denials, the property owner, O’Hara Properties, sued the city in county Superior Court. Afterwards, a group of new city council members voted with O'hara properties to build those developments.

History may repeat itself again or continue to repeat itself. This may set the wrong tone for future local or foreign developers to sue the city or hold the city hostage, each time they don't get their proposed rezoning or developments accepted by the community and the city.   

Support now

491


Supporter Voices

Petition updates