Oakland adopts state model affordable-housing ordinance and raises downtown density amid resident concerns over sites and transparency

The Oakland Borough Council moved quickly on Feb. 24 to adopt a package of ordinances intended to align the borough’s code with recent state changes to affordable-housing rules.

Attorney Giblin explained that the borough must adopt the state’s model housing ordinance and update local zoning provisions by the state deadline (March 15/16) to preserve immunity from builders’ remedy lawsuits. The council introduced and voted on several items: ordinance 26-983 (adopting the state model ordinance to replace Chapter 18), ordinance 26-984 (amending the downtown affordable housing overlay to increase permitted density from 18 to 22 units per acre and raising the affordable set-aside to 20% for rentals and sales) and ordinance 26-985 (applying the 20% set-aside to Downtown Area 2). Additional rezoning ordinances related to the McBride property and the Leoni property were also introduced.

Residents used the public-comment period to press for more information and raise site-specific concerns. Joan Cech, chief of the Oakland First Aid Squad, asked the borough to require elevators or alternative means of removing patients from any affordable building taller than two stories, saying it is difficult for volunteer responders to carry equipment and patients up stairs. “We humbly request that any building over 2 stories has an elevator or some method for us to be able to get people out quickly in an emergency,” she said.

Attorney Giblin and borough staff said state law constrains the borough from mandating features that are “cost generative” — requirements that add mandatory construction costs developers are not required to absorb under the statute. He told residents that for sites already zoned in prior rounds (the transcript referenced the Roper site adopted in round three) there was no zoning change proposed in this fourth round, and that unit counts on those sites remained the same.

Other residents raised traffic, stormwater and sewer-capacity concerns about specific proposed sites, including a parcel behind Ace Hardware referred to locally as the Roper site. Speakers sought clarity about where density increases would apply and what infrastructure or mitigation measures would be required at the planning-board stage. Attorney Giblin said site plans and traffic, parking and ingress/egress issues are reviewed later by the Planning Board, and residents are entitled to participate in those hearings.

Council members said the ordinances primarily implement the state model and that comments on traffic and site design should be raised at forthcoming Planning Board hearings. Final public hearings and votes were scheduled for March 12 as noted in the meeting; staff indicated the ordinances and related materials will be posted on the borough website.