Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors press Piedmont commission over wildfire, evacuation and parking risks for Moraga Canyon plan
Summary
Dozens of residents urged the commission to slow or rethink dense housing in Moraga Canyon, raising evacuation, parking overflow and speeding concerns; officials and the fire marshal said the plan includes evacuation coordination and fire‑safe measures but left many specifics for future project review.
During the public‑comment period on the Moraga Canyon specific plan, more than two dozen residents voiced safety and traffic concerns, many citing memories of the 1991 Oakland Hills fire and narrow neighborhood streets.
Vivian Mather, an Oakland neighbor, told the commission, "There is nothing safe about this project," arguing that adding housing at the canyon's narrow choke points and increasing vehicle counts would heighten evacuation risk. Several speakers described narrow side streets, frequent speeding on Moraga Avenue, and a lack of existing sidewalks and transit access. Todd Kaiser, a nearby resident, criticized the plan for lacking a realistic parking strategy, asserting the draft's assumptions could leave hundreds of cars overflowing into residential streets.
Officials responded that the specific plan establishes fire‑resistant construction standards, defensible‑space landscaping, and roadway improvements (including a potential signal at Red Rock Road and coordinated evacuation timing). Fire Marshal Mike Carlisle told commissioners that "improvements to those areas are gonna absolutely help us in protecting the city in case of a wildfire," while staff and consultants emphasized that project‑level design review, development agreements and construction permits would be the forum to address site‑level parking, driveway sight distances and construction staging.
The exchange left several concerns open: neighbors sought binding parking guarantees, clarified evacuation routing in a power outage, and pressed for earlier community engagement on traffic modeling; staff replied that many of those items will be revisited during developer selection and design review. The commission ultimately recommended the plan to council, but multiple commenters urged the council and staff to ensure that project‑level review fully addresses the safety and parking issues raised.
