View Resolution Exhibit B - EJ Element_Public Hearing Draft and Appendices — Oakland City Council, September 26, 2023 (part 1 of 2)

PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
July 2023
Oakland 2045
Oakland Environmental
Justice Element
EXHIBIT B:1
Prepared by: With Contributions From:

E/J Solutions
PolicyLink
2045 General Plan Update | Environmental Justice Element i
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY��ES-1

1. INTRODUCTION �� 1-1

1.1 Purpose and Requirements...............................................................................................1-1 Statutory Requirements ...................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Racial Equity Goals for the City of Oakland + Previous Ongoing Efforts ............................. 1-2 Relationship to Oakland’s General Plan Elements ............................................................................. 1-3 Connection to Vision and Guiding Principles .......................................................................................1-6

1.2 Environmental Justice Planning Process.................................................................... 1-7 Environmental Justice and Racial Equity Baseline Report ........................................................... 1-7 EJ Element Racial Equity Impact Analysis ..............................................................................................1-8 Revision of EJ Communities Mapping.......................................................................................................1-8

1.3 Community Outreach ........................................................................................................1-9

2. ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM AND HEALTH INEQUITIES IN

3. REDUCING POLLUTION EXPOSURE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY ......3-1

3.1 Issues and Disparities ......................................................................................................... 3-1 Pollution Burden ..................................................................................................................................................... 3-1 Sensitive Land Uses.............................................................................................................................................. 3-2 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................................................... 3-2 Water Quality.......................................................................................................................................................... 3-10 Solid Waste Sites ................................................................................................................................................. 3-14 Illegal Dumping .................................................................................................................................................... 3-14

3.2 Goals and Policies...............................................................................................................3-19

4. SAFE, HEALTHY, AND AFFORDABLE HOMES...............................................4-1

4.1 Issues and Disparities .........................................................................................................4-1 Cost Burden and Evictions................................................................................................................................4-1 Code Enforcement ................................................................................................................................................4-2 Older Housing..........................................................................................................................................................4-2 Lead............................................................................................................................................................................... 4-4 Indoor Air Quality.................................................................................................................................................. 4-4 Healthy Housing Locations............................................................................................................................. 4-6

4.2 Goals and Policies................................................................................................................4-8

5. EXPANDING HEALTHY FOOD ACCESS.................................................5-1

5.1 Issues and Disparities ......................................................................................................... 5-1 Food Access............................................................................................................................................................... 5-2 Food Distribution and Recovery................................................................................................................... 5-2 Food Assistance and Education ................................................................................................................... 5-2

5.2 Goals and Policies................................................................................................................ 5-6 OAKLAND�� 2-1

2.1 Historical Context / Root Causes.....................................................................................2-1 Environmental Racism as a Historical Process ......................................................................................2-1

2.2 Land Use and Health ......................................................................................................... 2-8 Health Inequities ....................................................................................................................................................2-8 How Planning and Land Use Impact Health ....................................................................................... 2-9

2.3 Identifying Environmental Justice Communities...................................................2-11 Purpose and Definition......................................................................................................................................2-11 Methodology............................................................................................................................................................2-12 Results .........................................................................................................................................................................2-15 ii
2045 General Plan Update | Environmental Justice Element

6. EQUITABLE PUBLIC FACILITIES �� 6-1

6.1 Issues and Disparities ........................................................................................................ 6-2 Community Facilities ........................................................................................................................................... 6-2 Public Art, Cultural Infrastructure, and Facilities ................................................................................ 6-2 Public Infrastructure ........................................................................................................................................... 6-2 Public Services and Utilities.............................................................................................................................6-5

6.2 Goals and Policies................................................................................................................6-6

7. PROMOTING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY ��7-1

7.1 Issues and Disparities ..........................................................................................................7-1 Mobility and Safety..................................................................................................................................................7-1 Park Access and Maintenance.......................................................................................................................7-8 Urban Forest and Urban Greening..............................................................................................................7-8

7.2 Goals and Policies............................................................................................................... 7-13

8. ENGAGED COMMUNITIES�� 8-1 Engagement Best Practices ............................................................................................................................8-1

8.1 Issues and Disparities ........................................................................................................ 8-2 Linguistic Isolation ................................................................................................................................................8-2 Internet Access........................................................................................................................................................8-2 Economic Well-Being..........................................................................................................................................8-5

8.2 Goals and Policies................................................................................................................8-8

9. IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS AND PROGRAMS ..................................9-1

9.1 Prioritizing Improvements and Programs that Meet the Needs of EJ Communities .......................................................................................................................... 9-1 2045 General Plan Update | Environmental Justice Element iii
List of Figures
Figure EJ-1: Racial Concentration 1940-2019 .......................................................................................2-5 Figure EJ-2: Median Household Income 1940-2019 .......................................................................2-6 Figure EJ-3: Prevalence of Poverty ...........................................................................................................2-7 Figure EJ-4: Life Expectancy .....................................................................................................................2-10 Figure EJ-5: CalEnviroScreen Score Components............................................................................ 2-11 Figure EJ-6: Structure of EJ Communities Screening Indicators ........................................... 2-12 Figure EJ-7: Environmental Justice Communities ........................................................................ 2-17 Figure EJ-8: Sensitive Land Uses, 2021 ....................................................................................................3-3 Figure EJ-9: BAAQMD Modeled Diesel Emissions .......................................................................... 3-6 Figure EJ-10: BAAQMD Modeled PM2.5 Emissions .........................................................................3-7 Figure EJ-11: NO2 and Health Effects ...................................................................................................... 3-8 Figure EJ-12: Air Quality Topic Score .........................................................................................................3-9 Figure EJ-13: Groundwater Threats, 2021 ..............................................................................................3-11 Figure EJ-14: Hazardous Materials Sites ................................................................................................3-16 Figure EJ-15: Calls for Illegal Dumping ..................................................................................................3-17 Figure EJ-16: Pollution Exposure of Sensitive Uses ........................................................................3-18 Figure EJ-17: Code Enforcement Complaints ................................................................................... 4-3 Figure EJ-18: Childhood Lead Risk ..........................................................................................................4-5 Figure EJ-19: Food Access ..............................................................................................................................5-3 Figure EJ-20: Head Start Locations .......................................................................................................... 6-3 Figure EJ-21: Healthcare Locations ...........................................................................................................6-4 Figure EJ-22: Oakland Existing and Proposed Bicycle Network, 2019 ................................7-2 Figure EJ-23: Oakland Transit Network, 2017 .................................................................................... 7-4 Figure EJ-24: Sidewalk Gaps in Oakland (2004-2007) ...................................................................7-5 Figure EJ-25: Crashes in Oakland 2016-2020 ......................................................................................7-6 Figure EJ-26: Parks Walkability ..................................................................................................................7-9 Figure EJ-27: Urban Tree Canopy ............................................................................................................7-10 Figure EJ-28: Climate Change Category Score ............................................................................... 7-12 List of Tables and Charts
Table EJ-1: Relationship of other Element Policies to Environmental Justice Topic Areas...1-4 Chart EJ-1: Citywide Differences in Health Outcomes by Race, 2020 ...................................2-9 Table EJ-2: Environmental Justice Communities Summary...................................................... 2-15 Chart EJ-2: Citywide Census Tract Average of CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Pollution Burden Score by Race, 2021......................................................................................................................3-1 Table EJ-3: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Air Quality............................................ 3-5 Table EJ-4: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Water Quality...................................3-12 Table EJ-5: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Hazardous Materials/ Illegal Dumping..........................................................................................................................3-15 Chart EJ-3: Code Enforcement Complaints by Census Tract Racial Majority, 2020 ................4-2 Table EJ-6: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Safe, Healthy, and Affordable Homes........................................................................................................................4-7 Table EJ-7: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Expanding Healthy Food Access.....5-5 Chart EJ-4: Median Percent of Household Income Spent on Energy Costs by Race, 2018...6-5 Table EJ-8: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Equitable Public Facilities 6-5 Chart EJ-5: High Injury Network Crashes by Census Tract Racial Majority, 2018 7-7 Table EJ-9: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Promoting Physical Activity......7-11 Table EJ-10: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator – Civic Engagement.......................... 8-7 Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions ...................................................... 9-2 Figure EJ-29: Community Engagement Spectrum.......................................................................... 8-1 Figure EJ-30: Limited English-Speaking Ability, Population Ages 5 and Over, 2019...........8-3 Figure EJ-31: Internet Access at Home, 2019 .....................................................................................8-4 Figure EJ-32: High-Wage Jobs by Census Block Group, 2017 (EPA Smart Location Database 3.0) ..........................................................................................................................8-6 iv
2045 General Plan Update | Environmental Justice Element This page intentionally left blank.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
ES-1
This document builds upon Oakland’s current regulatory setting for equity and environmental justice, including Oakland Municipal Code Section 2.29.170, which specifies that “the City of Oakland will intentionally integrate, on a Citywide basis, the principles of ‘fair and just’ in all the City does in order to achieve equitable opportunities for all people and communities,” as well as City Council Resolution 89249: Declaring Racism A Public Health Crisis, which states “That the City of Oakland declares racism a public health crisis and recognizes the severe impact of racism on the well-being of Oakland residents and the City overall.” California law requires that each city and county adopt a general plan to guide its physical growth and development. A jurisdiction’s general plan is its official policy document to create a blueprint for the future of the jurisdiction and guide its development.

In California, all cities must adopt a General Plan composed of at least seven elements, including either an Environmental Justice Element or Environmental Justice goals and policies integrated into related elements. Because environmental justice is a cross-cutting topic, Oakland has chosen to adopt a standalone Environmental Justice Element, while integrating environmental justice strategies into policies, goals, and actions across other elements of the General Plan. This approach will enable the City to coordinate interdepartmental efforts to effectively address environmental justice and racial equity. The Environmental Justice Element, as do the other General Plan Elements, uses an equity lens throughout its analysis and focuses on burdened census tracts in the development of its goals, policies, and actions. Therefore, the Environmental Justice Element is rooted in an equity framework in accordance with the General Plan’s Vision Statement and Guiding Principles.

The Environmental Justice Element contains nine chapters. Following the introduction and history sections, the Environmental Justice Element summarizes baseline conditions within Oakland’s communities through the lens of six environmental factors.

In general, each of these six chapters contains an overview of an environmental condition, a summary of disparities and communities vulnerable to the factor, and a set of goals and policies specific to that factor. The communities that are highlighted in Executive Summary
Historical and ongoing governmental and industrial practices have led to, and continue to generate racially inequitable outcomes, and longstanding environmental injustices in Oakland.

This General Plan outlines actions to work toward undoing the impacts of these past practices and creating a fair and just city.

An environmental justice approach seeks to rectify these issues, improving the environmental health of those most harmed by pollution burdens and impacted by historic disinvestment and disenfranchisement by investing in these communities to create opportunities that will allow its residents to live long, healthy lives.

This document, the Environmental Justice Element of the City of Oakland’s General Plan, serves as the foundation for achieving equity and environmental justice when planning for future growth and development in Oakland. The Environmental Justice Element identifies communities that are disproportionately impacted by inequitable and unjust environmental harms, and proposes goals, policies, and objectives to reduce the unique or compounded health risks in these communities, referred to as Environmental Justice Communities.

ES-2
Executive Summary
each chapter are the highest-scoring census tracts identified by the Environmental Justice Communities screening analysis and Environmental Justice Element Racial Equity Impact Assessment processes as the places that experience the greatest disparities and/or vulnerabilities. Chapter 9 concludes with a comprehensive table of actions to achieve the goals and policies set forth in the preceding chapters. Below are brief descriptions of the contents under each chapter:
• Chapter 1, “Introduction,” presents the background and purpose of the Environmental Justice Element, including statutory requirements. It also outlines the City of Oakland’s process and community engagement efforts undertaken
to develop the Element. Further, the chapter outlines the racial equity goals of the Environmental Justice Element and considers the Element’s relationship to other elements of the City’s General Plan and guiding principles.
• Chapter 2, “Environmental Racism and Health Inequities in Oakland,” provides an overview of the historical
development and planning decisions of Oakland which have shaped current conditions of environmental disparities. This chapter includes a description of health inequities that have resulted from past planning decisions and defines Oaklandspecific Environmental Justice Communities (disadvantaged communities).
• Chapter 3, “Reducing Pollution Exposure and Improving Air Quality,” analyzes the pollution burden, especially on sensitive land uses, in Oakland from air pollution, water contamination, hazardous materials and toxics, and illegal dumping.
• Chapter 4, “Safe, Healthy, and Affordable Homes,” details housing disparities in the City of Oakland, including code enforcement, age of housing stock, and indoor air quality. • Chapter 5, “Expanding Healthy Food Access,” analyzes
Oakland’s food network, including availability of food outlets, food availability, and food quality.
• Chapter 6, “Equitable Public Facilities,” details the distribution of and investment in Oakland’s public
facilities, such as infrastructure, school facilities, parks, and transportation and emergency services.
• Chapter 7, “Promoting Physical Activity,” analyzes the barriers to physical activity and health in the city, such as mobility and safety, park access maintenance, and urban forest and greening.
• Chapter 8, “Engaged Communities,” details the City of Oakland’s community engagement efforts and challenges
experienced, including an overview of the community
engagement spectrum, linguistic isolation, internet access, and employment.
• Chapter 9, “Implementation Actions and Programs,”
provides a summary table of the goals, policies, and actions relevant to each of the environmental factors that address the unique needs of Environmental Justice Communities as identified in this Element.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
1-1
these harms.1 Consistent with State requirements, the EJ Element addresses community-identified environmental justice issues related to reducing pollution exposure and improving air quality; promoting safe, healthy, and affordable homes; providing equitable public facilities; expanding healthy food access; promoting physical activity; improving civic engagement; and prioritizing improvements and programs that meet the needs of Environmental Justice Communities (EJ Communities). 1 To read more about the Principles of Environmental Justice, please visit https://www.ejnet.org/ej/principles.html

1. Introduction
Oakland strives to be a city where all neighborhoods thrive, and community members have what they need to lead healthy and productive lives. This includes clean air, land, and water; quality, affordable housing located near jobs and amenities; an enjoyable, accessible network of parks, recreation, and community facilities; access to nutritious food; and other community assets distributed equitably throughout the city. To achieve this goal, the city must respond effectively to the resounding consequences of institutional and systemic discrimination that are reflected in Oakland’s uneven geography of opportunity. This has largely meant that predominantly lower-income neighborhoods and communities of color unfairly and disproportionately experience higher exposure to pollution, greater negative health impacts, and less access to health-promoting resources.

To chart a path forward toward a more equitable city, Oakland has created its first Environmental Justice Element (EJ Element) for the Oakland 2045 General Plan Update. The Environmental Justice movement arose to address our history of unjust governmental actions, find remedies to disproportionate impacts, and builds decision-making power among groups most affected by

1.1 PURPOSE AND REQUIREMENTS

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
The City of Oakland is updating its General Plan, a visionary blueprint for the City’s future over the next 20 years. Senate Bill (SB) 1000,2 the Planning for Healthy Communities Act, requires general plans to “identify objectives and policies to reduce the unique or compounded health risks in disadvantaged communities” by means that include, but are not limited to:
• Reducing pollution exposure, including the improvement of air quality;
• Promoting equitable access to public facilities,3 healthy food, safe and sanitary homes, and physical activity;
• Reducing barriers to inclusive engagement and participation in the public decision-making process; and
• Prioritizing improvements and programs that address the needs of disadvantaged communities.
2 SB 1000 is an act to amend Section 65302 of the California Government Code.
3 As defined in subdivision (d) of California Government Code Section 66000, “public facilities” includes public improvements, public services, and community amenities.
1-2
Chapter 1 | Introduction
How are “Disadvantaged Communities”
defined?
SB 1000 defines a “disadvantaged community” as “an area identified by the California Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to Section 39711 of the Health and Safety Code or an area that is a low-income area that is disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards
that can lead to negative health effects, exposure, or
environmental degradation.”4
Further, SB 1000 defines “Low-Income” as “an area with
household incomes at or below 80 percent of the statewide median income or with household incomes at or below the threshold designated as low income by the Department of Housing and Community Development’s list of state income limits adopted pursuant to Section 50093.

What is Equity?
In Oakland, equity means all people have full and equal access to opportunities that enable them to attain their full potential. It means that identity—such as race, ethnicity, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation or expression— has no detrimental effect on the distribution of resources, opportunities, and outcomes for Oakland’s residents. Equity differs from equality, which focuses on giving everyone the same thing, regardless of outcomes.
4 Leyva, Connie M. SB-1000 Land use: general plans: safety and environmental justice., Government Code § 65302 (2016). https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_ id=201520160SB1000
SB 1000 requires that jurisdictions with “disadvantaged communities” adopt environmental justice goals, policies, and objectives as either a stand-alone Environmental Justice Element or as a set of objectives and policies integrated into other elements. In recognition of the cross-cutting nature of environmental justice topics and the interaction between various elements of the General Plan, the City of Oakland has opted to pursue a combination of both options by creating a standalone element as well as interweaving environmental justice into the policies, goals, and actions of all elements.

While State law uses the term “disadvantaged communities,” the City of Oakland has opted to use the term “Environmental Justice Communities,” (or “EJ Communities”) in line with recommendations from the California Environmental Justice Alliance.5 This is based on the recognition that, in addition to identifying the problems and areas that are unfairly impacted (i.e., “disadvantaged”) by cumulative burdens, gaining equitable access to environmental benefits, investments, and other resources for low-income communities and communities of color is also an important aspect of environmental justice.

RACIAL EQUITY GOALS FOR THE CITY OF
OAKLAND + PREVIOUS ONGOING EFFORTS
A guiding principle of Oakland’s General Plan update is to advance the City’s mission to “intentionally integrate, on a Citywide basis, the principle of ‘fair and just’ in all the City does in order to achieve equitable opportunities for all people and communities.”6 This means working to eliminate the root causes of inequity, understanding barriers to achieving greater equity in communities, and working with these communities to develop 5 California Environmental Justice Alliance/PlaceWorks, SB 1000 Implementation Toolkit: Planning for Healthy Communities, October 2017, available for download at http://www.caleja.org/sb1000-toolkit. 6 Oakland Municipal Code Section 2.29.170.1
solutions for long-term and systemic changes. That process begins by undertaking a full acknowledgment of the systemic racial inequities that have shaped the City of Oakland.

The EJ Element builds on the City’s ongoing efforts to achieve racial equity in Oakland. It is based on the frameworks established by the City’s 2018 Oakland Equity Indicators Report, the 2020 Racial Equity Impact Assessment and Implementation Guide for Oakland’s 2030 Equitable Climate Action Plan (ECAP), and other previous studies that have laid the foundation to ensure that the City integrates equity and social justice into its policies, practices, and actions.

In 2016, the City established the Department of Race and Equity to advance racial equity, with a mission “to create a city where diversity has been maintained, racial disparities have been eliminated, and racial equity has been achieved.”7 The Department of Race and Equity is particularly concerned with making a difference in the determinants of equity that lead to creation of a fair and just society – including community economic development, community and public safety, the law and justice system, early childhood development, education, equity in City practices, food systems, health and human services, healthy built and natural environments, housing, job training and job opportunities, neighborhoods, and parks and natural resources. The Department of Race and Equity’s goals are:

1. Eliminate systemic causes of racial disparities in City government;

2. Promote inclusion and full participation for all residents of the city; and

3. Reduce race-based disparities in Oakland’s communities. 7 City of Oakland, “Learn More About the Department of Race and Equity,” January 20, 2021, https://www.oaklandca.gov/resources/race-matters, accessed February 2022.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
1-3
These goals are based on the following race and equity working assumptions. These assumptions are adapted from the Annie E.

Casey Foundation’s Race Matters Toolkit,8 and lay the framework for the Department of Race and Equity’s Race and Equity Change Process.9
• Race matters: Almost every indicator of well-being shows troubling disparities by race.
• Disparities are created and maintained through
institutionalized policies and practices that contain barriers to opportunity.
• It’s possible, and only possible, to close equity gaps by using strategies determined through an intentional focus on racial disparities and their root causes.
• If opportunities in all key areas of well-being are equitable, then equitable results will follow.
• Given the right message, analysis, and tools, people will work toward racial equity.

The City recognizes that determinants of equity are the drivers of achieving a fair and just society. Access to the determinants of equity is necessary to have equity for all people regardless of race, class, gender, or language spoken. Inequities are created when barriers exist that prevent individuals and communities from accessing these conditions and reaching their full potential. 8 The Annie E. Casey Foundation, Race Matters Toolkit: User’s Guide, December 12, 2006, https://assets.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/aecfracemattersusersguide-2006.pdf. 9 City of Oakland, “Race & Equity Change Process,” August 31, 2018 (last updated January 20, 2021): https://www.oaklandca.gov/resources/raceequity-theory-of-change, accessed December 2022.

RELATIONSHIP TO OAKLAND’S GENERAL PLAN

ELEMENTS
The City of Oakland’s General Plan Update project is being undertaken in two phases. Phase 1 focuses on the creation of this new EJ Element, as well as updates to the Housing and Safety Elements, and preparation of a Racial Equity Impact Assessment, Zoning Code and Map update. Subsequently, Phase 2 will update the Land Use and Transportation; Open Space, Conservation and Recreation; and Noise Elements, as well as create a new Infrastructure and Facilities Element. Phase 2 is slated to be completed by 2025.

Because environmental justice topics touch all aspects of Oaklanders’ daily lives, the EJ Element serves as a foundational roadmap to the city becoming a more equitable and healthier place for all. The EJ Element will also inform and give direction to all other elements. The following Table EJ-1 illustrates the EJ topics included in Phase I elements and those that will inform policies in the Phase 2 elements. This means Phase 2 is an opportunity to develop additional implementation actions and programs, as well as conduct more in-depth analysis on EJ issues as they relate to the Phase 2 elements and refine the policies in the EJ Element with further study. For example, this Element identifies community needs for additional healthy food outlets, solutions to address pedestrian collisions, and ways to reduce impacts of industrial pollution. In addition to the goals and policies in this EJ Element, the Land Use and Transportation Element could include several additional policies and actions to incentivize grocery store development, improve roadway safety through specific design, and address land use compatibility to protect residents and reduce pollution.

While the EJ Element will be adopted in Phase 1, any additional EJ issues or solutions that arise during Phase 2 can be addressed through follow-up amendments to the EJ Element in Phase 2. 1-4
Chapter 1 | Introduction

ELEMENT SAFE AND SANITARY

HOUSING

PUBLIC FACILITIES AND

PHYSICAL ACTIVITY HEALTHY FOOD ACCESS

AIR QUALITY, WATER

QUALITY, AND

POLLUTION EXPOSURE

CIVIC ENGAGEMENT,

INVESTMENT

PRIORITIZATION, AND

IMPROVED HEALTH

OUTCOMES
Housing
(Phase I)
• Building more affordable housing
• Addressing homelessness
• Avoiding displacement and
keeping people in their homes
• Affirmatively furthering fair
housing
• Improving housing quality issues
• Encouraging climate-resilient and
earthquake-resilient housing
• Encouraging new affordable
housing in higher resource areas
• Encouraging new affordable
housing in higher resource areas
• Protecting against smoke and
wildfire
• Studying options to provide
financing for remediation of
contaminated sites
• Eliminating methane gas
combustion in all homes by 2040
• Protecting residents from
displacement
• Preserving and improving
existing housing stock
• Promoting neighborhood
stability and health
• Provide accountability measures
for housing programs
Safety
(Phase I)
• Protecting housing from
environmental and human-made
hazards
• Improving bicycle and pedestrian
infrastructure
• Roadway improvements and
auto safety
• Augmenting urban greening
and urban forestry to mitigate
flooding, heat, and pollution
• N/A • Reducing exposure to toxic air
contaminants
• Protecting the public from
hazardous materials
• Promoting green infrastructure
and climate resilience measures
• Addressing climate change
inequity
• Encouraging coordination
across departments and with
community groups to support
community safety
• Creating a responsive, inclusive
emergency response network
• Coordinating with existing
groups on sea level rise planning
Land Use and
Transportation
(LUTE)
(Phase 2)
• Finding more locations and
facilitating additional housing in
Oakland
• Creating complete, walkable,
bikeable, and transit-accessible
neighborhoods, with access to
everything people need close to
home
• Locating homes away from
pollution sources
• Making it safer, easier, and more
comfortable to walk, bike, and
get around without a car
• Improving connectivity
between important community
destinations including public
facilities
• Creating incentives, finding more
locations, and facilitating food
access in Oakland
• Ensuring land use compatibility
between polluting uses and
sensitive populations
• Reducing number of cars on the
road, improving other means of
getting around
• Shaping economic development
and future of jobs
• Creating cultural districts/
corridors
• Creating complete
neighborhoods with access to
healthcare and health-promoting
services and facilities
Table EJ-1: Relationship of other Element Policies to Environmental Justice Topic Areas 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
1-5

ELEMENT SAFE AND SANITARY

HOUSING

PUBLIC FACILITIES AND

PHYSICAL ACTIVITY HEALTHY FOOD ACCESS

AIR QUALITY, WATER

QUALITY, AND

POLLUTION EXPOSURE

CIVIC ENGAGEMENT,

INVESTMENT

PRIORITIZATION, AND

IMPROVED HEALTH

OUTCOMES
Open Space,
Conservation,
and Recreation
(OSCAR) (Phase 2)
• Ensuring all housing has
adequate, equitable access to
open space and recreational
facilities
• Creating a comprehensive
network of accessible, wellmaintained parks and facilities for all neighborhoods
• Supporting and providing access
to more community gardens
• Preserving natural spaces and
habitat that also supports cleaner
air, water, land, and soil
• Ensuring culturally appropriate
parks, recreation, and arts
programming
• Investing in existing parks
and recreational facilities in EJ
Communities
Noise
(Phase 2)
• Protecting homes from excessive
noise and improving community
noise environments
• Ensuring public spaces do not
experience excessive noise while
also supporting community
events
• N/A • Reducing noise pollution and
exposure
• Prioritizing investments in EJ
Communities that reduce noise
Infrastructure
and Facilities
(Phase 2)
• Ensuring homes have adequate,
equitable access to quality
infrastructure and facilities
• Supporting infrastructure
financing mechanism for
improvements identified in other
elements
• N/A • Building climate-resilient
infrastructure
• Adding additional green
stormwater infrastructure to the
City’s storm drainage network to
clean and infiltrate stormwater
• Reducing embodied carbon in
infrastructure and facilities
• Prioritizing infrastructure
investments in EJ Communities
• Promoting industries and
businesses that support a local
circular economy, including repair
and reuse businesses/activities
Table EJ-1: Relationship of other Element Policies to Environmental Justice Topic Areas 1-6
Chapter 1 | Introduction

CONNECTION TO VISION AND GUIDING

PRINCIPLES
The Environmental Justice Element seeks to create a city where all people have a chance to live a healthy and opportunity-filled life, no matter their identity. The purpose of this Element ties closely with the following portions of the General Plan’s Vision Statement:

We are housed, healthy, and safe. Oakland has high-quality accessible housing for everyone who needs it, and each person is housed with dignity. Every neighborhood, home, school, and park has clean air and fresh water, and Oakland’s children breathe that fresh, clean air as they run, play, and grow. Cool shade from mature trees, scents of flowers, and sounds of birds chirping and bees buzzing enrich lush residential areas. The city’s many grocery stores, farmer’s markets, and garden farmstands offer fresh, healthy food to nurture tables and bodies in all different cultural traditions. Oakland’s homes and communities have healed from historic violence, and crime-free, clean streets and public spaces are safe for people to walk and linger.

We see ourselves reflected in Oakland. Residents shape and craft the City’s processes and outcomes through equitable, transparent, and inclusive processes. The City of Oakland works for its residents, prioritizing their quality-of-life concerns, recognizing and celebrating the contributions of Oakland’s multiple distinct communities of color, including Black, Latinx, Asian, and Indigenous peoples, and actively partnering with community groups and residents. Youth, elders, people with disabilities, immigrants, and people who speak different languages actively participate in government and are empowered to craft a city that meets the needs of all residents; community members can see progress towards their goals through continuous monitoring and feel a sense of ownership of their culturally rich city. The built environment responds to and reflects this richness: its public art, play spaces, and buildings showcase Oakland’s unique diversity and multicultural histories.

We support meaningful opportunities for residents and businesses to prosper and contribute. Oakland is a beautiful city where people want to live and work, with thriving local businesses and a growing equitable economy that offers high-quality, climate-positive jobs for many different skillsets. New businesses are welcome, and Oakland is a hub for entrepreneurs and companies attracted to Oakland’s skilled workforce and its location at the geographic center of the Bay Area. The city is an incubator of new ideas and green solutions, training the next generation of business leaders through robust workforce development programs. Throughout Oakland, flourishing neighborhood commercial streets are lined with trees and greenery, small businesses, restaurants, and services residents patronize daily, and visitors come from all over to enjoy the local food, art, sports, natural environment, and culture.

We are rooted in Oakland and all neighborhoods have what we need to grow. Oakland’s public facilities are hubs of community activity, as schools, libraries, parks, and open spaces spark connections and inspiration and bring people together for learning, play, growth, and resilience. Children play in clean, safe and accessible parks and spend summers splashing in sparkling lakes, pools, and beaches. Neighborhoods thrive as small villages within the city, where neighbors can support each other, children grow up, elders age in place, and those that were displaced return to their communities. Diverse arts and culture flourish in Oakland, from art and music to food and festivals, and a sense of belonging permeates public spaces filled with gatherings, celebration, and wellness. As residents walk down the street they can hear many languages, see different places of worship, and feel the swell of many people coming together to build something greater. The City’s roots grow stronger every day.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
1-7
The EJ Element furthers the following General Plan Guiding Principles:

We are housed, healthy, and safe.

1. Facilitate housing production and maintenance
throughout Oakland to meet the housing needs of people
at all income levels including low- and very-low incomes, workforce and moderate-income households, and shelter
for the unhoused.

2. Ensure that every home, neighborhood, school, and park has clean air, water, and land.

3. End community violence and crime through a
collaborative and community-led public health approach
to violence and healing.

4. Design streets that are safe for walking, biking, rolling, and playing.

5. Ensure that people have access to fresh food, water, and restrooms.

6. Foster quiet neighborhoods that are not impacted by
excessive noise from streets, highways, and machinery.

We see ourselves reflected in Oakland.

7. Use equity and results-based accountability to drive decision-making and investments in Oakland, working
to overcome intentional and unintentional barriers to
fairness, justice, and opportunity.

8. Co-develop solutions with community groups,
community members, and the Ohlone people, such that
all people of Oakland feel ownership of the city.

9. Fully integrate youth, elders, and persons with disabilities into the community, ensuring that they can access
resources and represent their own interests.

We support meaningful opportunities for residents and businesses to prosper and contribute.

10.Promote a thriving and sustainable economy that
attracts and retains a diversity of jobs and future-oriented industries that provide opportunities for all Oaklanders.

11. Foster local small businesses as the heartbeat of Oakland.

We are rooted in Oakland and our roots run deep.

12. Strengthen schools, libraries, childcare, and community spaces to support, inspire, and partner with families.

13. Cultivate lush active parks, recreation areas, and quiet green spaces that are accessible, safe, clean, droughtresistant, and well-maintained.

14.Foster Oakland’s neighborhoods as villages within the city that enrich residents with resources, culture, and strong social ties.

15. Work toward a reversal of historic and ongoing
displacement.

16. Promote Oakland’s diverse cultural richness, allowing it to thrive and grow through its people, music, gardens, art, history, murals, languages, food, and festivals.

1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

PLANNING PROCESS

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND RACIAL EQUITY

BASELINE REPORT
The City of Oakland prepared an Environmental Justice and Racial Equity Baseline (EJ Baseline Report) to identify and delineate existing social, economic, and environmental disparities by race and geography that can be influenced directly or indirectly by the General Plan. The findings of the EJ Baseline Report serve to establish a baseline of existing conditions pertaining to environmental justice and racial equity to inform conversations throughout the General Plan Update process between City staff and members of the public, particularly those in communities most impacted by racial inequities that make them vulnerable to the consequences of climate change and other environmental effects.

The EJ Baseline Report is consistent with Oakland’s ResultsBased Accountability framework, “a disciplined way of thinking and taking action” to create measurable change in people’s lives. “Results-Based Accountability” is a data-driven decision-making process oriented toward actionable outcomes.

This framework starts by defining desired results or goals and works backwards, step by step, toward those means to set a clear path to achieve those outcomes. Indicators measure the extent to which a result is being achieved and help keep track of the City’s progress over time.
1-8
Chapter 1 | Introduction
The Results-Based Accountability framework is an important aspect of the City’s Race and Equity Change Process, which requires establishing baseline disparity data, targets/benchmarks, and processes to track and report outcomes. The EJ Baseline Report synthesizes recent efforts to paint a comprehensive picture of where the City currently stands along its trajectory toward environmental justice and racial equity and helps to define where policies in the EJ Element can further those objectives.

EJ ELEMENT RACIAL EQUITY IMPACT ANALYSIS
The City of Oakland conducts a racial equity impact analysis (REIA) alongside all emerging or revised plans and policies to support development of equitable, concrete, data-driven, outcome-oriented, and problem-solving actions. The REIA educates about racial disparities; informs about root causes of disparities; engages impacted communities; provides a set of specific recommendations for achieving equitable outcomes; and includes a framework for evaluating the equity impacts of implementation over time.

A REIA has been prepared in parallel with the EJ Element to guide practices and inform policies that effectively advance racial equity in Oakland. The first stage of the EJ Element REIA focused on the SB 1000 Screening Analysis methodology and results of the EJ Baseline Report. The assessment grades the indicators included in the screening analysis from A, most equitable, to F, most disparate/inequitable to highlight the issues with the most racially disparate outcomes and the neighborhoods facing the greatest disparities within each issue. Applying the REIA to the screening analysis resulted in recommendations for refining the methodology and adjusting indicators to better reflect:
• The City’s top equity issues,
• Community priorities that have been identified through the outreach process,
• Actionable metrics that directly inform planning decisions, and • Availability of data.

Further, the REIA and recommendations helped determine a more suitable threshold for identifying EJ Communities, as discussed in the following section.

REVISION OF EJ COMMUNITIES MAPPING
Identifying low-income communities most impacted by environmental justice issues (EJ Communities) is a core component of SB 1000 and one of the primary objectives of an EJ Element. The EJ Baseline Report was an important first step in presenting a preliminary screening methodology to identify EJ Communities.

This kicked off the iterative process of modifying and refining the methodology to ensure that the final EJ Communities map in this Element is representative of the on-the-ground conditions people experience in their daily lives. In addition, the methodology has been revised using the recommendations from the REIA (described above). The changes that have been incorporated into the final analysis include minor adjustment or replacement of certain indicators from the preliminary screening analysis in the EJ Baseline Report, addition of new indicators, restructuring of indicators into new categories or topics, and removal of two indicators due to data inconsistencies. Section 2.3: Identifying Environmental Justice Communities describes the final methodology and provides a full discussion of the changes that were made to the indicators. A full description of the final indicators is included in Appendix A.

In addition, the criteria and threshold for identifying EJ Communities were expanded to increase the final number of EJ Communities. Using recommendations from the REIA and based on community feedback, including from the West Oakland Community Action Plan (WOCAP) Steering Committee, EJ communities include: (1) census tracts in the top quartile (25 percent) of the screening methodology composite score; (2) census tracts in the top decile (10 percent) of the Pollution Burden, Climate Change, Sensitive Population, and Built Environment category scores; and (3) any Disadvantaged Communities designated by CalEPA pursuant to SB 535. More than one of these criteria may apply to an EJ Community. The results of the EJ Communities mapping process are presented in Section 2.3: Identifying Environmental Justice Communities.

Note: The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), in partnership with Communities for a Better Environment and community members from East Oakland, initiated the first Community Steering Committee meeting for the East Oakland AB 617 Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP) process on September 15, 2022. The committee will meet monthly to develop a CERP to improve air quality and public health in the impacted communities of East Oakland. Once the community boundary for the East Oakland CERP is defined by the committee, the EJ Communities Map will be updated to include those communities. 2045 General Plan
| Environmental Justice Element
1-9
Environmental Justice Communities:

A Note on Terminology
The State defines “disadvantaged communities” as “an
area identified by the California Environmental Protection Agency, pursuant to Section 39711 of the Health and
Safety Code, or an area that is a low-income area that is disproportionately affected by environmental pollution
and other hazards that can lead to negative health effects, exposure, or environmental degradation.”
In this EJ Element, we opt to use the term “Environmental Justice Communities” to refer to “disadvantaged
communities.”
Although “Environmental Justice Communities” are
identified and mapped in the EJ Element to help the
City focus on where and how to implement EJ policies
and actions, this distinction does not mean EJ issues do not exist in communities elsewhere in the city. The term “EJ Communities” is used in this Element to refer only to census tracts that have been identified as EJ Communities through the SB 1000 screening analysis. Communities
that experience EJ issues (and may or may not be an EJ
Community) are separately referred to as “impacted
communities” in this Element.

1.3 COMMUNITY OUTREACH
Proactive and meaningful community engagement from the
start of a planning process to the implementation of goals and policies is critical to achieving the goals of environmental justice.

A key environmental justice (EJ) principle is involving the commu- nities most impacted by environmental justice issues, and those who could be adversely impacted from policy implementation, so that they can have a say in the decisions that impact their health and well-being. Community engagement in developing this Element included a range of activities intended to meet people where they were. In many instances, community mem- bers shared their firsthand knowledge of environmental issues in their neighborhoods, as well as existing community-led efforts and strategies to address these issues. Engagement activities included: • Community Organization Interviews
. Equity facilitators
from E/J Solutions interviewed 12 environmental justice advocacy organizations for input on draft actions and the Environmental Justice Element’s topic areas of focus:

1. Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN)

2. Communities for a Better Environment (CBE)

3. Cocina del Corazón

4. The Greenlining Institute (GLI)

5. New Voices Are Rising (NVR)

6. Oakland Parks & Recreation Foundation (OPRF)

7. Oakland Climate Action Coalition (OCAC)

8. Saba Grocers Initiative

9. Save the Bay (STB)

10. Sugar Freedom Project (SFB)

11. The Village in Oakland (The Village)

12. West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project (WOEIP) 1-10
Chapter 1 | Introduction
• Neighborhood Workshops. On April 30 and May 28, 2022, staff held General Plan open houses in East and West
Oakland. At the East Oakland workshop, participants
discussed environmental justice concerns in small groups with staff or added sticky notes to boards addressing
environmental justice, safety, and housing. At the West Oakland workshop, participants marked up maps with
stickers representing key environmental justice issues and discussed EJ issues in small groups with a facilitator. • EJ Hub and Online Survey. City staff created an online, interactive, educational platform (“GPU Environmental
Justice Hub” or “EJ Hub”) to support community
engagement and data ground-truthing process for the EJ
Element. The EJ Hub showcases information from the EJ and Racial Equity Baseline through an interactive and engaging platform. Using the EJ Hub, residents explored the initial draft Map of Potential Environmental Justice Communities, shared their visions for a healthy neighborhood, and
documented local environmental justice issues and solutions.

The EJ Hub can be accessed here: https://arcg.is/00iuLT • Community Tours. On August 29, 2022, Ms. Margaret
Gordon, Co-founder and Co-director, and Brian Beveridge, Co-director, of the West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project (WOEIP), led the planning team on a tour of West Oakland, a special and instructive opportunity to learn from WOEIP’s extensive community knowledge of environmental
justice conditions in West Oakland.
• Cultural Events and Pop-Ups. Between November 2021 to March 2023, the GPU team conducted community events
in Eastmont, Fruitvale, San Antonio, Chinatown, West
Oakland porch chats, Hoover Elementary in West Oakland, and at the Oakland Asian Cultural Center’s (OACC) Asian Pacific New Year Celebration and the Black Joy parade.

Information about these events can be found on the General Plan Update website (https://www.oaklandca.gov/topics/
meetings-and-events) and the community engagement
collaborative’s website (https://www.deeplyrooted510.org/).

Eleven organizations within the collaborative have hosted and conducted community engagement and outreach with
their networks at large outdoor or virtual events and pop-ups in addition to through social media, with a focus on reaching individuals from communities of color.
• Equity Working Group. The Equity Working Group (EWG)
is comprised of individuals who have been highly engaged in Oakland housing, safety and environmental justice, land use issues and solutions. The EWG met 9 times to provide input on the 2023-2031 Housing Element. At 17 meetings
throughout 2022, the EWG discussed equity considerations for the Safety and EJ elements. See https://www.
deeplyrooted510.org/ewg for more information.
• Stakeholder Interviews. At eight discussion groups held in May 2022, representatives from over 50 agencies, businesses, and community groups participated in small group
discussions with project staff.
• Neighborhood Councils. Staff are working with
Neighborhood Service Coordinators to present and receive feedback at Neighborhood Council (NC) meetings on topics including housing, environmental justice, industrial lands, and safety and natural hazards.

Some of the key themes from community outreach included the following:
• Industrial Land Use and Air Pollution. One of the most pressing environmental justice issues in Oakland is the disproportionate pollution burden that West and East
Oakland neighborhoods face, largely due to proximity to the Port of Oakland, industrial land, and its associated uses, such as truck transport. Coupled with Oakland’s economic history, these land use patterns were created by zoning choices, racial exclusion, and urban renewal. This has resulted in a legacy of polluting uses right next to sensitive uses such as homes, schools, and parks. In times of growing
wildfire threat, smoke has also become another burden
that adds to existing pollution. A growing body of research indicates that these polluting industrial land uses increase rates of asthma, cancer, and other health issues, as well as decreased life expectancy. The impacted communities are disproportionately communities of color. Related to industrial land uses, input also indicated a lack of enforcement of nonconforming or unpermitted uses, desire for change to zoning or shortening of conditional use permitting timelines, and recommendations for a moratorium on polluting
facilities, phasing out certain uses, urban greening, greener employment replacements for these industries, and provision of air filters for existing neighbors. Many of the strategies suggested have greenhouse gas reduction and climate
resiliency co-benefits.
• Exposure to Toxics and Hazardous Substances. Even
after industrial land uses are discontinued, they may leave behind toxic chemicals and other hazardous substances.

There are several Superfund or brownfield sites throughout areas of West Oakland as well as along I-880 that are either undergoing or still require cleanup, known as “remediation.” Active remediation may directly expose on-site and nearby inhabitants to hazardous substances through land, air, and water contamination. Such activities and intermediary uses of Superfund and brownfield sites should consider both the short- and long-term potential for harmful health effects on current and future users.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
1-11
• Transportation Safety and Noise. Urban renewal and past land use decisions have also resulted in disproportionate impacts due to freeways and railroads. I-880 and I-980 differ vastly from I-580 in terms of truck traffic and subsequent pollution and road safety because of decisions regarding goods movement that were largely influenced by the more affluent residents living in the hills. Community members voiced concerns about pedestrian and bicyclist safety in neighborhoods near I-880 and I-980, citing traffic collision hot spots like Chinatown as places that need immediate
improvement. In addition to air pollution emitted by vehicles along these roadways, noise pollution is another key concern impacting the communities living near freeways and
railroads.
• Housing Issues. Some of the top housing issues identified by community members included the homelessness
crisis, housing quality issues, and housing affordability.

Groups suggested a wide variety of strategies to house
the unhoused community, including treating unhoused
populations with dignity; stopping the current encampment management policy; facilitating more flexible building types, temporary units, permanent supportive housing, RVs/safe parking zones, tiny homes, manufactured housing; and
working with the unhoused community to understand their needs and priorities. The disproportionate representation of Black Oaklanders among unhoused individuals was
also emphasized as a key equity issue. Producing new
affordable and deeply affordable housing options was
identified as a key strategy to prevent displacement. Groups discussed a wide range of strategies to build more inclusive neighborhoods and add more affordable housing units
in Oakland, including legalizing existing nonconforming housing units, adopting inclusionary zoning, increasing density in primarily single-family areas such as Rockridge, supporting homeowners in the construction of accessory
dwelling units (ADUs), acquiring land to build new
permanently affordable housing and community land trustmanaged projects, and reducing the amount of discretionary review required for new housing projects. Finally, many Oaklanders described facing housing quality issues such as overcrowding and unsafe building conditions, as well as lack of maintenance resulting from landlord neglect, lack of funds for upkeep, or fear of reporting these issues. Inequitable lead paint risks were also identified as part of the 2021 Racial Equity Impact Analysis: Eliminating Lead Paint Hazards in Oakland and Alameda County. Community-recommended
strategies to address these issues included programs/grants to landlords and homeowners to make repairs; universal
design improvements to allow all Oaklanders to remain
in their homes as they age and to help mobility-impaired residents; and tax credits or programs to address other housing habitability concerns such as indoor air quality.

Other issues and recommended strategies are summarized
in Chapter 2 of the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
• Equitable Climate Resilience. Oakland’s frontline
communities are hit first and worst by environmental
injustice and the climate crisis. Although these communities vary in vulnerability to climate issues such as sea level rise, flooding, and energy cost burden, many of these same
people and places experience the compounded effect of
other environmental justice issues such as lack of access to healthy food, affordable homes, or well-maintained parks.

Several community members have emphasized that there
is immediate need to implement solutions that strengthen frontline communities’ climate resilience.
• Gentrification and Displacement. Concerns about
gentrification and displacement associated with new
investment were top of mind for many Oaklanders,
especially in light of a significant loss (30 percent) of Oakland’s Black population from 2000 to 2019. People who have generational roots in Oakland have been displaced
but continue to come to Oakland to work and be with
community. While displacement issues relative to housing costs are discussed in the Housing Element, community
members also expressed alarm at displacement of Oakland’s cultural institutions and local businesses, an essential part of Oakland’s culture. Others indicated that this displacement was not new; for example in West Oakland, construction of the BART Station, post office distribution center, and freeway construction destroyed existing black businesses along the 7th Street corridor. Several community members suggested providing targeted support to existing small businesses, and establishing cultural or arts districts to prioritize, promote, and preserve Oakland’s culture.
• Cultural Spaces and Art. Preservation of community culture and diversity was one of the most frequently referenced goals among community members. More than half of
all Oakland Visioning Survey respondents mentioned
Oakland’s diversity—including race, culture, economics, gender, neighborhoods, and perspectives—as one of its
greatest strengths, and around a quarter of respondents also mentioned the Oakland’s wealth in terms of culture, including diversity in art, music and creative spirit. Focus groups and popup interview input also reflect this priority.

Oakland is home to a wide array of cultures, and the City seeks to ensure that these diverse practices, expression, 1-12
Chapter 1 | Introduction
and creativity are seen, respected, and supported. A central goal of environmental justice is to allow everyone to prosper in a healthy community, not by removing the differences between the city’s communities but rather, by fostering welcoming environments for people of all identities and backgrounds to thrive. Community members recommended
that the City promote and/or support public and community spaces, programs, and events for cultural learning and
acceptance throughout Oakland, and create policies that support Oakland artists, culture makers, and organizations. • Illegal Dumping and Lack of Public Works Maintenance.

Community input also indicated that presence of trash,
blight and illegal dumping, and infrequent trash collection and other lack of maintenance were other important
environmental justice issues. Beyond being a visual eyesore, community members indicated that illegal dumping has
larger public health consequences, forcing some to veer off sidewalks into dangerous roadways, raising concerns about hazardous materials, blocking creeks and worsening flooding, starting fires, and leading to general feelings of neglect and abandonment by the City. Illegal dumpers often target and leave waste in homeless encampments, where
unhoused residents may be less likely to report for fear of “sweeps”. Illegal dumping and lack of waste receptacles or maintenance in public areas such as parks and sidewalks also reduce people’s ability to enjoy public spaces and to access them for physical activity that promotes health and wellbeing. Recommended strategies included more stringent enforcement of illegal dumping, more frequent pickup in “hot spots,” amnesty programs such as free disposal days for bulky and hazardous waste, and incentives for recycling, education, and community ambassador programs.
• Pedestrian and Bicyclist Comfort and Safety. Some
community members indicated that they or someone they
knew had been involved in a collision with a vehicle as a pedestrian or bicyclist. Others noted that roads in some areas are poorly maintained and suffer potholes. Potential solutions included a suite of transportation improvements, including speed bumps, more bike lanes and stations, improved public transit, street improvements to make walking and biking safer, reducing car traffic overall, and maintaining roads. • Need for Health-Promoting Resources in Neighborhoods.

Many community members pointed out the inequitable
investment in community health assets, such as high-quality parks, clean and well-maintained public restrooms, schools, and community facilities; local retail that meets daily needs; arts and cultural facilities; affordable and quality housing; and accessible healthcare. They also pointed to inequitable distribution of health harms, such as polluting facilities, proximity to freeways or truck routes, and illegal dumping.

Consistent with SB 1000 guidance and the City’s racial
equity goals, community members emphasized that City
improvements, investments, and policies should specifically focus on prioritizing needs of communities that have suffered the most harm due to past planning decisions.
• Tree Canopy and Green Infrastructure. The importance
of addressing equity in Oakland’s urban tree canopy was emphasized, as well as the urban forest’s role in mitigating negative effects of climate change. Urban forestry resources have many co-benefits including providing shade and
reducing urban heat, filtration of some air pollutants, serving as visual and sound buffers, supporting natural habitats and ecosystems, and boosting economic value of neighborhoods.

Tree canopy can vary substantially due to tree species, age, and maintenance. Lack of proper maintenance can hinder
a tree’s ability to provide its many benefits. Additionally, urban greening projects have been identified as the highest priority in the East Oakland Neighborhoods Initiative
Community Plan. Recommended considerations include
development of a maintenance plan for all public trees along streets and sidewalks and in parks, as well as expansion of urban greening projects in EJ Communities, and equitable implementation of the Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) Plan.10
• Food Access. An absence of affordable options for healthy, nutritious food in combination with a concentration of
10 The City of Oakland adopted the Green Stormwater Infrastructure Plan (https://cao-94612.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/Oakland-GSI-PlanFinal-20190930_sm.pdf) in 2019 to support the countywide Clean Water Program that seeks to protect and restore Oakland’s watersheds. The plan guides designs and practices to reduce the volume of stormwater runoff, mitigate minor localized flooding risk, provide urban greening benefits, and improve water quality.
retailers such as liquor stores and fast food outlets that do not offer such choices can lead to an unhealthy food environment that limits the ability to make healthy food choices. The high cost of food was identified as one of the biggest barriers to good nutrition. Community members
voiced a need for an equitable distribution of affordable grocery stores, farmers markets, and community gardens to enable food sovereignty in all neighborhoods. Participants also spoke of need to support smaller independent grocers, smaller vendors, and other organizations who are already located in communities underserved by food retail.
• Accountability and Community Empowerment. While
Oakland has made strides in addressing racial equity and adopting policy to remedy environmental justice issues, many community members felt like the City could do better in building and maintaining relationships with community groups. Some felt distrustful that an institution that
perpetuated past harms would seek to truly turn community input into action. Others emphasized the importance of
developing solutions with community, rather than just for the community, as a power-building mechanism. Solutions included active, paid partnerships with community
organizations; feedback loops during outreach processes that communicate any current City limitations and identify actions to reduce/remove these barriers; and mechanisms to track how effective policies are and how they are being implemented.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
2-1

2. Environmental Racism and Health Inequities in Oakland and tribal political status.1 Nevertheless, this land continues to be of great importance to the Ohlone people.2

Disparities in social, physical, and economic environments and conditions continued in eras of industrial growth, which brought about significant change to the urban environment and increased residential segregation. Oakland was historically a destination for working people and immigrants due to the abundant industrial jobs and relatively affordable neighborhoods. Many neighborhoods often became cultural and ethnic enclaves when residents of color were barred from living in other parts of the city by segregationist policies, enforced with violence.

In Oakland, as in cities across the nation, communities of color were impacted by the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s federal housing redlining policy, the practice of identifying majority-white areas as sound and profitable real estate investments and heavily subsidizing them through the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), 1 Mitchell Schwarzer, Hella Town: Oakland’s History of Development and Disruption, (Oakland: University of California Press, 2021). 2 Lisjan (Ohlone) History and Territory. Sogorea Te’ Land Trust. Accessed at https://sogoreate-landtrust.org/lisjan-history-and-territory/. while simultaneously refusing to insure mortgages in and near majority-Black neighborhoods and other communities of color.

These areas were rated as “D”, or “Hazardous,” and color-coded as red on the infamous “Residential Security” maps created by the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC). Residents of these “redlined” neighborhoods, including West Oakland and East Oakland, were denied access to credit, resulting in a cycle of disinvestment and poverty and creating the circumstances for long-term racial segregation. To prevent their own neighborhoods from being redlined, majority-white private developers, realtors, and homeowners were encouraged to write racially restrictive covenants into their deeds that further inhibited Black residents and other residents of color from moving into these areas.

Research shows that neighborhoods that were historically redlined are today more likely to suffer greater poverty, increased heat, lower life expectancy, higher incidences of chronic diseases, increased prevalence of poor mental health, and lower life expectancy at birth.3 3 The Lasting Impact of Historic “Redlining” on Neighborhood Health: Higher Prevalence of Covid-19 Risk Factors (Washington, D.C.: National Community Reinvestment Coalition, 2020). https://ncrc.org/holc-health/

2.1 HISTORICAL CONTEXT / ROOT
CAUSES

ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM AS A HISTORICAL

PROCESS
Past land use planning and zoning decisions have played a large role in shaping current environmental justice problems. Setting a course from the present to the future calls for an understanding of our current conditions, which in turn requires an understanding of historical trends in population change, land use, housing, economic opportunity, transportation, and other factors that have made Oakland the city it is today.

Oakland was founded in 1852 on unceded land of the Chochenyo -speaking Ohlone people, the native stewards of the land dating back thousands of years. After arrival of Spanish missionaries in the 1760s, Ohlone peoples were forced into labor camps at missions and baptized into the Catholic faith. During and after this time, Oakland expanded and urbanized at the further expense of the Ohlone people, their sacred sites, tribal cultural preservation, 2-2
Chapter 2 | Environmental Racism and Health Inequities in Oakland Using Redlining to Help Identify EJ
Communities
The City can begin to redress the inequities brought about by discriminatory actions and practices by acknowledging the harm they have caused and perhaps more importantly, by recognizing that they continue to cause harm especially to low-income communities and people of color. For
this reason, redlining is an indicator used in the SB 1000 Screening Analysis methodology to help identify EJ
Communities in Oakland. Specifically, the methodology
uses the grades that the Home Owners Loan Corporation
assigned to various neighborhoods throughout Oakland in the 1930s to compare the places that benefited most from their grade A (“Desirable”, shown in green on the image to the right) versus the areas that continue to face the repercussions of redlining (grade D, “Hazardous”, shown in red on the image to the right).

Industrial growth during the World War II era further established Oakland as a hub for economic opportunity and jobs, which attracted an influx of Black and African American populations from the South (one of the waves of “Black migration”), many of whom settled in neighborhoods near their jobs, such as by the railroad in West Oakland. Following the war, federal policies like the GI Bill sponsored returning white veterans to settle into suburbs by providing low interest mortgages and loans, enabling what is known as “white flight.” These same financial incentives were denied to veterans of color, and the continued practice of redlining and racially restrictive covenants further delineated economic disparity and racial segregation.4 4 Just Cities, East Oakland Displacement Status and Impacts from the BRT Project Summary: A Racial Equity Planning and Policy Justice Report for OakDOT’s East Oakland Mobility Action Plan, June 2021, https://drive.google. com/file/d/1sGCZt1uGPaFLroOm8BkGczV_vXOGsFTk/view, accessed March 16, 2022.

Spotlight: Urban Renewal in West
Oakland
By 1958, the Oakland Planning Commission had declared
that all of West Oakland was blighted. This action set
the stage for the displacement and reconstruction
of predominantly Black neighborhoods. Many West
Oakland residents did experience poor housing
conditions. However, these conditions directly resulted from systemic racism, disinvestment, and discriminatory lending practices that restricted access to home
improvement and maintenance loans.6
In West Oakland alone, government agencies used
eminent domain to build the West Oakland Bay Area
Rapid Transit (BART) station, elevated tracks along 7th Street, three major interstate highways (the Nimitz/I-880, Grove Shafter/I-980, and MacArthur/I-580), and a sizeable postal facility. While the plans for the highways were
designed by the State Department of Public Works, the
Oakland City Council selected the exact routes. Clearing land for those projects destroyed entire blocks of homes and thriving commercial districts, displacing many
residents and small business owners permanently.7
About 8,000 housing units were razed in West Oakland
between 1960 and 1966, contributing to the displacement of nearly 14,000 low-income residents from this historic center of Black culture and community.8
Berkeley, CA: Othering and Belonging Institute, 2019. https:// belonging.berkeley.edu/rootsraceplace#footnote197_73poucc. 6 Montojo, Nicole, Eli Moore, and Nicole Mauri. “Roots, Race, & Place: A History of Racially Exclusionary Housing in the San Francisco Bay Area.” Berkeley, CA: Othering and Belonging Institute, 2019. https://belonging.berkeley.edu/ rootsraceplace#footnote197_73poucc.
7 Ibid.
8 Brandi T. Summers, “Untimely Futures,” Places Journal, November 2021. Accessed 02 Oct 2022. https://doi.org/10.22269/211109 In the 1950s, eminent domain, a process in which local redevelopment agencies condemned areas as “blighted” and seized properties from homeowners and tenants to facilitate demolition, severely undermined and led to drastic displacement in major centers of Black culture and community, such as West Oakland, in addition to other historic communities settled in the 19th century such as Chinatown. These communities were devasted in the 1950s and 1960s by the demolition and construction associated with freeways, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) facilities, and urban renewal. When neighborhoods were divided, families lost their homes, businesses closed, and neighbors left – all of which undermined a community’s ability to thrive.5
5 Montojo, Nicole, Eli Moore, and Nicole Mauri. “Roots, Race, & Place: A History of Racially Exclusionary Housing in the San Francisco Bay Area.” 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
2-3
Types of Neighborhood Change:

Gentrification and Displacement
The relationship between gentrification and displacement is complex.

Gentrification is a type of neighborhood change that occurs when new investments in a historically disinvested neighborhood lead to socioeconomic change.17 When policies and community involvement adequately support the process, these investments can be a positive force of change such as more housing, increased home values for those who are able to be homeowners, and improved amenities like street trees and lighting that enhance safety and comfort in public spaces. Gentrification can also be a negative force, however, when the economic and cultural changes that come with gentrification make existing residents and local businesses unable to afford increased taxes or feel uncomfortable or unwelcome among new neighbors.

Displacement, or the forced relocation of residents and businesses,18 can occur when lack of investment in sufficient housing in neighborhoods creates competitive pressure that leads new residents to displace existing ones rather than move into new homes. There are also different types of displacement, as explained by the Uprooted Project19:
• Direct displacement: Residents can no longer afford to remain in their homes due to rising housing costs or other actions like lease non-renewals, evictions, landlords not maintaining homes, etc.
• Indirect displacement: Units being vacated by low-income residents are no longer affordable to other low-income
households (also known as ‘exclusionary displacement’). • Cultural displacement: Changes in the aspects of a
neighborhood that have provided long-time residents with a sense of belonging and allowed residents to live their lives in familiar ways.
17 Urban Displacement Project, “What Are Gentrification and Displacement,” 2021, https://www.urbandisplacement.org/about/whatare-gentrification- and-displacement/, accessed February 17, 2022. 18 Planetizen, “What is Displacement?” Planopedia, https://www. planetizen.com/definition/displacement, accessed February 21, 2023. 19 The Uprooted Project, University of Texas at Austin, https://sites.utexas. edu/gentrificationproject/gentrification-and-displacement-in-austin/, accessed December 16, 2022.

While greater areas of East and North Oakland became open to Black, Hispanic/Latinx, and Asian families beginning in the 1950s, many of these same areas were experiencing disinvestment and deterioration of housing and public spaces, along with a massive loss of employment in nearby industrial sectors. This disinvestment led to innumerable abandoned and underutilized business properties along Oakland’s main corridors, which suffered greatly as purchasing power fell and consumers, particularly wealthier white residents, went elsewhere to live and shop.

Lack of investment was Oakland’s dominant economic story from the 1950s into the 1990s. Through waves of plant and store closures and redevelopment sites standing vacant for decades after demolition, the City searched for private investment wherever it could be found. Most of the major projects that were built, whether downtown high-rises or in transportation infrastructure, were led by the public sector. At the same time, disinvestment in Oakland’s flatlands neighborhoods became apparent in the high levels of abandonment of single-family homes in the 1970s, deterioration of public housing developments, persistent redlining, and denial of loans or insurance in communities of color. This period of public and private disinvestment also reflected in communities’ physical and social infrastructure—such as crumbling streets, under-resourced schools, lack of jobs, limited healthcare infrastructure, and increases in crime—alongside growing social unrest. Contemporary hardship and tensions escalated as serious health problems were sensationalized by the War on Drugs and the crack cocaine epidemic that disproportionately targeted Black Oaklanders.9,10 During this period, resistance to oppression also shaped the city, and community groups born in the 1960s such as the Black Panther Party, Oakland Community Organizations (OCO), Unity Council, Intertribal Friendship House, and many others continued to organize and demand protections and equal access to jobs, housing, employment, transportation and services.11 9 King, Ryan. “Disparity by Geography: The War on Drugs in America’s Cities.” The Sentencing Project, 1 May 2008, https://www.sentencingproject.org/ wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Disparity-by-Geography-The-War-on-Drugs-inAmericas-Cities.pdf 10 Fryer, Roland G. Jr., et al. “Measuring Crack cocaine and its Impact.” Economic inquiry, Apr. 2006, scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/fhlm_crack_ cocain_0.pdf
11 Zinn, Howard (2003). A Peoples History of the United States. Haper-Collins. P. 126-210. ISBN-0-06052842-7
Since the late 1990s, Oakland has seen an increase in real estate investment, which has had both positive and negative effects.

In the years leading up to the 2008 housing crash and Great Recession, banks engaged in a process referred to as “reverse redlining” through which predatory lending practices and subprime loans were targeted in the same neighborhoods that were once marked as off-limits for borrowers.12 This resulted in waves of foreclosures in East and West Oakland. A significant number of these foreclosed properties were then acquired by investors, and once-affordable and stable homes were flipped overnight into market-rate rentals.

An influx of private capital, partly due to efforts like the City’s 10K Initiative to revitalize the urban core, has reinvigorated downtown and uptown.13 At the same time, rising housing prices and a lack of new affordable options created waves of residential and commercial gentrification, especially in North and West Oakland and Chinatown, with a growing pattern of displacement in East Oakland.14 Massive regional job growth, particularly in the technology sector, coupled with inadequate housing supply in other cities, sent waves of new residents to the East Bay in search of more affordable homes.15 The impacts of the lack of regional housing supply rippled through other residential areas of the city, where communities of color faced greater vulnerability to rising housing costs than white residents.16
12 “East Oakland Displacement Status and Impacts from the BRT Project Summary.” n.d. Oakland: Just Cities. https://cao-94612.s3.amazonaws.com/ documents/EOMAP-Appendix-2.pdf.
13 Ibid.
14 See generally Owens, Darrell, Discourse Lounge, “Where Did All the Black People in Oakland Go?”, September 8, 2021. https://darrellowens. substack. com/p/where-did-all-the-black-people-in?utm_source=url, accessed February 21, 2022. See also City of Oakland, “Economic Trends and Prospects, Baseline Analysis for Oakland General Plan”, Commute Trends and Workforce Characteristics, pp. 9-16. Access available at https:// https:// cao-94612.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/Economic_Trends_Prospects_ EPS_2022.06.02.pdf
15 Mitchell Schwarzer, Hella Town: Oakland’s History of Development and Disruption (University of California Press, 2021).
16 “East Oakland Displacement Status and Impacts from the BRT Project Summary.” n.d. Oakland: Just Cities. https://cao-94612.s3.amazonaws.com/ documents/EOMAP-Appendix-2.pdf.
2-4
Chapter 2 | Environmental Racism and Health Inequities in Oakland The direct and indirect displacement of residents, driven by the inequitable housing market, threatens not only households but the cultural identity and viability of existing communities.

Nowhere has the impacts of these changes been more visible than on Oakland’s streets, as homelessness increased 83 percent between 2017 and 2022 (from 2,761 to 5,055 individuals).20 The Black/African American racial group has continued to be disproportionately represented, making up about 60 percent of all sheltered homeless individuals – nearly three times the proportion that Black/African Americans represent in Oakland’s total population.21 Although the individual causes for homelessness are complex, there are key structural reasons why Oakland has one of the worst homelessness crises in America, namely a catastrophic shortage of deeply affordable homes on top of salient issues including structural racism, unstable rental markets for tenants, systemic barriers to housing for the formerly incarcerated, a lack of living wage job opportunities, and inadequate mental health services.

From 2000 to 2019, Oakland lost nearly 30 percent of its Black population and significant numbers of long-time Asian communities residing in ethnic enclaves including Chinatown.22 The 20 EveryOne Home, Oakland 2022 Point-In-Time Count: Unsheltered & Sheltered Report, 2022, https://everyonehome.org/wp-content/ uploads/2022/05/Oakland-PIT-2022-Infographic-Report.pdf, accessed December 16, 2022.
21 Ibid.
22 American Community Survey (ACS) (2014-2018); U.S. Census 2000, 2010; Urban Displacement Project, 2021.

COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted and exacerbated racial and economic disparities in housing security; the pandemic has also shown the public health outcomes of Oakland’s housing disparities.23 Figures EJ-1 and EJ-2 map the geographic change in racial and economic makeup of Oakland through time. It is noted that the definitions of race/ethnicity and measures of income have also changed to reflect social changes; these maps are limited to available data by census tract. Figure EJ-1 shows how patterns of racial segregation have evolved, with increasing diversity along I-580, but have also maintained a majority-white concentration in the western Oakland hills and majority-non-white concentrations in the flatlands. This map also demonstrates how the makeup of communities of color have changed; majority Black neighborhoods in West and East Oakland (in blue) have turned majority Hispanic/Latinx (in orange) between 2000 and 2019, which is especially true in East Oakland. Figure EJ-2 shows how median household income also follows a similar spatial pattern.

The areas in light green represent neighborhoods with the highest income, which generally overlap with areas that have white majorities. In the same manner, areas with the lowest income shown in dark blue are generally clustered in West Oakland, San Antonio, and East Oakland. These patterns of inequity are further demonstrated by the disparity in current (2019) poverty level by race shown in Figure EJ-3.
23 “City of Oakland HCD 2021-2023 Strategic Action Plan City of Oakland Housing & Community Development Department 2021-2023 Strategic Action Plan.” n.d. Accessed May 9, 2022. https://cao-94612.s3.amazonaws.com/ documents/HCD.final.21-21Strategic-Plan.pdf.
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
!"c$
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aî
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

EMERY VI LLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
Inte rnat io nal
Air por t
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Cha bot
Coast G uard
Islan d Alameda
Alameda Gat eway
Ferry Terminal
Jack L ondon Square
Ferry Terminal
SOURCE: IPUMS NHGIS, University of Minnesota, 2021; City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021 Oakland General Plan Update
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
!"c$
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aî
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

EM ERY VILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
Inte rnat io nal
Air por t
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Cha bot
Coast G uard
Islan d Alameda
Alameda Gat eway
Ferry Terminal
Jack L ondon Square
Ferry Terminal
1950
Notes: Histor
A
ic
sia
C
n
en
a
s
n
u
d
s T
P
r
a
a
c
c
i
t
fi
s
c
f
I
r
s
o
la
m
nd
D
e
e
r
ce
w
n
e
n
r
i
e
al
no
C
t
e
s
n
e
s
p
us
a
.
r
A
a
l
t
l
e
o
d
th
u
e
n
r
til
fe
2 a
0 tu
0 r
0 e
.
s
Tr
(
a
e.
c
g
t
.
s
, s
m
tr
a
e
p
et
p
s
e
,
d
cit
b
y
y
li
ra
m
c
i
i
t
a
s
l
)
p
a
l
r
u
e
ra
a
li
s
ty
ex
(
i
m
sti
a
n
jo
g
ri
(
t
2 y
0 o
2 r
1 g
)
r
.
e
A
a
s
t
ia
es
n
t
/P
p
a
r
c
o
if
p
ic
or
I
t
s
i
l
o
a
n
n
).
d
P
er
or
a
t
n
o
d
f
H
O
i
a
s
k
p
l
a
a
n
n
i
d
c
/
/L
O
a
A
ti
K
nx
ai
p
rp
o
o
p
r
u
t
la
a
t
r
io
e
n
a
s
s
w
m
e
a
r
s
e
ke
n
d
ot
o
d
u
i
t
st
f
i
r
n
o
g
m
uis
1 h
9 e
6 d
0 fr
o
o
n
m
wa
"o
rd
th
s
e
a
r
s
"
l
r
o
a
w
ce
p
s
o
u
p
n
u
t
l
il
at
1 io
9 n
80 a
,
re
a
a
n
s
d
.
0 1.75 3.5 7
µ
MILES
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
!"c$
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aî
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

EM ERY VILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
Inte rnat io nal
Air por t
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Cha bot
Coast G uard
Islan d Alameda
Alameda Gat eway
Ferry Terminal
Jack L ondon Square
Ferry Terminal
1940 1960
1970 1980 1990
2000 2010 2019
Majority White
Majority Hispanic/
Latinx
Hispanic/Latinx
& White
Asian & Hispanic/
Latinx
Majority Black
Black & White
Black & Hispanic/
Latinx
Asian/Pacific
Islander & Black
Majority Asian*
Asian & White
3 Group Mixed
Mixed (Diverse)
No Data/Low
Pop. Area
*Includes Pacific Islander
1980-90.

Figure EJ-1: Racial Concentration 1940-2019
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
!"c$
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aî
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

EM ERY VILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
Inte rnat io nal
Air por t
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Cha bot
Coast G uard
Islan d Alameda
Alameda Gat eway
Ferry Terminal
Jack L ondon Square
Ferry Terminal
2010
SOURCE: IPUMS NHGIS, University of Minnesota, 2021; City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021 Oakland General Plan Update
Notes: Historic Census Tracts from Decennial Census. All other features (e.g., streets, city limits) are as existing (2021). Port of Oakland/OAK airport masked out from 1960 onwards as low population areas. 0 1.75 3.5 7
µ
MILES
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
!"c$
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aî
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

AL AME DA

SAN LE ANDRO

BE RKELEY

PIEDMONT

EM ERY VILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
Inte rnat io nal
Air por t
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Cha bot
Coast G uard
Islan d Alameda
Alameda Gat eway
Ferry Terminal
Jack L ondon Square
Ferry Terminal
2019
Distribution of Median Household Income*
Percentile Range
Top 10% (Highest Income)
80-90%
70-80%
60-70%
50-60%
40-50%
30-40%
20-30%
10-20%
0-10% (Lowest Income)
No Data/Low Population Area
*1960 and 1970 reflect average household (families
and unrelated individuals) incomes rather than
median due to data limitations.

Figure EJ-2: Median Household Income 1940-2019
Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
niversity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

29.6% - 38.6%

22.0% - 29.5%

14.1% - 21.9%

7.5% - 14.0%

0.0% - 7.4%
No Data/Low Population Area
Base Map
City of Oakland
Alameda County
µ
Parks
Figure EJ-3: Prevalence of Poverty
2-8
Chapter 2 | Environmental Racism and Health Inequities in Oakland What are “unique or compounded
health risks”?
A “health risk” is a hazard to human health. Some hazards (such as lead, asbestos, floods, and heat waves) may be dangerous enough to harm human health on their own. Other hazards are less acute on their own but become harmful when they coincide with other health risks. This is a compounded health risk.

Today, people are often exposed to multiple health risks, such as asbestos and air pollutants, while experiencing poverty and living in neighborhoods with poor access to fresh and affordable foods. These overlapping conditions are experienced more often by EJ Communities. The inequitable distribution of resources that promote health, coupled with the concentration of environmental pollution and other hazards, is what SB 1000 refers to as the unique or compounded health risks that impact EJ Communities.

The Link Between Racism and Poor
Health Outcomes
On June 7, 2022, the Oakland City Council adopted Resolution 89249 officially recognizing and declaring that “racism is a public health crisis in the City of Oakland and throughout the United States and the world.” The Resolution also accentuated the City’s commitment to address and alleviate the ongoing impacts of racism. In doing so, the City of Oakland joined the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Medical Association, and the American Public Health
Association in explicitly recognizing racism as a threat to public health.

The Resolution reaffirms a growing body of research on
the problematic relationship between systemic racism and the social determinants of health. Structural racism shapes the distribution and quality of the social determinants of health, such as housing, neighborhood conditions, income, employment, public safety, and education, which significantly impact individual and community health. Thus, racial and ethnic health disparities are primarily due to inequities in exposure to environmental risk factors and access to healthpromoting resources rather than biological differences between racial groups.25
25 Introduced by City Attorney Barbara J. Parker, City Administrator Edward D. Reiskin, President Pro Tem Sheng Thao, and Councilmembers Carroll Fife, Treva Reid, and Loren Taylor. Resolution Declaring Racism a Public Health Crisis and Reaffirming the City’s Commitment to Advancing Racial Equity., Resolution Number 89249 § (2022). https://oakland.legistar. com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5648415&GUID=3302DDAA-B81D-44B8- A3FC-CA542C19B1D9&Options=&Search=.

2.2 LAND USE AND HEALTH

HEALTH INEQUITIES
“There is increasing recognition that the environments
in which people live, work, learn, and play have a
tremendous impact on their health. Re-shaping
people’s economic, physical, social, and service
environments can help ensure opportunities for health
and support healthy behaviors. [Because] health and
public health agencies rarely have the mandate,
authority, or organizational capacity to make these
changes, … responsibility for the social determinants
of health falls to … housing, transportation, education, air quality, parks, criminal justice, energy, and
employment agencies.”
- Adewale Troutman and Georges C. Benjamin,
American Public Health Association
Health in All Policies: A Guide for State and Local
Governments, 2013
Health inequities are differences in health outcomes “that are a result of systemic, avoidable, and unjust social and economic policies and practices that create barriers to opportunities.”24 As described the previous section, a history of structural racism has contributed to persistent inequities that are exacerbated by an increasing gap in social and economic inequalities.

Varying levels of access to opportunities and resources across neighborhoods, combined with disproportionate exposure
to threats such as air pollution, soil contamination, traffic congestion, substandard housing, and increased social and generational trauma, comprise what SB 1000 refers to as “unique or compounded health risks.” To a large extent, land use decisions determine how both environmental health threats and public health resources are distributed. For example, adjacent incompatible land uses, such as industrial and residential, can expose residents to higher levels of pollution and noise. Such proximity can increase the risk of asthma or other respiratory diseases, while constant, excessive noise can increase stress, anxiety, depression, high blood pressure, heart disease, and more.
24 Rudolph, L., Caplan, J., Ben-Moshe, K., & Dillon, L. (2013). Health in All Policies: A Guide for State and Local Governments. Washington, DC and Oakland, CA: American Public Health Association and Public Health Institute.

As described in Section 2.1, a history of discriminatory policies and land use decisions has also shaped who lives where in the city, creating differences in health outcomes that are correlated with (or follow similar patterns to) race. Chart EJ-1 shows how white populations have a much lower average rate of coronary heart disease, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease than Black, Asian, and Hispanic/Latinx populations. In fact, the average incidence of these health outcomes for white people is lower than the population-wide average, while Black, Asian, and 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
2-9
Hispanic/Latinx populations experience higher rates than the citywide average. These findings are also supported by data from the Alameda County Public Health Department (ACPHD), which show that there are racial disparities in health outcomes for cancer-related deaths, rate of low-birth-weight infants, and life expectancy at birth.

These factors, along with others, affect life expectancy overall based on geography: data from the Alameda County Public Health Department (ACPHD) show a nearly 20-year difference between the Oakland census tract with the highest and lowest life expectancy at birth. As shown in Figure EJ-4, tracts in East Oakland generally have lower life expectancies, and the tracts with the lowest life expectancies are Fitchburg/Hegenberger and Brookfield Village, both at less than 72 years – more than 10 percent lower than the citywide average.

HOW PLANNING AND LAND USE IMPACT HEALTH
Land use regulation is an essential determinant of health because it shapes the physical environment of neighborhoods, and in turn, can expand or restrict access to opportunities for everyday physical activity, healthy foods, economic growth, social connections, and more. Further, the protection of residents’ public health, safety, and welfare is the legal basis for land use regulation.

The section below summarizes how land use planning and the built environment influence health outcomes.

Reducing Pollution Exposure, Improving Air Quality
In virtually every community, people may be exposed to pollution daily through direct contact with air, food, water, and soil contaminants. This is especially true for those who live near highly polluting land uses. Certain types of pollution exposure disproportionately impact those with higher risk factors such as age or underlying health conditions. Socioeconomic conditions that increase stress, decrease access to health care, or make healthy living difficult further compound the adverse health effects of pollution. In times of growing wildfire threat, smoke is another burden added to existing pollution.

Exposure to multiple sources of pollution, such as freeway traffic, the Port, and industrial sites, disproportionately burdens many EJ Communities in Oakland. These communities are also on the front lines facing the challenges associated with adapting to the impacts of climate change. Identifying the sources, types, and quantities of pollution across Oakland neighborhoods, as well as their change over time, is essential to determine the best solutions.

Promoting Safe and Healthy Homes
Many homes in Oakland, particularly in lower-income areas where renovations have either not occurred or are substandard, are likely to contain lead-based paint, mold, mildew, asbestos, unvented biproducts of methane (“natural”) gas combustion, and other toxic materials. These conditions put adults and children at risk of conditions including lead poisoning and asbestosis, which can result in lifelong detrimental health impacts. Despite the risks, many low-income families cannot afford to move out of or remediate these conditions.

Housing location is as impactful as structural conditions. For example, proximity to pollution sources, such as freeways or industrial facilities, worsens indoor air quality. In addition, some housing may not have adequate access to economic opportunities or public services and facilities.

Promoting Healthy Food Access
Food access refers to a person’s ability to access nutritionally adequate, culturally appropriate, and affordable food. Having a sufficient income to purchase healthy food and the proximity or ability to travel to a food source that offers nutritionally adequate, culturally appropriate, and affordable food are essential elements of equitable access.

Promoting Physical Activity
Differences in the quality of and access to safe and well-maintained places to walk, play, and exercise in Oakland’s communities lead to a range of adverse health outcomes. Land use choices that do not consider how far jobs, parks, schools, healthy food resources, and other community facilities are from neighborhoods can result in increased reliance on cars and less active transportation, which in turn contributes to higher rates of diabetes, obesity, and heart disease.

Environmental justice policies must promote physical activity and address the equitable distribution of active transportation (i.e., pedestrian and bicycle) networks and the distribution of parks, open spaces, and urban green spaces.

Chart EJ-1: Citywide Differences in Health Outcomes by Race, 2020 Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
niversity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

SB 1000 refers to “public facilities” as “public improvements, public services, and community amenities.” These may include transit facilities, public restrooms, parks, open spaces, health centers and clinics, schools, daycare centers, libraries, museums, community centers, community facilities, and recreational facilities (such as senior or youth centers).

Civic Engagement/Reducing Barriers to Inclusive
Engagement and Participation
Ensuring that all community members—especially those most impacted by environmental pollution and other hazards—can meaningfully participate in any civic decision-making process is key to planning for environmental justice.

Creating accessible and culturally appropriate opportunities for low-income, underrepresented, and linguistically isolated stakeholders to engage in local decision-making will help identify and resolve EJ issues.

Prioritizing Improvements and Programs in EJ
Communities
Environmental justice seeks to improve the environmental health of those most harmed by pollution burdens by intentionally investing in the most impacted communities to create opportunities for their residents to live long, healthy lives.

EJ Communities may have specific needs requiring singular actions to ensure that existing conditions are improved and not exacerbated. In addition, effective prioritization would ensure that policies and programs benefiting EJ Communities are implemented promptly.

Lastly, prioritizing improvements and programs for EJ Communities may also help the City access public funding dedicated to benefiting EJ Communities.

2.3 IDENTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL

JUSTICE COMMUNITIES

PURPOSE AND DEFINITION
Environmental Justice (EJ) Communities (referred to as “disadvantaged communities” in SB 1000) are low-income areas that are disproportionately impacted by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to adverse health effects. EJ Communities are eligible for special funding considerations, as well as targeted environmental justice efforts and investments. EJ Communities should also be recognized by the City and uplifted in order to equitably allocate opportunities and resources.

State law (SB 1000) requires jurisdictions to identify EJ Communities. This can be as simple as identifying the census tracts that the State designates pursuant to SB 535, which relies on the CalEnviroScreen methodology developed by the California Environmental Protection Agency Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). Alternatively, local jurisdictions have the option to refine this process using a more locally responsive methodology such as by including local and hyperlocal datasets. Oakland has chosen to take this second approach to identifying EJ Communities.

CalEnviroScreen
The California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool, or CalEnviroScreen, is a mapping tool developed by CalEPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to help identify California communities that are disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution.

Last updated in October 2021, the methodology currently uses 21 indicators measuring cumulative pollution burden and population characteristics that make communities
particularly vulnerable to pollution. As illustrated below, each of the indicators falls under one of four components that are grouped, weighted, and combined to calculate the final CalEnviroScreen score.

The overall CalEnviroScreen score is often used to describe the interaction between cumulative pollution burden and population vulnerability, but each of the indicators that make up the score are also important pieces of information. Some of these topics are mapped and discussed in this Element to show how individual EJ issues affect communities
throughout Oakland.

Pollution Burden
Pollution Burden
Components
Exposures
Average of
Exposures and
Environmental
Effects*
Environmental
Effects
Socioeconomic
Factors
Sensitive
Populations
Average of
Sensitive
Populations and
Socioeconomic
Factors
Population
Characteristics
Population
Characteristics
CalEnviroScreen Score
X
* The Environmental Effects score was weighted half as
much as the Exposures score.
=
Figure EJ-5: CalEnviroScreen Score Components
2-12
Chapter 2 | Environmental Racism and Health Inequities in Oakland

METHODOLOGY
The first step in the process of identifying and mapping Oakland’s EJ Communities began with the EJ Baseline Report. In line with State law requirements and objectives, the EJ Baseline Report included a preliminary screening analysis that evaluated whether low-income areas are disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to adverse health effects, exposure, or environmental degradation. It does this by broadly analyzing possible disproportionate burdens according to all topic areas required by SB 1000. The screening analysis also considers issues unique to Oakland, such as illegal dumping, and issues not reflected in CalEnviroScreen, such as local vulnerability to climate change and redlining.

As mentioned, the preliminary screening analysis combined a series of indicators, or quantitative metrics that evaluate environmental justice issues, to identify disproportionate impacts across each of the eight SB 1000 topic areas: (1) pollution exposure, (2) public facilities, (3) food access, (4) safe/sanitary homes, (5) physical activity, (6) unique/compounded health risks, (7) civic engagement, and (8) prioritization of environmental justice communities’ needs. From there, each of the indicators were scored using a methodology that ranks all 113 census tracts in the City from highest (1.00, representing the most burdened) to lowest (0.00, representing the least burdened). This is referred to as a “percentile ranking” because the relative rank of each tract corresponds with a composite score on a scale of 0.00 (0 percent, or 0th percentile) to 1.00 (100 percent, or 100th percentile). By calculating the relative ranks/scores, this methodology is suitable for highlighting the places that are comparatively most burdened by environmental justice issues in the City.

The preliminary methodology from the EJ Baseline Report used 50 indicators grouped into four categories: race and poverty, pollution burden, sensitive populations, and built environment. Each category is made up of two to four topics, as illustrated in green below. Revisions to the preliminary methodology are shown in orange and are discussed in the following section.

Individual indicator scores were calculated using the percentile ranking methodology described above. Topic scores are calculated from the sum of the individual indicators that make up the topic. For example, the Water topic is comprised of the Groundwater Threats and Impaired Water Bodies indicators, which are added together and translated into another percentile score for Water. The same process is repeated at the topic-level to calculate category scores, and category scores are combined using this method to calculate the overall composite score. In other words, each level of the hierarchy “rolls up” to the final composite score.

Finally, this score was used to identify the top 25 census tracts with the highest cumulative burden scores as potential EJ Communities in the EJ Baseline Report.

Note: Climate Change was a topic under the Pollution Burden category in the preliminary methodology but has been revised as a separate category in the updated methodology.

An initial REIA assessed this methodology, highlighted gaps in the analysis, and provided recommendations for improvement.

The final methodology used to identify EJ Communities in this Element has consequently been refined based on these recommendations, including the removal, addition, and adjustment of indicators to better align them with a focused set of selection guidelines, including the following considerations:
• How well does the indicator measure an SB 1000 topic, such as health disparities?
• Does the indicator/metric reflect community priorities for change?
• Is the indicator actionable, and can City policy directly or indirectly impact it?
• Is the data currently available?
Figure EJ-6: Structure of EJ Communities Screening Indicators 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
2-13
The final methodology includes 53 indicators, maintaining many of the same categories and topics as the preliminary screening analysis. Since the Baseline Report, the following changes have been made to the set of indicators which include revisions in response to REIA recommendations:
• The following indicators have been replaced:
− Low-Income Area Indicators. The preliminary screening analysis included low-income area indicators that aligned with State definitions of “low-income areas.” These
categorical indicators undermined the percentile ranking system used to compare Oakland’s census tracts because
of the limited number of categories. In other words, areas with similar median household incomes all received
the same score even if the proportion of low-income
households differed. The new low-income indicator was
created to better illustrate the concentration of lowincome households in each census tract. The new indicator measures the percentage of households making less than
30 percent of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Area Median Family Income (HAMFI).26
− Asthma Indicators. The preliminary analysis included two indicators for asthma: a “Pediatric Asthma Attributable to Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)” indicator and a “Rate of Adult Asthma” indicator. The former indicator was sourced
from the West Oakland Environmental Indicators
Project (WOEIP) and Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)
partnership studying hyperlocal air quality in West
Oakland.27 The latter indicator was sourced from the
National Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) PLACES dataset. To more comprehensively capture the
health impacts of air pollution on asthma outcomes for all ages, the updated analysis replaced these two indicators 26 Every year, HUD sets income limits that determine eligibility for assisted housing programs such as Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher. These income limits are based on HUD’s estimates for Median Family Income and Fair Market Rent area definitions for each metropolitan area, parts of some metropolitan areas, and each non-metropolitan county.
27 Hyperlocal data used in this study uses measurements taken by a car equipped with an air monitoring sensor that was driven along certain roads in West Oakland, East Oakland, and freeways in Oakland in 2017. Due to data gaps for areas that were not included in the routes (such as the Oakland hills), citywide comparisons cannot be made for this EJ screening analysis. with “Asthma Emergency Department Visits” data from
CalEnviroScreen (version 4.0). It is noted that hyperlocal data is used in the screening analysis when the data is currently available and complete for the entire city. The indicator “Mortality Attributable to NO2” (within the
Health topic) is one such hyperlocal indicator.
− Urban Heat Island Indicators. The preliminary screening analysis included an “Urban Heat Island Index” indicator developed by California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) in 2015. To use a more locally specific dataset for a period relevant to the 2040 General Plan, the updated analysis replaced this with an indicator on “Projected
Average Maximum Temperature during Future Heat
Health Events” from the California Heat Assessment Tool (CHAT). The CHAT was developed as part of California’s
Fourth Climate Change Assessment published in 2018.

The new indicator is a more understandable metric over
which the City has direct influence through changes to
the built environment.
− Park Access. The preliminary analysis measured low park access as the percentage of population that is not within a 10-minute walking distance of a park. This indicator was revised to account for updated information regarding
park access such as including regional parks and
removing parks that are closed or not publicly accessible.

In addition, the updated indicator is more spatially precise because it measures the number of housing units by
parcel that are located outside a 10-minute walking
distance of publicly accessible, open parks instead of
estimating the percentage of population by census block group. See Appendix A for full data dictionary and more information about data sources.
• The following indicators have been added:
− Proximity to Industrial Zones. Represents how close
certain communities live to industrially zoned areas, which are common sources of pollution.
− Proximity to Farmers’ Markets. Measures how far
communities live from farmers’ markets, which can be
an alternative source of food as well as a cultural asset through its function as a community gathering space.
− Proximity to Existing Community Gardens. Measures
distance to the closest community garden, which not only serves as a local food source but also helps provide access to green spaces in the city.
− Energy Cost Burden. Measures how much of their
income a household spends on energy costs. It represents vulnerability to the impacts of climate change, which
can increase energy costs such as greater need for air
conditioning as temperatures increase.
− Extreme Commutes. Measures the percentage of
workers whose commutes are 90 minutes or longer.

It represents a low-level of jobs-housing fit (lack of
affordable housing near jobs) as well as increased
transportation burden.
− Incomplete Plumbing or Kitchen Facilities. Measures
the percentage of households that lack complete
plumbing or kitchen facilities. Both of these indicators are used by HUD as a proxy for substandard housing
conditions.
− Free or Reduced Price Meals (FRPM). Measures the
proportion of students enrolled at each school receiving FRPM, representing food insecurity.
• The following indicators and topics have been restructured:
− Redlining. The Redlining indicator, previously under
the Neighborhood Disinvestment topic of the Built
Environment category, has been moved to the Race topic
in the Race and Poverty category. Because the Race topic has fewer indicators than Neighborhood Disinvestment
contributing to its score, moving Redlining into Race
places greater weight to the indicator – meaning that it has more impact on the overall composite score.
2-14
Chapter 2 | Environmental Racism and Health Inequities in Oakland − Climate Change. The Climate Change topic was
promoted to a category, independent of the Pollution
Burden category. The methodology now accounts for five
distinct, equally weighted categories rather than four. − Green Space. The indicators for Park Access and Lack of Tree Canopy were grouped into a new topic, outside of the Neighborhood Disinvestment topic, but still part of the Built Environment category.
− Toxic Releases. This indicator was moved from the
Hazardous Materials topic to the Air Quality topic (both within the Pollution Burden category) after closer review of the CalEnviroScreen 4.0 measure for toxic releases from facilities, which measures the extent to which facilities that make or use toxic chemicals can release these
chemicals into the air.
− Lead Exposure. This indicator was moved from the
Air Quality topic (Pollution Burden category) to the
Housing topic (Neighborhood Disinvestment topic,
Built Environment category) after closer review of the
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 measure for children’s lead risk from housing, which estimates the percentage of low-income
households with children in older housing structures that have a higher likelihood of containing lead-based paint hazards.

Other revisions made in response to REIA recommendations include “flipping” some indicators, including Life Expectancy, Median Household Income, Active Commutes, and Community Facilities so that they measure negative outcomes. This means that higher scores indicate greater burden/impact for all indicators. Additionally, the evictions indicator was revised to measure the number of evictions per renter rather than for all residents to better control for areas that are predominantly owner-occupied.

A few indicators were removed entirely from the EJ Communities screening methodology: Distance to Healthcare Facilities and Lack of Vehicle Ownership. Distance to Healthcare Facilities was omitted because of the complexity of factors that contributed to its anomalous outcomes. In particular, tracts with the farthest distances to healthcare facilities were predominantly located in the Oakland hills, which tend to have higher median incomes, less populations of color, and lower rates of negative health outcomes. Rather, the geographic distribution of low-density neighborhoods increases distances to services such as healthcare facilities that are generally located closer to civic centers like Downtown. Moreover, inequitable access to healthcare is often impacted by financial rather than geographic barriers.

For example, mapping lack of health insurance generally aligns with patterns of poor health outcomes (according to the CDC’s PLACES dataset), both of which have higher values in lower-income areas despite nearby health facilities. Similarly, the Lack of Vehicle Ownership indicator was initially revised to measure households that do not own two or more vehicles (i.e., own zero or only one vehicle) to help account for voluntary lack of vehicle ownership, which tends to occur in places well-served by transit such as Downtown; however, this metric was ultimately removed due to its interdependence with transit access and in light of the City’s climate objectives to reduce reliance on driving. Nevertheless, inclusion of certain indicators over others does not preclude them as issues that should be considered in the EJ Element. The Element explores a robust range of topics that are all assessed in combination with the findings of the EJ Communities mapping process. Ultimately, this approach allows the EJ Element to serve as the keystone and guiding resource for integrating environmental justice in the General Plan, especially for elements that will be prepared in subsequent phases (as noted in Section 1.1).

After calculating scores for all 53 indicators and combining these into the topic, category, and overall composite score, criteria and cutoff thresholds were applied to determine which census tracts are formally identified as EJ Communities. These criteria and thresholds have been informed by the REIA. Similar to the CalEnviroScreen methodology, which identifies the most impacted communities as those in the top 25th percentile of census tracts statewide, the EJ Baseline Report identified preliminary EJ Communities as the top 25 highest-scoring census tracts in Oakland (corresponding to the top 22nd percentile in the city) by overall composite score. Community input voiced concerns that this initial approach did not capture enough areas to reflect the on-the-ground conditions and lived experiences of the most impacted and burdened communities in the city.

Based on this feedback and recommendations from the REIA, the number of identified EJ Communities has increased from 25 census tracts to 48 census tracts, based on the following, in order of consideration:

1. Is the census tract among the top 25th percentile of overall composite scores (i.e., greater than or equal to 0.75)?

2. Is the census tract among the top 10th percentile of any of the category scores (i.e., scoring 0.90 or higher for Race/ Low Income, Pollution Burden, Climate Change, Sensitive Population, or Built Environment)?

3. Is the census tract designated as a Disadvantaged
Community per SB 535?
If any of these criteria are met, the census tract is included in the final list of EJ Communities, presented in the next section. 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
2-15
CENSUS

TRACT NAME

EJ COMMUNITY
CRITERIA1

CATEGORY SCORE
Composite
Score
Race &
Poverty
Pollution
Burden
Climate
Change
Sensitive
Population
Built
Environment
Lockwood/
Coliseum/
Rudsdale
Top 25% Composite 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 0.79
Fitchburg Top 25% Composite 0.99 0.93 0.79 0.96 0.98 0.91 Brookfield Village/
Hegenberger Top 25% Composite 0.98 0.68 0.96 0.94 0.99 0.92 Melrose Top 25% Composite 0.97 0.85 0.93 1.00 0.56 0.98 New Highland Top 25% Composite 0.96 0.96 0.70 0.96 0.96 0.75 Jingletown/
Kennedy Top 25% Composite 0.96 0.80 0.97 0.99 0.66 0.84 Fremont District Top 25% Composite 0.95 0.77 0.62 0.95 0.85 0.95 Oakland Estuary Top 25% Composite 0.94 0.79 0.98 0.71 0.71 0.86 Elmhurst Top 25% Composite 0.93 0.97 0.66 0.41 0.95 1.00 DeFremery/Oak
Center Top 25% Composite 0.92 0.96 0.85 0.84 0.91 0.43
Stonehurst Top 25% Composite 0.91 0.98 0.58 0.46 0.94 0.94 Fruitvale Top 25% Composite 0.90 0.82 0.71 0.90 0.76 0.67 Clawson/Dogtown Top 25% Composite 0.89 0.61 0.90 0.98 0.75 0.61 Seminary Top 25% Composite 0.88 0.95 0.49 0.47 0.89 0.99 Reservoir Hill/
Meadow Brook Top 25% Composite 0.88 0.88 0.54 0.86 0.80 0.68 Fruitvale/
Hawthorne Top 25% Composite 0.87 0.71 0.72 0.82 0.86 0.60 Prescott/Mandela
Peralta Top 25% Composite 0.86 0.63 0.87 0.83 0.59 0.76 Brookfield Village Top 25% Composite 0.85 0.54 0.77 0.50 0.88 0.97 McClymonds Top 25% Composite 0.84 0.69 0.89 0.78 0.61 0.70 Sobrante Park Top 25% Composite 0.83 0.62 0.75 0.88 0.65 0.73 Bancroft/
Havenscourt West Top 25% Composite 0.82 0.67 0.31 0.81 0.92 0.89 Harrington/
Fruitvale Top 25% Composite 0.81 0.86 0.45 0.92 0.74 0.63 Castlemont Top 25% Composite 0.80 0.90 0.09 0.87 0.78 0.96 Lower San Antonio
East Top 25% Composite 0.79 0.94 0.63 0.53 0.68 0.82
Bancroft/
Havenscourt East Top 25% Composite 0.79 0.84 0.32 0.49 0.90 0.96 RESULTS Table EJ-2: Environmental Justice Communities Summary As summarized in Table EJ-2, there are 48 total census tracts that have been identified as EJ Communities in the City of Oakland: 29 are in the top 25th percentile by composite score, 12 additional census tracts are in the top 10th percentile of any one of the category scores, and seven additional census tracts have lower scores, but are designated by CalEPA as SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities (as of May 2022). These census tracts are mapped on Figure EJ-7.

Among EJ Communities, the top contributing category is Sensitive Populations, for which there are 26 census tracts that score among the top 25th percentile, and the average score is

0.74. Meanwhile, the individual indicators that have the greatest number of EJ Communities scoring in the top 25th percentile include Very-Low Income (26 tracts, 0.734 average), Proximity to Industrial Zones (26 tracts, 0.729 average), and Lack of Health Insurance (23 tracts, 0.731 average).

While the purpose of the screening tool is to identify the most cumulatively burdened census tracts, each indicator on its own reveals geographic disparities. Each section of this Element lists the neighborhoods (by census tract) that score in the top decile for related indicators, and EJ Communities included among these neighborhoods are prioritized for related City action and investment.

A full table of scores for each indicator is included in Appendix A. 2-16
Chapter 2 | Environmental Racism and Health Inequities in Oakland Bunche/Oak Center Top 25% Composite 0.78 0.83 0.74 0.77 0.79 0.37 Hoover/Foster Top 25% Composite 0.77 0.56 0.95 0.70 0.51 0.78 Arroyo Viejo Top 25% Composite 0.76 0.87 0.37 0.43 0.84 0.93 Acorn Top 25% Composite 0.75 0.99 0.76 0.25 0.97 0.45
Prescott
SB 535
Disadvantaged
Community

0.74 0.64 0.73 0.79 0.71 0.51
Cox/Elmhurst Top 10% Category 0.71 0.92 0.29 0.39 0.82 0.88 Peralta/Hacienda Top 10% Category 0.71 0.75 0.51 0.91 0.54 0.54 Jack London
Gateway Top 10% Category 0.70 0.91 0.79 0.20 0.83 0.53
Chinatown Top 10% Category 0.69 0.72 0.94 0.10 0.96 0.52 Eastmont Top 10% Category 0.68 0.73 0.03 0.80 0.78 0.90 Webster Top 10% Category 0.67 0.89 0.22 0.44 0.93 0.72
Lower San Antonio
West
SB 535
Disadvantaged
Community

0.66 0.88 0.61 0.29 0.68 0.69
Port Upper Top 10% Category 0.65 0.39 0.99 0.66 0.34 0.71 Chinatown/Laney Top 10% Category 0.62 0.71 0.96 0.55 0.59 0.15 Oakland/Harrison
West Top 10% Category 0.60 0.42 0.81 0.93 0.47 0.30
Longfellow
SB 535
Disadvantaged
Community

0.59 0.50 0.82 0.65 0.53 0.44
Bunche/MLK Jr
SB 535
Disadvantaged
Community

0.52 0.66 0.84 0.15 0.46 0.49
Pill Hill Top 10% Category 0.51 0.43 0.91 0.07 0.77 0.39 Eastlake Clinton
West
SB 535
Disadvantaged
Community

0.50 0.57 0.55 0.21 0.49 0.66
Uptown/
Downtown
SB 535
Disadvantaged
Community

0.49 0.44 0.88 0.00 0.88 0.29
Gaskill
SB 535
Disadvantaged
Community

0.47 0.49 0.68 0.63 0.55 0.05
Jack London Square Top 10% Category 0.44 0.09 1.00 0.47 0.36 0.47 Downtown/Old
Oakland Top 10% Category 0.38 0.29 0.92 0.02 0.43 0.50

1. Some census tracts may meet more than one criterion, but table shows only the first one met, in order of: (1) Top 25% Composite (Top 25%), (2) Top 10% Category (Category), and (3) SB 535 Disadvantaged Community (SB 535).

Table EJ-2: Environmental Justice Communities Summary
Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave
Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
îA
ÞA
ÞA
Aâ
|A
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

EMERYVILLE
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
International
Airport
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Chabot
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
SOURCE: City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2022 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Oakland General Plan Update
Overall Composite Score
Score Range
91 - 100
81 - 90
71 - 80
61 - 70
51 - 60
41 - 50
31 - 40
21 - 30
11 - 20
0 - 10
Potential Environmental Justice Community
West Oakland AB617 Community Boundary
Port of Oakland
Base Map
Railroads
Major Highways
Major Roads
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
Port of
Oakland
Port of
Oakland
Figure EJ-7: Environmental Justice Communities
2-18
Chapter 2 | Environmental Racism and Health Inequities in Oakland This page intentionally left blank.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
3-1

3. Reducing Pollution Exposure and Improving Air Quality

3.1 ISSUES AND DISPARITIES

POLLUTION BURDEN
Oaklanders experience pollution of various kinds: air pollution, water contamination, and exposure to hazardous materials.

Exposure to these pollutants varies significantly, with higher concentrations in EJ Communities. Pollution exposure occurs when people come into direct contact with air, food, water, and soil contaminants. While Oakland has a relatively lower CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Pollution Burden score than the rest of California, this relatively low citywide value hides the disproportionate pollution burden experienced by some Oakland communities. Chart EJ-2 below shows that there are higher concentrations of Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) communities living in census tracts that have higher pollution burden scores, meaning that they are more at risk than white populations. Residents living in EJ Communities often live close to polluting industrial uses or adjacent to freeways and major truck routes. This disproportionate exposure directly impacts the health of vulnerable populations.

On average, census tracts in Oakland have an overall
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Pollution Burden percentile score of 44.3, meaning that census tracts in the city are less impacted by environmental effects and exposures than more than half of tracts in California. However, four of Oakland’s tracts rank in the top 10th percentile in the entire state for pollution burden: Port Upper, Jingletown/Kennedy, Melrose, and Brookfield Village/Hegenberger – all of which are identified as EJ Communities in this Element.

Chart EJ-2: Citywide Census Tract Average of
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Pollution Burden Score by
Race, 2021
Note: Race is assigned to the racial group with the plurality (highest proportion) within a census tract.

Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0, CalEPA, 2021
Clean air, water, and land are some of the building blocks for healthy neighborhoods. However, Oakland’s urban setting, economic history, and past policy and land use choices mean that communities in West and East Oakland, primarily communities of color, experience some of the highest pollution levels in the state.

As discussed in Section 2.2, high pollution exposure has a direct impact on human health, leading to disproportionate levels of negative health outcomes like asthma, cardiovascular disease, or cancer in communities burdened by pollution. This section covers existing environmental factors such as pollution and other natural and human-made environmental hazards that affect Oakland residents. It identifies baseline conditions related to the SB 1000 topics of pollution exposure, air quality, and unique or compounded health risks. In addition to environmental justice, these topics correspond most closely with the Land Use and Transportation, Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation (OSCAR) and Safety Elements of the General Plan.
3-2
Chapter 3 | Reducing Pollution Exposure and Improving Air Quality

SENSITIVE LAND USES
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) defines sensitive receptors as “children, elderly, asthmatics, and others who are at a heightened risk of negative health outcomes due to exposure to air pollution,” and the locations where these sensitive receptors congregate, such as schools and schoolyards, parks and playgrounds, daycare centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential communities, are considered sensitive receptor locations (also referred to as sensitive land uses).36 In the short and long term, an individual’s exposure to pollution of any kind (air, water, or land) in their community can lead to chronic conditions or negative health outcomes including asthma or increased risk of cancer. Communities of color are at higher risk for exposure to pollution and hazards in neighborhood environments at an early age. Exposure to these conditions, particularly during sensitive developmental stages, contributes to health disparities later in life.37 As discussed earlier in Section 2.1, a history of racially discriminatory policies and practices have created inequitable development patterns in Oakland that expose BIPOC communities and low-income communities to greater concentrations of pollution and other health risks.

Data from the Alameda County Public Health Department shows that residents of West Oakland and Downtown Oakland have higher rates of asthma emergency room visits as well as stroke and congestive heart failure compared to the rest of the city. On 36 California Air Resources Board, “Sensitive Receptor Assessment,” https:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/capp-resource-center/community-assessment/sensitivereceptor-assessment, accessed February 21, 2023. 37 Chenghao Wang, et. al, “Rethinking the urban physical environment for century-long lives: from age-friendly to longevity-ready cities,” Nature Aging 1 (2021): 1088-1095, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43587-021-00140-5, accessed March 8, 2022.
the other hand, residents of the Oakland hills are expected to live up to seven years longer than those from the flatlands in West Oakland and downtown.38 These outcomes are not a coincidence; legacy land use decisions based on racially discriminatory practices (discussed in Section 2.1) have resulted in and perpetuated environmental injustices such that Oaklanders with the least ability to pay for and recover from environmental health threats are also the most impacted.

Land use incompatibility is one of the most important contributors to environmental burdens on an EJ Community. Mixing sensitive land uses with known or foreseeable pollution or natural hazards can create or compound health risks. According to WOEIP’s 2002 report, “Neighborhood Knowledge for Change”, 10 percent of sensitive sites in Oakland, like schools, hospitals, and homeless shelters were located within one-eighth of a mile of industrial facilities at high risk for chemical accidents. Figure EJ-8 maps the location of existing sensitive land uses in Oakland, with residential areas shown in yellow. Since 2002, the proportion 38 Environmental Defense Fund, “How pollution impacts health in West Oakland,” 2019, https://www.edf.org/airqualitymaps/oakland/pollution-andhealth-concerns-west-oakland, accessed February 15, 2022. of sensitive uses other than residentially zoned areas shown in Figure EJ-8 that are within one-eighth of a mile of high- or veryhigh hazard ranking industrial facilities has increased to over 30 percent.

AIR QUALITY
Outdoor air pollution comes from many sources, such as vehicle exhaust, construction and industrial activities, smoke from fireplaces and wildfires, and pollen from local plants. Transportation and industrial sites can release exhaust and chemicals that contribute to increased rates of asthma, congestive heart failure, and stroke. These pollution sources exacerbate health impairments and increase the economic burden from hospitalizations and healthcare. In Oakland, the concentration of sites that release chemical pollution is four times higher in high-poverty neighborhoods than that of more affluent neighborhoods.39 Census tracts in West and East Oakland are particularly affected by air pollution due to their proximity to traffic and industrial uses.
39 City of Oakland, Oakland 2030 Equitable Climate Action Plan, July 2020, https://cao-94612.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/Oakland-ECAP-07-24.pdf.

Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
hattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
sity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
















































































































































 





 



































 


































 



















 


















 



















 




































 





ÆP ÆP ÆP
ÆP
ÆP
ÆP
ÆP
ÆP !"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

EMERYVILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
International
Airport
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Chabot
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
SOURCE: California Department of Social Services, 2021; Oakland Unified School District, 2021; City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Oakland General Plan Update
Existing Residential Areas
Schoolground
Park or Playground
ÆP Hospital
 Library
 Recreation Center
 Senior Residential Care
 Adult Residential Care
 Childcare Center
Base Map
City of Oakland
Alameda County
Open Space/Regional Park
µ
Major Roads
Figure EJ-8: Sensitive Land Uses, 2021
3-4
Chapter 3 | Reducing Pollution Exposure and Improving Air Quality Types of Air Pollutants
Following the Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tracks six common air pollutants, called “criteria air pollutants” that are found all over the U.S. and have been shown to harm human and environmental health as well as cause property damage. These criteria air pollutants are ground-level ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide (CO), lead, sulfur dioxide (SO2), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). EPA calls these pollutants “criteria” air pollutants because it sets National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for them based on the latest scientific information regarding their effects on human health or welfare. In addition to the NAAQS, criteria air pollutants in California must meet State standards established by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Both the national and State standards help protect the public from harmful pollutants.

Of criteria air pollutants, particulate matter finer than 2.5 micrometers in size (PM2.5) poses the greatest health risk because they can penetrate deep into the lungs or even get into the bloodstream, resulting in a wide range of health effects.40 PM2.5 commonly comes from combustion sources of all fuel types, including diesel, along with particulates such as from road dust.

Certain air pollutants are known to increase the risk of cancer and/ or other serious health effects. These are classified as “toxic air contaminants” (TACs, known federally as “hazardous air pollutants”), some of which do not have a safe level of exposure (i.e., any amount of exposure is considered substantially harmful). One of the most concerning TACs is diesel particulate matter (DPM), which is a type of PM2.5 that is emitted as exhaust from diesel fuel combustion.

The West Oakland Community Action Plan (WOCAP) identifies 89 potential community-level strategies and control measures intended to reduce criteria pollutant and TAC emissions and decrease West Oakland residents’ exposure to TAC emissions.
40 United States Environmental Protection Agency, “How Does PM Affect Human Health?” EPA Region 1, last updated February 3, 2023, https://www3.epa.gov/ region1/airquality/pm-human-health.html, accessed February 21, 2023.

Mobile Sources
Mobile air pollution sources include on-road motor vehicles (cars and trucks) and off-road vehicles and equipment (such as aircraft, trains, and ocean-going vessels) and are Oakland’s primary source of air pollution.

Exhaust and chemical outputs from the transportation and industrial sectors, including the Port of Oakland, contribute to the climate crisis and increased rates of asthma, congestive heart failure, and stroke, as well as increased economic burden from hospitalizations and health care.41 Ocean-going vessels and trucks serving the Port bring disproportionate levels of diesel pollution and fine particulate matter to West Oakland and communities living along the I-880 and I-980 freeway corridors.

In addition to degrading local air quality, these toxic pollutants are absorbed in soils and contaminate groundwater. Heavy rains and floods bring pollutants to the surface, contaminating streets and waterways.

New regulations from CARB will require, starting in January 2023, that every vessel coming into a regulated California port, such as the Port of Oakland, use either shore power (e.g., plug in to the local electrical grid) or a CARB-approved control technology to reduce harmful emissions, such as diesel particulate matter and nitrogen oxides (NOx). The Port of Oakland is also in the beginning stages of designing infrastructure that would help transition to carbon-free, heavy-duty trucks and cargohandling equipment, including the replacement of a substation and electrical infrastructure for generating solar power.

Stationary Sources
Stationary air pollution sources include industrial facilities, gasoline stations, power plants, dry cleaners, waste disposal, and sites of other commercial and industrial processes. Stationary sources resulted in 26 percent of the city’s total PM2.5 emissions in 2018. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD or “Air District”) is the local air pollution control district for the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin and regulates stationary sources of air pollution. Permitted stationary sources of TACs in Oakland include industrial facilities, gasoline stations, power plants, dry cleaners, waste disposal facilities (such as landfills and wastewater treatment plants), and other commercial and industrial processing sites (such as metal processing and chemical manufacturing facilities).
41 City of Oakland, 2030 Equitable Climate Action Plan, July 2020.

Utilizing Local Data to Map Block-by-Block Air
Pollution
Conventional air monitoring is conducted by a network of stationary air quality monitors dispersed throughout an area. Agencies such as CalEPA and BAAQMD operate their own networks. Private and nonprofit partners can help supplement air quality monitoring data by providing additional monitors throughout their communities. However, estimating local levels of pollution is difficult because air monitoring stations are typically located many miles away from each other, and the data from these stations has to be averaged and/or estimated at a level that can mask out significant levels of pollution in certain neighborhoods.

Community groups in West and East Oakland have partnered with researchers at the Environmental Defense Fund and the University of Texas at Austin and technological companies like Google and Aclima to map, measure, and analyze pollution data at the neighborhood level, where pollution can be eight times higher at one end of a block compared to the other.

The Planning and Building Department has partnered with WOEIP to incorporate data from this study into this EJ Element. The EJ Communities screening analysis and maps included in the Baseline Report and this Element have utilized this hyperlocal data wherever feasible. This EJ Element directs the City to further incorporate more finer-grained community data to inform City programs and policies. 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
3-5
further refined the localized health risks of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations to Oakland residents.42 Using data from this study, Figure EJ-11 shows where the mortality (proportion of annual deaths) attributable to NO2 is greatest in Oakland. Figure EJ-12 shows how Oakland neighborhoods are affected by air quality overall, with the census tracts in blue and dark blue being the most burdened according to our Air Quality topic indicators. The Air District is leading a coordinated regional effort to generate community-based solutions for improving air quality and public health in impacted communities, pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 617. AB 617 requires local air districts and CARB to reduce air pollution in the most impacted communities through several methods, including development of Community Emissions Reduction Plans in collaboration with community members. In 2018, West Oakland was selected for this program. WOEIP partnered with BAAQMD to develop the West Oakland Community Action Plan, which focused on reducing exposure to pollutants from sources such as Port-related activities, trucks, industrial sources, road dust, and residential burning. In 2021, East Oakland was selected for the program. The Air District, in partnership with Communities for a Better Environment and the East Oakland community, initiated the first Community Steering Committee meeting for the East Oakland AB 617 Community Emissions Reduction Plan process on September 15, 2022. The committee will meet monthly to develop a Community Emissions Reduction Plan to improve air quality and public health in the impacted communities of East Oakland.

The City will support these efforts through land use or zoning changes to limit additional air quality burden in EJ Communities shown in Table EJ-3; prioritizing air quality improvements, such as distribution of air filters, priority urban greening or buffering, or other strategies to protect existing residents; using BAAQMD tools43 in assessing impacts and requiring higher air filtration ratings in new development, continuing to implement recommendations in the 2030 ECAP, and coordinating with community groups.
42 Veronica A. Southerland, et al., “Assessing the Distribution of Air Pollution Health Risks within Cities: A Neighborhood-Scale Analysis Leveraging HighResolution Data Sets in the Bay Area, California,” Environmental Health Perspectives 129, no. 3 (March 2021), https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP7679. 43 BAAQMD models and tools available at https://www.baaqmd.gov/aboutair-quality/research-and-data/research-and-modeling.

PM2.5 DIESEL TRAFFIC TOXIC RELEASES
Tract Name Score Tract Name Score Tract Name Score Tract Name Score Jingletown/Kennedy 1.00 Jack London Square 1.00 Sobrante Park 1.00 Fitchburg 1.00 Chinatown 0.99 Acorn Industrial* 0.99 Brookfield Village 0.99 Lockwood/Coliseum/ Rudsdale 0.99
Fruitvale/Hawthorne 0.98 Jack London Gateway 0.98 Port Upper 0.98 Paradise Park/Golden Gate 0.98
Pill Hill 0.97 Acorn 0.97 Eastmont Hills 0.97 Bushrod/North Oakland 0.97 Downtown 0.96 Chinatown/Laney 0.96 Adams Point North 0.96 Panoramic Hill 0.96 Oakland Estuary 0.96 Port Lower* 0.96 Adams Point East 0.96 Brookfield Village/ Hegenberger 0.95
Chinatown/Laney 0.95 Port Upper 0.95 Laurel/Upper Peralta Creek 0.95 Santa Fe/North Oakland 0.95
Fruitvale 0.94 Chinatown 0.94 Foothill Square/Toler
Heights 0.94 Upper Telegraph/ Fairview Park 0.94
Hoover/Foster 0.93 Downtown/Old
Oakland 0.93 Mills College 0.93 New Highland 0.93
Uptown/Downtown 0.92 Prescott/Mandela
Peralta 0.92 Trestle Glen 0.92 Bushrod/Childrens Hospital 0.92 Melrose 0.91 Oakland Estuary 0.91 Jingletown/ Kennedy 0.91 Sobrante Park 0.91 Eastlake 0.90 Prescott 0.90 Temescal West 0.90 Rockridge Note: Bolded census tracts in blue are EJ Communities.
* Indicates census tract with low population.

Table EJ-3: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Air Quality Diesel particulate matter, primarily emitted by industrial sources such as container ships and ocean-going vessels, cargo-handling equipment, railyards, trucks, and industrial operations of Port tenants, is concentrated in the industrial areas of West Oakland and along western portions of I-880, as shown in Figure EJ-9.

Many of these industrial uses depend on truck transport on designated routes, which bring disproportionate levels of diesel pollution, fine particulate matter, and black carbon to West and East Oakland along the I-880 and I-980 freeway corridors due to the truck ban on I-580. As a result, PM2.5 is concentrated primarily along the I-980 and I-880 freeways in the southern half of the city, as shown in Figure EJ-10. Nitrogen oxides (NOx), a precursor to ground-level ozone (a criteria air pollutant tracked by CARB), are also generally concentrated in the industrial parts of West Oakland and the Oakland International Airport. Policies in the EJ Element seek to reduce concentrations of particulate matter and air pollutants and protect sensitive uses from pollution’s existing effects. In partnership with the West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project (WOEIP), the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) conducted a Health Impact Assessment of Oakland that Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
niversity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

0.74 - 1.35 (Top 10%)

0.60 - 0.73

0.48 - 0.59

0.41 - 0.47

0.38 - 0.40

0.33 - 0.37

0.29 - 0.32

0.23 - 0.28

0.19 - 0.22

0.12 - 0.18
Base Map
City of Oakland
Alameda County
Parks
Ferry Routes
Railroads
µ
Major Roads
Figure EJ-9: Modeled Diesel PM Concentrations
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
niversity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

11.1 - 13.6 (Top 10%)

10.6 - 11.0

10.2 - 10.5

9.8 - 10.1

9.4 - 9.7

8.9 - 9.3

8.6 - 8.8

8.0 - 8.5

7.5 - 7.9

6.2 - 7.4
Base Map
City of Oakland
Alameda County
Parks
Ferry Routes
Railroads
µ
Major Roads
Figure EJ-10: Modeled PM2.5 Concentrations
Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
ersity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

EMERYVILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
International
Airport
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Chabot
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
SOURCE: West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project/Environmental Defense Fund, 2021; City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Oakland General Plan Update
Percent of Annual Deaths

9.1% - 10.3%

7.7% - 9.0%

6.3% - 7.6%

5.0% - 6.2%

3.5% - 4.9%
No Data
Base Map
Major Roads
Railroads
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
Note: Data provided courtesy of EDF as published in the Bay Area Air Pollution HIA (2021).

Figure EJ-11: NO2 and Health Effects
Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave
Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
îA
ÞA
ÞA
Aâ
|A
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

0.90 - 1.00

0.80 - 0.90

0.70 - 0.80

0.60 - 0.70

0.50 - 0.60

0.40 - 0.50

0.30 - 0.40

0.20 - 0.30

0.10 - 0.20

0.00 - 0.10
Potential Environmental Justice Community
West Oakland AB617 Community Boundary
Port of Oakland
Base Map
Railroads
Major Highways
Major Roads
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
Port of
Oakland
Port of
Oakland
Figure EJ-12: Air Quality Topic Score
3-10
Chapter 3 | Reducing Pollution Exposure and Improving Air Quality Building Resilience: West Oakland
Community Action Plan (WOCAP)
In 2018, WOEIP partnered with BAAQMD to develop the West Oakland Community Action Plan (WOCAP): “Owning Our Air.” The plan was adopted by BAAQMD and CARB in 2019 and
set ambitious goals to protect the community’s health. The WOCAP sets targets to reduce disparities in air quality and ultimately achieve improvements that match today’s cleanest air quality for all neighborhoods in West Oakland by 2030.

The 2020 Annual Repor t highlight s progres s on
implementation, including 29 replacements for low-emission equipment, four Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) 16 air filters installed at schools, and incorporation of relevant strategies in the West Oakland Truck Management Plan,
among other early implementation wins.

The EJ Element includes several policies that support
implementation of the WOCAP to continue reducing air
emissions in the West Oakland AB 617 Community. The
Element also directs the City to support similar processes and outcomes in other areas of the city that are disproportionately affected by air pollution.

WATER QUALITY
The quality of the water that people drink, use, and play in has a direct effect on their health, and when the sources of this water are compromised, the contamination can make people sick. The quality of water infrastructure—or the services through which residents obtain their water—also plays a pivotal role in public health. However, all too often, infrastructure investments align with the geography of wealth, resulting in underinvestment and disinvestment in low-income communities and communities of color. As a result, people of color are more likely to live in areas with higher rates of contaminated water, stormwater and wastewater overflows, and increased risks of flooding.44 44 Pacific Institute, A Twenty-First Century U.S. Water Policy, Chapter 3:

Water and Environmental Justice (2012), http://pacinst.org/wp-content/ groundwater under the school. The source was likely the five active cleanup sites within half a mile of the school. The City will continue to support the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board and California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) to assess cleanup sites in EJ Communities with high groundwater contamination threat.

A consortium of cities and agencies, including Oakland, work to protect water quality in the county through the Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program. This program regularly monitors and conducts special studies of the county’s creeks, wetlands, and the San Francisco Bay to assess the watershed; inspects industrial and commercial business facilities; provides public information and engages the public; ensures municipal maintenance; regulates new construction development; and prevents stormwater pollution from illicit discharges, pollutant spills, and construction activities. Additionally, the City will continue to support implementation of the Port of Oakland’s Sanitary Sewer Management Plan, which aims to prevent sanitary sewer overflows in Portowned infrastructure, and the Port’s Clean Water Program, which helps keep contaminants out of the Bay through permits, public education, development requirements, testing and monitoring, and illicit discharge detection and elimination.

GeoTracker is a statewide data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater. This database contains records for sites that require cleanup, such as leaking underground storage tanks (LUSTs), Department of Defense Sites, and Cleanup Program Sites. GeoTracker also contains records for various unregulated projects as well as permitted facilities including irrigated lands, oil and gas production, operating permitted underground storage tanks, and land disposal sites. Additionally, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) maintains the California Integrated Water Quality System (CIWQS) to monitor and regulate environmental places of interest such as agricultural facilities and operations that may affect water quality. CalEnviroScreen assesses threats to groundwater quality based on these two databases.

While most Oakland residents have access to high-quality drinking water, groundwater threats like LUSTs, gasoline stations, military cleanup sites, and industrial sites including the airport are some of the water quality issues that affect many parts of Oakland. According to CalEnviroScreen 4.0, more than half of Oakland’s census tracts score in the 80th percentile or higher for groundwater threats. As mapped in Figure EJ-13 these census tracts are generally located closer to the waterfront, whereas census tracts with lower scores (i.e., that are less exposed to groundwater threats) are generally located in the Oakland hills. As sea level rise and climate change affect Oakland into the future, rising groundwater tables could worsen groundwater contamination threats.45 Several policies and actions in the Safety Element direct further study of the potential impacts of sea level rise on groundwater contamination.

An example of recent local groundwater contamination occurred in 2020, when the Oakland Unified School District shut down McClymonds High School in West Oakland for a week after officials found trichloroethylene, a cancer-causing chemical, in the uploads/2013/02/water_and_environmental_justice_ch3.pdf. (via Clean Water For All, Water, Health, and Equity: The Infrastructure Crisis Facing LowIncome Communities & Communities of Color – and How to Solve It, October 23, 2018, http://protectcleanwater.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/FINALCWC_Report_Full_report_lowres-003-3.pdf. Accessed February 14, 2022.) 45 Policies on sea level rise are found in the Safety Element.

Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
versity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

EMERYVILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
International
Airport
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Chabot
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
SOURCE: CalEPA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, 2021; City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Oakland General Plan Update
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score
Statewide Percentile Rank [0-100]

80.1 - 100

60.1 - 80

40.1 - 60

20.1 - 40
0 - 20
Base Map
Railroads
Major Roads
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
Figure EJ-13: Groundwater Threats, 2021
3-12
Chapter 3 | Reducing Pollution Exposure and Improving Air Quality In 2019, the City of Oakland developed a Green Stormwater Infrastructure Plan46 that complies with SWRCB’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit47, helps implement the Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program, and seeks to protect and restore Oakland’s watersheds. “Green stormwater infrastructure” refers to a variety of practices and engineered facilities designed to detain and clean, capture and reuse, or infiltrate stormwater runoff to reduce the volume of runoff and improve water quality. In accordance with the City’s Resilient Oakland Playbook, Oakland will use green stormwater infrastructure to manage stormwater and reduce minor localized flooding risks, as well as provide urban greening benefits, such as improved air quality and reduced urban heat island effects, especially for neighborhoods that have limited access to parks and green space.

To address water quality issues, the City will continue to collaborate with water providers, support residents and businesses in avoiding stormwater and groundwater contamination, and prioritize implementation of green stormwater infrastructure projects in EJ Communities shown in Table EJ-4 in partnership with community groups. EJ Communities are shown bolded and highlighted in Table EJ-4. 46 City of Oakland, Green Stormwater Infrastructure Plan, September 30, 2019, https://cao-94612.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/Oakland-GSI-PlanFinal-20190930_sm.pdf. 47 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (Order No. R2-2022-0018; NPDES Permit No. CAS612008), May 11, 2022, https://www.waterboards. ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/water_issues/programs/stormwater/MRP/mrp5-22/ R2-2022-0018.pdf.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND TOXINS
Industrial activities and related transportation and logistics infrastructure, including freeway and rail corridors, have been a central part of the city’s economic history and development. Though regulation and oversight of these sites have become more stringent over time, the historic and current use, storage, or transport of hazardous materials as part of these industrial and commercial operations have resulted in soil and groundwater contamination from spills or leaks of hazardous materials or petroleum products, even recently.

People may be exposed to hazardous materials through three possible pathways:
• Breathing: When contaminants attach to small dust and soil particles or occur as a vapor, breathing can expose people. • Eating or Drinking: Exposure can happen when people eat or drink contaminated water, food, specks of dust, or soils.

Children that suck their fingers or chew toys contaminated with dust or soils may be exposed.
• Direct Contact: Skin can absorb some contaminants from direct contact with contaminated dust and soil particles, the contaminants themselves, or vapors.

There are several types of hazardous sites in Oakland: cleanup sites, hazardous waste sites, and solid waste sites. Toxic release sites and threats to groundwater may also result in exposure to hazardous materials and are described in the preceding sections.

The Safety Element includes goals, policies, and actions related to hazardous materials and toxins, such as review of proposed facilities, enforcement of standard conditions of approval for investigation of remediation, and coordination with other agencies. The EJ Element expands on these policies and actions to help further reduce impacts of hazardous materials on sensitive receptors.

GROUNDWATER
THREATS IMPAIRED WATER BODIES1
Tract Name Score Tract Name Score
Port Upper 1.00 Oakland Estuary 1.00
Chinatown 0.99 Jingletown/Kennedy 0.99
Fruitvale/Hawthorne 0.98 Melrose 0.98
Pill Hill 0.97 Brookfield Village/
Hegenberger 0.94
Downtown 0.96 Lower San Antonio
East 0.94
Oakland Estuary 0.96 Eastlake Clinton West 0.94
Chinatown/Laney 0.95 Eastlake Clinton East 0.94
Fruitvale 0.94 Ivy Hill 0.94
Hoover/Foster 0.93 Lower San Antonio
West 0.93
Uptown/Downtown 0.92 Jack London Square 0.91
Melrose 0.91 Chinatown/Laney 0.91
Eastlake 0.90 - 0.90
Note: Bolded census tracts in blue are EJ Communities.

1. Only includes 11 tracts in top decile due to ties. Next highest score for Impaired Water bodies is 0.68.

Table EJ-4: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by
Indicator — Water Quality
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
3-13
Cleanup Sites
Superfunds are sites that are part of an environmental program established to address abandoned hazardous waste sites. Superfunds have levels of contamination that may pose a threat to human life. Superfund cleanup involves placing sites in a National Priorities List and establishing an appropriate cleanup plan. The EPA is responsible for removal actions, enforcement, and community involvement.

Other cleanup sites that are not federally owned are regulated by a cleanup program conducted by SWRCB or any of the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards. Examples include rail yards, ports, equipment supply facilities, metals facilities, industrial manufacturing and maintenance sites, dry cleaners, bulk transfer facilities, refineries, landfills, and some brownfields.

Unauthorized releases detected at cleanup sites vary but could include hydrocarbon solvents, pesticides, perchlorate, nitrate, heavy metals, and petroleum constituents, among others.

A brownfield is a property where contamination is present and may complicate future use of the site. Generally, these sites are cleaned up by the owner, previous owner, or state governments.

Brownfields can indirectly and directly impact public health in many ways. Brownfields can affect community cohesion and morale, for example, due to the presence of abandoned and derelict structures, especially in EJ Communities that suffer from a disproportionate number of brownfield sites. Brownfields can also have negative economic impacts if continued operation of existing on-site infrastructure including roads, sewer, and electricity diverts City funds that could be used for services elsewhere.48 Brownfields can also directly impact public and environmental health due to contamination that can pollute soil, air, and water resources on- and off-site.49 Contaminants often found at brownfield sites include lead, petroleum, asbestos, arsenic, and volatile 48 Center for Creative Land Recycling. “White Paper: Community Transformation Through Brownfields Redevelopment.” July 2021. Accessed December 27, 2022, https://www.cclr.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/25. community-transformation-through-brownfield-redevelopment.pdf 49 Minnesota Department of Health, “Brownfields and Public Health,” Accessed October 5, 2022, https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/ environment/places/brownfield.html#health.
protective or remediation measures. Almost a quarter of all sites are actively being remediated and five percent of sites are currently operational and certified to handle hazardous materials. In tandem with the Safety Element, which includes several policies to minimize health and safety impacts related to the use, storage, manufacture, and transport of hazardous materials, policies in the EJ Element support improving land use compatibility, performance standards to avoid health and safety impacts to sensitive uses, and changes to conditional use permitting that phase out incompatible uses more quickly. Impacted communities most burdened by hazardous materials are shown in Table EJ-5. organic compounds from manufactured chemicals such as
degreasers and paint strippers. These contaminants can cause serious health problems, including mesothelioma, lung cancer, kidney damage, and birth defects.50
Cleaning up and reinvesting in these properties can help reduce disparities in adverse health outcomes by preventing exposure to hazardous substances. Revitalizing brownfield sites also offers opportunities to bring jobs back into an area, clean up blight in a neighborhood, increase community connectivity, restore local ecologies, reduce the effects of urban heat islands, and promote physical activity and recreation.

Hazardous Waste Sites
Hazardous waste sites may contain chemicals that are harmful to health. Only certain facilities are allowed to treat, store, or dispose of this type of waste. Hazardous waste can range from used automotive oil to highly toxic waste materials produced by factories and businesses. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains data in the EnviroStor Hazardous Waste Facilities Database and Hazardous Waste Tracking System on permitted facilities that are involved in the treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous waste as well as information on hazardous waste generators. Although this database includes information about illegal and abandoned sites, it is noted that it may not necessarily capture all incidences of potential exposure to hazardous materials in a community.

According to EnviroStor and GeoTracker as of March 2022, there were approximately 1,700 documented hazardous materials sites throughout Oakland, mainly located near the southern half of the city and in West Oakland (Figure EJ-14). While more than half are “closed” cases (e.g., have been cleaned up or taken other corrective action), numerous hazardous materials sites may still contain contaminants that pose a threat to the public and environment if these sites were disturbed without appropriate 50 US Environmental Protection Agency, “Environmental Contaminants Often Found at Brownfield Sites,” Accessed October 5, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/ sites/default/files/2019-10/documents/environmental_contaminants_often_ found_at_brownfield_sites.pdf.

Credit: Environmental Protection Agency
3-14
Chapter 3 | Reducing Pollution Exposure and Improving Air Quality

SOLID WASTE SITES
Solid waste sites are places where garbage from homes, factories, or businesses is collected, processed, or stored. These include landfills and composting or recycling facilities, most of which require permits to operate. As of July 2021, there were 14 solid waste facilities in Oakland, with the largest concentration in East Oakland, north of the Coliseum. According to CalRecycle’s Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) database, six of the 14 solid waste facilities in Oakland are active: two facilities operated by Bee Green Recycling & Supply, one operated by Asphalt Shingle Recyclers, one by Independent Recycling Services in the Coliseum Industrial Complex, and two by California Waste Solutions facilities in West Oakland. The number of solid waste sites and facilities in predominantly Latinx census tracts is over seven times higher than in predominantly Asian census tracts, and nearly five times higher than predominantly white census tracts. The census tracts with the most solid waste sites and facilities include Melrose, Port Upper, and Lockwood/Coliseum/Rudsdale, while 63 census tracts in the city have none at all.

Institutional Framework and Responsibilities
There are a number of federal, State, regional, and local agencies that are responsible for addressing hazards. These agencies are described in detail in Section 3.1 of the Safety Element. Facilities that are subject to cleanup, permitting, enforcement, and investigation efforts are tracked by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)’s EnviroStor database and include sites such as Federal Superfund (National Priority List) and State Superfund sites, military facilities, voluntary cleanup sites, and school sites being evaluated for possible contamination. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) maintains the GeoTracker database to regulate leaking underground storage tanks (LUSTs); Department of Defense facilities; spills, leaks, investigations, or cleanups; and landfills. As described in the Safety Element, the City will work closely with agencies responsible for monitoring, enforcement, and cleanup, in addition to community-based organizations working on environmental justice issues.

ILLEGAL DUMPING
Abandoned trash, or illegal dumping, also contributes to an unhealthy and unsafe living environment and has a negative impact on neighborhood quality. Illegal dumping can contribute to land, water, and air pollution in a neighborhood and may contain harmful substances. Accumulation of illegal dumping can also be fire hazards. Figure EJ-15 shows the rate of service requests received by the Oakland Call Center (OAK 311) for illegal dumping per 1,000 people in each census tract. In general, tracts along the freeways, particularly I-880 and I-580, have higher rates of illegal dumping and geographically correspond with the West Oakland and East Oakland neighborhoods (with some exceptions). Tracts in the Oakland hills to the northwest have very few reports of illegal dumping in comparison. West and East Oakland already face environmental burdens from surrounding industrial operations, existing recycling facilities, freeways, and other uses. While some of this dumping is household waste, some businesses and individuals hire unlicensed haulers, who sometimes drop loads on public property. Dumpers may also target and leave their garbage illegally at encampment sites, which exacerbates the challenges faced by unhoused individuals already dealing with difficult living conditions. Environmental Justice Communities most burdened by illegal dumping are shown in Table EJ-5.

City efforts to tackle illegal dumping include the creation of Oaktown PROUD, a campaign by and for Oaklanders, to Prevent & Report Our Unlawful Dumping. The campaign’s strategy for reducing illegal dumping organizes City and community efforts into the three E’s (focus areas): Education, Eradication, and Enforcement. As a part of the Oaktown PROUD outreach campaign to reduce littering and dumping, the City is working with Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) high school students, teachers and administrators to manage the Oaktown PROUD Student Ambassador Program, detailed below. Students take the knowledge they have gained to educate people about the problem of litter and dumping in Oakland and provide resources and guidance on what they can do to help.51
The City has also taken steps to eradicate illegal dumping. The Public Works Department proactively sends Garbage Blitz teams to clean up known hot spots and illegal dumping. In 2019, the City established an Environmental Enforcement Officers (EEOs) unit, a team of civilian investigators who monitor heavy dumping sites and refer cases for legal action when necessary. EEOs enforce and keep illegal dumpers accountable by contacting suspected dumpers, encouraging them to abate blight using available services, and issuing citations when adequate evidence is found.

Since its inception, the Oaktown PROUD campaign has continued to be implemented in partnership with the City Council, neighborhood advocates, community-based organizations, and businesses.52
51 https://cao-94612.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/EEU-3.2021-v2-Copy. pptx-5-13-2021.pdf-word.pdf
52 City of Oakland, “City of Oakland and Community Leaders Launch ‘Oaktown PROUD’ Action Campaign to Combat Illegal Dumping,” posted January 14, 2020, last updated July 28, 2020, https://www.oaklandca.gov/ news/2020/city-of-oakland-and-community-leaders-launch-oaktownproud-action-campaign-to-combat-illegal-dumping#:~:
text=Oaktown%20PROUD%20is%20a%20campaign,promote%20community%20 pride%20and%20volunteerism., accessed December 21, 2022. 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
3-15
CLEANUP SITES HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES SOLID WASTE SITES1 INDUSTRIAL ZONES2 ILLEGAL DUMPING Tract Name Score Tract Name Score Tract Name Score Tract Name Score Tract Name Score Port Upper 1.00 Acorn Industrial* 1.00 Melrose 1.00 Melrose 0.92 Acorn Industrial* 1.00 Prescott/Mandela Peralta 0.99 Jack London Square 0.99 Port Upper 0.99 Port Upper 0.92 Port Upper 0.99 Oakland Estuary 0.98 Paradise Park/Golden Gate 0.98 Lockwood/Coliseum/ Rudsdale 0.98 Brookfield Village/ Hegenberger 0.92 Melrose 0.98 Acorn Industrial* 0.97 Piedmont Ave South 0.97 Brookfield Village/ Hegenberger 0.97 Fitchburg 0.92 Oakland Estuary 0.97
DeFremery/ Oak Center 0.96 Brookfield Village/
Hegenberger 0.96 Prescott 0.96 Sobrante Park 0.92 Foothill Square/Toler Heights 0.96 McClymonds 0.96 New Highland 0.96 Chabot Park 0.95 McClymonds 0.92 Fitchburg 0.95 Clawson/Dogtown 0.95 Oakland/Harrison West 0.95 Sequoyah 0.95 DeFremery/Oak Center 0.92 McClymonds 0.95 Prescott 0.94 Acorn 0.94 Fitchburg 0.94 Jack London Square 0.92 Hoover/Foster 0.94 Melrose 0.93 Port Upper 0.93 Prescott/Mandela Peralta 0.93 Port Lower* 0.92 Clawson/ Dogtown 0.93 Jingletown/ Kennedy 0.92 Pill Hill 0.92 Jingletown/ Kennedy 0.92 Acorn Industrial* 0.92 Chinatown 0.92 Hoover/Foster 0.91 Jack London Gateway 0.91 New Highland 0.91 Prescott/Mandela Peralta 0.91 Jingletown/Kennedy 0.91 Jack London Square 0.90 Downtown/Old Oakland 0.90 - 0.90 Jingletown/Kennedy 0.91 Golf Links 0.90 Note: Bolded census tracts in blue are EJ Communities.
* Indicates census tract with low population.

1. Only includes 11 tracts in top decile due to ties. Next highest score for Solid Waste Sites is 0.88, and next highest for Illegal Dumping is 0.66.

2. Maximum score is 0.92 due to ties.

Table EJ-5: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Hazardous Materials/Illegal Dumping Building Resilience: Oaktown PROUD
Oaktown PROUD is a campaign by and for Oaklanders to reduce illegal dumping and improve our neighborhoods. The campaign name contains an urgent call to action for all Oaklanders to “Prevent & Report Our Unlawful Dumping (PROUD).” The Oaktown PROUD campaign uses the City of Oakland’s Three E’s strategy to reduce illegal dumping by organizing City and community efforts into three focus areas: Education, Eradication and Enforcement.

As a part of the Oaktown PROUD outreach campaign to reduce littering and dumping, the City of Oakland is working with OUSD high school students, teachers, and administrators to manage the Oaktown PROUD Student Ambassador Program. This program was sparked by ideas from Oakland students and currently operates at Oakland and Skyline high schools. The focus of the students’ work is to take the knowledge that they gain through a summer program and use that information to educate people about the problem of litter and dumping in Oakland and provide resources and guidance on what they can do to help.

Source: Oaktown PROUD website
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
""
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
" "
"
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
))
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
))
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
) )
)
")
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
Ssn Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
hattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
rsity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
§¨¦80
§¨¦880
§¨¦980
§¨¦580
§¨¦880
§¨¦580
§¨¦580
ÄÅ13
ÄÅ123
ÄÅ24
ÄÅ13
ÄÅ185
ÄÅ61

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

PIEDMONT

EMERYVILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
International
Airport
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Chabot
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal
SOURCE: ESA, 2022; City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2022; DTSC, 2021; SWB, 2021 Oakland General Plan Update
Envirostor
Status
Active
Certified
Refer
Geotracker
Status
") Active
") Open
") Pending Review
") Informational Item
Base Map
City of Oakland
Alameda County
Parks
Residential Areas
µ 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Figure EJ-14: Hazardous Materials Sites
Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
hattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
sity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

Figure EJ-15: Calls for Illegal Dumping
Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave
Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
îA
ÞA
ÞA
Aâ
|A
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

0.90 - 1.00

0.80 - 0.90

0.70- 0.80

0.60 - 0.70

0.50 - 0.60

0.40 - 0.50

0.30 - 0.40

0.20 - 0.30

0.10 - 0.20

0.00 - 0.10
Non-Sensitive Uses
Industrial Zoning
Open/Active EnviroStor Cleanup Site
Open/Active GeoTracker LUST Site
BAAQMD Permitted Sources (2020)
Base Map
Railroads
Major Highways
Major Roads
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
Port of
Oakland
Port of
Oakland
Sensitive uses include existing residential uses, schools/educational facilities, religious/institutional uses, and hospitals.

Figure EJ-16: Pollution Exposure of Sensitive Uses
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
3-19
potential for adverse effects related to air quality, noise, or safety on adjacent existing residential uses and Environmental Justice Communities, including the possibility of creating an overlay that focuses on air quality issues.

EJ-1.5 Regulate Polluting Uses. Develop more stringent permitting standards and limit the number of variances approved for new, high-intensity, industrial or commercial land uses near sensitive uses in Environmental Justice Communities. See also Policy SAF-5.1 and EJ-1.15.

EJ-1.6 Enhanced Enforcement. Prioritize code enforcement to address illegal land uses and activities that cause pollution and are hazardous to health in EJ Communities.

Air Filtration and Reducing GHG
Many of the strategies to reduce GHG will be included in the forthcoming Land Use and Transportation Element (LUTE)
update (including mixed land uses and transportation policies).

EJ-1.7 Truck-Related Impacts. For new warehouses and
truck-related businesses, reduce impacts from truck
loading and delivery including noise/vibration, odors,
air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions.

EJ-1.8 Air Filtration. Consistent with the State’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards for air filtration in effect as of January 1, 2023, require newly constructed buildings of four or more habitable floors to include air filtration systems equal to or greater than Minimum Efficiency
Reporting Value (MERV) 16 (ASHRAE Standard 52.2), or
a particle size efficiency rating equal to or greater than 50 percent in the 0.3-1.0 micrometer range and equal
to or greater than 85 percent in the 1.0-3.0 micrometer range (AHRI Standard 680).

EJ-1.9 Electric Vehicle Charging. Require industrial and warehouse facilities and truck-attracting businesses
to provide electrical connections for electric trucks
and transport refrigeration units in support of CARB
regulations.

EJ-1.10 Reduce Emissions from Port Operation. Support
Port of Oakland’s efforts to reduce emissions as part
of operation and compliance with CARB regulations.

This could include:
• Support of zero-emission drayage truck operations
through appropriate local ordinance amendments,
including allowable weight limits for singleaxle, zero-emission trucks on local streets, and developing an investment plan for needed
upgrades.
• Provision of data or staff time to study of the effects on truck flow and congestion due to increasing
visits from larger container ships, the feasibility of
an off-terminal container yard that utilizes zeroemission trucks to move containers to and from the marine terminals, and the potential efficiency
gains from increasing the number of trucks hauling
loaded containers on each leg of a roundtrip to the
Port.

Construction and Building Emissions
EJ-1.11 Building Electrification. Continue to enforce compliance with Oakland’s Building Electrification Ordinance, which requires new buildings to be natural gas-free
and support the transition of existing buildings to natural gas alternatives in order to improve safety and air quality and reduce health risks. This could include:
• Ensuring that all new developments reduce on-site
natural gas combustion through electrification of
heating and cooking technologies.

EJ-1.12 Construction Site Impacts. Through standard conditions of project approval, code enforcement, and other regulatory mechanisms, require new development to
minimize disturbances of natural water bodies and
natural drainage systems caused during construction
and to implement measures to protect areas from road
dust, erosion and sediment loss.

3.2 GOALS AND POLICIES
GOAL EJ-1 REDUCE POLLUTION, MITIGATE

THE IMPACTS OF POLLUTION ON

EXISTING SENSITIVE LAND USES,

AND ELIMINATE ASSOCIATED
PUBLIC HEALTH DISPARITIES.

Toxic Air Contaminants
EJ-1.1 Toxic Air Contaminants. Reduce the public’s exposure to toxic air contaminants through appropriate land use
and transportation strategies, identified through the
LUTE update in Phase 2 of the GPU process, particularly in Environmental Justice Communities and other areas
most burdened by air pollution, as identified in Figure EJ-12.

EJ-1.2 Truck Emissions and Pollution Exposure. Minimize air pollution and exposure of sensitive land uses to truck
pollution, particularly in EJ Communities and other
areas most burdened by air pollution, while recognizing the Port of Oakland’s role as the highest-volume shipping port in Northern California.

Industrial/Sensitive Land Use Compatibility
EJ-1.3 Industrial Uses Near Sensitive Land Uses. Ensure that heavy industrial uses are adequately buffered from residential areas, schools, and other sensitive land uses.

In new industrial developments, require adequate
mitigation of air contaminant exposure and vegetative
barriers near large stationary and mobile sources of air pollution. Prioritize nature-based mitigation solutions such as vegetative barriers wherever feasible and align with other greening opportunities such as canopy need,
green stormwater infrastructure, and high heat areas to plan for multiple benefits.

EJ-1.4 Performance Standards. Develop performance standards in the zoning code applicable to new industrial and commercial developments to minimize or avoid the
3-20
Chapter 3 | Reducing Pollution Exposure and Improving Air Quality EJ-1.13 Emissions from Construction Activities. Require projects to implement construction air pollution and
greenhouse gas emissions controls and applicable
mitigation strategies for all construction sites to the maximum extent feasible. Refer to Best Construction
Practices and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) recommended by BAAQMD.

EJ-1.14 Reduced Exposure to Air Pollution for Project Occupants. Incorporate measures to improve indoor air quality and reduce exposure to air pollution in new
development projects.

Air Quality Monitoring and Assessment
EJ-1.15 Sensitive Uses. Coordinate with BAAQMD and community partners in evaluating human exposure to toxic air contaminants, particularly in Environmental Justice Communities, and impose conditions as appropriate
on projects to protect public health and safety beyond
those in the City’s 2020 standard conditions of approval.

EJ-1.16 Community Air Protection. On an ongoing basis, support BAAQMD, community members, businesses, and other stakeholders in developing and implementing
Community Air Monitoring Plans, Community Emissions Reduction Plans, and other air pollution control initiatives pursuant to AB 617. Supportive City actions may include:
• Participation on steering committees and technical
advisory committees.
• Co-investments that leverage additional funding for
actions in EJ Communities.
• Utilization of community-collected air quality data
in policy development and evaluation.
• Co-development of a public information campaign
targeting residents living 1,000 feet of freeways that
focuses on education about air pollution mitigation
measures.
• Contracts with community partners and other air
pollution monitoring organizations to obtain more
granular pollution data.

EJ-1.17 Data-Informed Efforts. Collaborate with BAAQMD, community organizations, and other stakeholders to
use air quality monitoring data to inform area-specific improvement actions outside of AB 617-related efforts.

Such actions may include:
• Prioritizing areas for capital investments with cobenefits for air quality, such as the planting of trees, green stormwater infrastructure for flood
management, and installation of EV charging
infrastructure. Ideally, to maximize resiliency,
co-benefits will address multiple climate and
environmental hazards.
• Integrating air quality improvement actions into
planning efforts, such as new specific plans, master
plans, or area plans that will guide development in
impacted areas.
• Limiting the establishment of new sources of air
pollutants in areas with elevated levels of pollutant
concentrations unless appropriate mitigation is
implemented.
• Obtaining and using hyperlocal data along with
community ground-truthing to more accurately
inform development of air quality improvement
strategies that are most effective and responsive
to the needs of EJ Communities. This data will be
accessible for residents to utilize.
• Seeking opportunities to enhance existing air
monitoring efforts, such as by working with
BAAQMD and helping to expand the current
monitoring network, especially where sensitive
uses are within close proximity (within 500 feet) of
pollution sources.
• Partnering with industrial and warehouse facility
owners, community-based environmental and
energy justice organizations to install rooftop solar
PV systems to power EV charging stations.

EJ-1.18 Impact Assessment and Mitigation. Continue to use BAAQMD modeling tools and guidance documents as
appropriate to identify and mitigate air quality impacts from proposed development projects.

EJ-1.19 Regional Coordination. Support air quality planning efforts led by other local, regional, and State agencies while simultaneously leveraging City authority and
resources to focus on reducing air pollution burden in
EJ Communities.

Credit: Amir Aziz
2045 General Plan
| Environmental Justice Element
3-21
GOAL EJ-2 PROTECT OAKLAND WATER
SUPPLIES FROM CONTAMINATION.

Water Quality
EJ-2.1 Clean Water Programs. Promote environmental
stewardship and pollution prevention activities with
outreach, assistance, and incentives for residents and
businesses, particularly in EJ Communities and areas
with impaired surface and groundwater, as identified
in Figure EJ-13
.

EJ-2.2 Water Quality Hazard Prevention. Remediate and
clean up sites with known or potential contamination,
as mapped in Figure EJ-14 or identified on GeoTracker,
that impact or potentially impact water quality. Con-
tinue to support the San Francisco Regional Water
Quality Control Board and California Department of
Toxic Substances Control to assess cleanup sites, leak- ing underground storage tanks, and gasoline stations
in EJ Communities with high water contamination
threat.

EJ-2.3 Protect and Restore Creeks and Wetlands. Protect, enhance, and restore riparian corridors and wetlands,
increasing biodiversity and access for residents to exist- ing creeks and wetlands. Collaborate with environmen-
tal justice organizations and EJ Community residents
to co-develop environmental stewardship and pollution
prevention programs with outreach, assistance, and
incentives for residents and businesses.

EJ-2.4 Stormwater Management. Reduce stormwater runoff
by implementing the Green Stormwater Infrastruc-
ture Plan to help conserve water, protect water bodies, comply with stormwater protection regulations, and
mitigate localized flood risk from large storm events.

Review opportunities for greening, additional open
space, and safe Non-Motorized Transportation (NMT)
infrastructure and prioritize improvements, workforce
development, programs, investments, and partner-
ships in Environmental Justice Communities.

GOAL EJ-3 PREVENT, REDUCE, AND CLEAN UP
ILLEGAL DUMPING.

Illegal Dumping and Blight
EJ-3.1 Design for Graffiti Reduction. Establish guidelines based on Crime Prevention Through Environmental
Design (CPTED) standards and other best practices
that decrease opportunity for graffiti.

EJ-3.2 Blight Control and Prevention. Control and mitigate impacts of blight-producing industrial and commercial
activities with a high tendency of attracting trash and litter, such as recyclers, fast food restaurants, ware- houses and industrial sites, and other businesses that
may attract blight. Additionally, vacant lots should be routinely maintained by property owners and kept
clean.

EJ-3.3 Proactive Illegal Dumping Cleanup. Support the
expansion of proactive cleanup crews that target ille-
gal dumping “hot spot” areas in EJ Communities, as
identified in Figure EJ-15
.

EJ-3.4 Illegal Dumping Enforcement. Continue to enforce dumping as an illegal activity, including increased
monitoring of hot spots on weekends and before/after
business hours, ticketing, and expansion of Environ-
mental Enforcement Officers (EEO). Every two years, as
part of the budget process, assess enforcement efforts
to ensure discriminatory patterns do not emerge.

EJ-3.5 Community Education on Illegal Dumping. Expand
community campaigns in EJ Communities, in partnership
with community members, to prevent dumping, inform
neighbors about affordable services and ways to report
illegal dumping, and support youth leadership. Develop
campaign outreach materials in a variety of languages.

Examples include education about Bulky Block par-
ties and engagement of the Oaktown PROUD Student
Ambassadors.
3-22
Chapter 3 | Reducing Pollution Exposure and Improving Air Quality This page intentionally left blank.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
4-1
A safe and healthy home is a fundamental component of a healthy quality of life, supporting both mental and physical health as a source of shelter and peace of mind. Housing with proximity to quality facilities such as open space and recreation, public transportation, and employment also promotes good health.

However, a history of inequitable investments and discriminatory practices, compounded with the rising cost of living in the Bay Area, disproportionately threatens the ability of low-income and BIPOC communities to afford to stay in their communities. As described in Chapter 3, certain neighborhoods and communities in Oakland also face pollution exposure due to their proximity to polluting facilities, such as the Port of Oakland, industrial land, and truck routes. Pockets of concentrated housing inequity may also be isolated from essential health resources such as improved recreational spaces, quality pharmacies, clinics, and hospitals, and healthy food options.

The City of Oakland recently updated its Housing Element for the 2023-2031 housing cycle. As part of the Housing Element update, the City conducted a thorough evaluation of the previous (2015-2023) Housing Element; an analysis of housing needs, constraints, resources, and opportunities; and an assessment of fair housing. The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes more information and detail about Oakland’s housing needs and the City’s plan for protecting and supporting existing neighborhoods while accommodating new residents. The 2023-2031 Housing Element also discusses issues related to homelessness, housing affordability, and displacement. This section of the EJ Element describes additional issues and opportunities related to housing quality and habitability, as well as identifies appropriate locations for housing to minimize exposure to pollution.

4. Safe, Healthy, and Affordable Homes 4.1 ISSUES AND DISPARITIES

COST BURDEN AND EVICTIONS
Household income is one of the most significant factors affecting housing choice and opportunity. Income largely determines a household’s ability to purchase or rent housing. While higher-income households have more discretionary income to spend on housing, lower- and moderate-income households are limited in the range of housing they can afford. Typically, as household income decreases, cost burdens, overcrowding, and vulnerability to displacement and houselessness increase. Households that are housing cost burdened and do not receive housing assistance or own their home outright are considered precariously or insecurely housed. These households are at greater risk for eviction, displacement, overcrowding and homelessness.

A housing cost burdened household is defined as a household that spends more than 30 percent of their monthly income on housing, while severely cost burdened households spend more 4-2
Chapter 4 | Safe, Healthy, and Affordable Homes
than 50 percent of household income on housing costs. Most extremely low-income households in Oakland (over 60 percent) are severely cost burdened. Oakland’s predominantly Latinx/Hispanic neighborhoods are the most housing cost burdened with over double the number of severely housing burdened households as predominantly White neighborhoods.

According to the California Department of Finance, in 2021 there were 178,207 housing units and 167,680 households in Oakland.

Most of these households are renters (59 percent), while 41 percent are homeowners.1 This means that homeownership in Oakland is significantly less than Alameda County as a whole, where the majority (54 percent) of units are owner-occupied and 46 percent are renter-occupied. In Oakland, more renters are low-income than homeowners and tend to have higher rates of housing cost burden than homeowners - 46.5 percent of all renters experience some level of housing cost burden while 31.8 percent of homeowners do. Today, the vast majority of Oakland’s Black/African American residents are renters (67.83 percent). When housing costs are high, residents may be forced to make tradeoffs that affect housing habitability. 1 United States Census Bureau, 2019: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables – Households and Families (S1101), December 10, 2020, https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=oakland,%20ca%20 housing&g=1600000US0653000&tid=ACSST5Y2019.S1101, Accessed February 16, 2022.
majority people of color are all higher than the overall citywide rate. Oakland’s most impoverished neighborhoods with the highest proportion of renters are most likely to suffer from substandard housing conditions. These neighborhoods disproportionately house Latinx, Black, immigrant, and refugee communities, low-income renters with children, undocumented residents, residents receiving public assistance and elderly renters. Substandard housing conditions such as pest infestation, mold, asbestos, lead paint, faulty plumbing, and overcrowding can lead to increased health problems such as asthma, lead poisoning, cardiovascular disease, and neurological disorders. Residents in predominantly Black census tracts are 1.9 times more likely than predominantly White census tracts to report code enforcement complaints due to substandard housing conditions. It is important to note however, that many residents of substandard housing do not report their complaints for fear of retaliation from their landlord and some landlords take advantage of this, a practice called “predatory habitability.” Figure EJ-17 maps the distribution of all three types of code enforcement complaints for 2020 (the most recent year with complete data) throughout Oakland.

OLDER HOUSING
Age of housing can also be an indicator of substandard housing conditions, particularly for buildings built over 30 years ago. More than 80 percent of Oakland’s housing stock was constructed prior to 1980 and is now over 40 years old. Without proper maintenance or rehabilitation, older buildings can fall into disrepair, subjecting residents to conditions such as inadequate sanitation, structural hazards, hazardous mechanical systems, and other issues that the State has determined to be below the minimum standards of living (as defined by Government Code Section 17920.3). Based on the City’s 2020-2021 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report, the Oakland Housing Authority (OHA) administered programs that supported the rehabilitation of 317 existing affordable housing units in fiscal year 2020/2021.2 However, the City’s ability to meet the need for rehabilitation assistance is limited, and it can be difficult to accurately identify substandard units in need of rehabilitation, especially since not all households living in substandard conditions may actively seek assistance. 2 City of Oakland Department of Housing and Community Development, Draft 2020/2021 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report, November 24, 2021, https://www.oaklandca.gov/services/2020-21- consolidated-annual-performance-and-evaluation-report-caper, accessed February 16, 2022.

There are an average of 85 evictions per 1,000 residents in predominantly Black census tracts and 72 per 1000 in predominantly Asian tracts, compared to 34 evictions per 1,000 residents in predominantly White census tracts. Evictions in predominantly Black census tracts are nearly 2.5 times higher than in predominantly White census tracts, corroborating other evidence of higher displacement rates in the Black community. The disparity gap between the most and least impacted census tracts is far larger than the averages. For instance, Prescott/Mandela Peralta in West Oakland experiences 30 times more evictions per 1,000 people than Montclair North in the north Oakland Hills, and Port Lower in West Okaland experiences 365 times more evictions than Upper Piedmont Ave.

CODE ENFORCEMENT
The 2018 Oakland Equity Indicators Report found that housing quality (comprised of the housing habitability complaints, complete kitchen facilities, and overcrowding indicators) is not equitable, with an average score of 33 out of 100. Chart EJ-3 shows how the number of code enforcement complaints (for blight, zoning, and housing habitability) per 1,000 residents differ by census tract racial majorities.

Specifically, majority-white tracts have the lowest rate of code enforcement complaints per 1,000 residents and tracts that are Chart EJ-3: Code Enforcement Complaints by Census Tract Racial Majority, 2020 Includes code enforcement complaints received by the Planning & Building Department regarding blight (activity/facility), housing habitability, or zoning of rental housing during 2020.

Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
hattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
rsity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

Figure EJ-17: Code Enforcement Complaints
4-4
Chapter 4 | Safe, Healthy, and Affordable Homes
Spotlight: Racial Equity Impact
Analysis: Eliminating Lead Paint
Hazards in Oakland & Alameda County
Lead is a material with properties that make it useful in industrial and commercial products and was once added
to everything from gasoline, paint, solder, water pipes, and cosmetics, among others. Despite this widespread use,
lead is an extremely potent toxin and dangerous to health, particularly for young children. Although corporations in the lead paint industry were well aware of lead’s toxicity and its risks to public health by the early 20th century, lead paint was not banned until 1978, and many homes built before this era are at high risk of containing this dangerous substance.

In July 2019, various California counties and cities entered into a landmark $305 million Settlement Agreement with
lead paint manufacturers. Under the Lead Settlement
Memorandum of Understanding, Alameda County and
the City of Oakland received 10 percent of the settlement abatement funds to be paid out over seven years
(approximately $24 million).

In Oakland, “the problem is so large that the rate of lead poisoning in some Oakland zip codes is higher than in
Flint, Michigan at the height of its lead in the water crisis.” Lead paint hazards disproportionately affect low-income and Black, Indigenous, and Latinx communities due to the prevalence of older, dilapidated housing, which exposes children in poverty to lead paint hazards at the greatest rates. In 2021, Environmental/Justice Solutions conducted a Racial Equity Impact Analysis to guide the City of Oakland in partnering with Alameda County to develop and implement an equitable lead hazard abatement program. The report
recommends policies that prioritize at-risk communities, address barriers to resources, ensure lead hazards
are expeditiously removed from homes in vulnerable
communities, and bolster local economic resilience. This EJ Element includes policies that support implementation of REIA recommendations with an emphasize on primary
prevention.

LEAD
Housing that was built before 1978 when the residential use of lead-based paints was banned is likely to contain some leadbased paint. When the paint peels and cracks, lead paint chips and dust can spread throughout indoor environments and be ingested or breathed in, increasing risk of lead poisoning particularly in young children. Residents living in older neighborhoods who cannot afford to renovate or repair their homes are especially at risk of exposure – up to 96 percent of households in both east and west Bancroft/Havenscourt census tracts based on data from CalEnviroScreen. Tracts with the greatest risk of lead exposure to children are shown in Figure EJ-18. About sixty percent of the census tracts in Oakland are in the top statewide percentile rank of children’s lead risk from housing. In addition, there are notable disparities by race: The percentage of low-income children at risk for lead poisoning is over 1.5 times higher in predominantly Latinx census tracts than in predominantly white census tracts.

Census tracts south of Lake Merritt, bounded by I-880 and I-580, are at greatest risk of lead pollution, as well as census tracts near the Port of Oakland, including Port Upper, Port Lower, Prescott/ Mandela Peralta.

INDOOR AIR QUALITY
Although outdoor air pollution is most commonly the focus of conversations about air quality, the indoor environment also has a significant impact on health, especially considering that Americans spend an average of 90 percent of their time indoors.3 Homes can expose people to air pollutants such as nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, moisture, and mold. Older buildings that are not well-maintained can lack proper ventilation or have deteriorated building infrastructure that exacerbates exposure to these indoor pollutants.

Several major appliances including water heaters, space heaters, clothes dryers, and stoves are fueled by natural (mostly commonly methane) gas, which is also a source of indoor air pollutants and a major contributor to poor health outcomes. In fact, when gas stoves are on, indoor air pollutants can spike to levels 3 United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Report to Congress on indoor air quality: Volume 2,” Washington, DC (1989): EPA/400/1-89/001C, [as cited on https://www.epa.gov/report-environment/indoor-air-quality]. that would be considered illegal by EPA standards if those same levels occurred outside. In light of this fact, the City has set a target of no more gas in Oakland buildings by 2040. However, replacing gas with electric energy may not be feasible for all residents. That is, lower-income areas, areas with older housing stock, and areas with high rates of renters are more likely to have higher proportions of poorly maintained or poorly ventilated homes, absent or nonfunctioning range hoods, and higher competition in demand for repair/upgrade funds, making electrification both that much more urgent and that much more cost-prohibitive, and therefore a major environmental health and equity issue. The City’s 2030 ECAP includes actions to develop a policy roadmap to achieve decarbonization of the existing building stock by 2040, without additional cost burden or displacement risk to frontline communities (those hit first and worst by climate change effects).

The City will also continue to support property owners in building electrification, energy efficiency and resilience, and housing maintenance programs through grants and technical assistance.

In addition to policies and actions in Oakland’s Housing Element, additional policies in the EJ Element support resource coordination across City departments and partners, seek to improve the City’s ability to inspect and screen for health and safety issues in homes, and incentivize ways to include health-promoting features in affordable housing.

Environmental Justice Communities most burdened by quality issues, income burden, evictions, and lead exposure are shown in Table EJ-6.

Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
attuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
ity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

EMERYVILL E
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
International
Airport
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
SOURCE: CalEPA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, 2021; City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Oakland General Plan Update
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score
Statewide Percentile Rank [0-100]

80.1 - 100

60.1 - 80

40.1 - 60

20.1 - 40
0 - 20
Railroads
Major Roads
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
J:\GISData\582_Oakland_GP\GIS\Projects\EJ\Fig x-x Lead.mxd Figure EJ-18: Childhood Lead Risk
4-6
Chapter 4 | Safe, Healthy, and Affordable Homes

HEALTHY HOUSING LOCATIONS
Oakland’s geography has been shaped historically by zoning, one of the primary purposes of which is to protect residential, commercial, industrial, and civic areas from the intrusion of incompatible uses. However, in the past, zoning was often used as tools to perpetuate racism, effectively working to keep property values higher for White residents in more affluent areas by locating incompatible uses in predominantly BIPOC communities. As described in the Housing Element REIA, “While affluent neighborhoods are protected from industrial uses and the intrusion of lower-priced housing into their neighborhoods, the public health, character, and culture of lower income, BIPOC neighborhoods do not receive equivalent levels of protection. In effect, higher standards are presumed and upheld for predominantly White and affluent neighborhoods than are for lower income neighborhoods that are majority BIPOC.” Single-family zoning (detached unit residential) was largely designed to have a similar effect as racially restrictive housing covenants. This legacy continues to this day, as “[continued utilization] of single-family zones, acts to bar the development of housing affordable to residents earning moderate- to low-incomes, who are more likely to be BIPOC, across swaths of the city” where there is more access to health-promoting resources, employment, and opportunity. The Housing Action Plan includes zoning and height changes across the city and in specific sites in Rockridge, single-family dominated neighborhoods, along corridors, transit proximate areas and high resource neighborhoods to affirmatively further fair housing. The HAP also implements an Affordable Housing Overlay Zone, where 100 percent affordable projects will be granted by-right approvals. The AHO will largely apply citywide. Any projects located on sites with at least 20 percent affordable units within the City’s Housing Sites Inventory Overlay Zone will be granted by-right approvals.

Oakland’s Housing Element
Oakland’s 2023-2031 Housing Element sets forth the City’s housing priorities and goals—as well as its vision for both short- and long-term development—to create a fair and just city. State law mandates that the Housing Element be updated every eight years to reflect changing conditions, community objectives, and goals. The 2023-2031 Housing Element
identifies a foundational framework of five overarching goals in Chapter 4: Housing Action Plan to comprehensively address the housing crisis and needs of Oaklanders. The goals seek to significantly address disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replace segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, foster and maintain compliance with civil rights, and affirmatively further fair housing. The goals and policy focus areas include:
• Protect Oakland Residents from Displacement and
Prevent Homelessness: Protect Oakland tenants from
displacement and create conditions that enable them to
remain in their homes and communities.
• Preserve and Improve Existing Housing Stock: Conserve and improve the affordability of existing housing stock in Oakland and address substandard conditions.
• Close the Gap Between Affordable and MarketRate Housing Production by Expanding Affordable Housing Opportunities: Facilitate the production of
housing for extremely low, very low, low, and moderateincome households. In addition to increased production generally, provide a diversity of housing types, ownership opportunities, living arrangements, and features designed to accommodate persons with disabilities.

Locate new housing to further access to opportunity
(while simultaneously investing in and protecting tenants in disinvested communities) and remove constraints to
affordable housing development.
• Address Homelessness and Expand Resources for
the Unhoused: Recognize housing as a human right.

Reduce homelessness through Housing First approaches
and support coordination across the spectrum, from
homelessness prevention to transitional housing/shelter and services to permanent housing with resources for
long-term support.
• Promote Neighborhood Stability and Health:

Promote resilient development in safe, healthy, and
just communities. Increase resources in disinvested
communities and create long-time stability through
homeownership opportunities.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
4-7

TRACT NAME (WITH SCORE)
HABITABILITY HOUSING BURDEN EVICTION HEATING1 OVERCROWDING INCOMPLETE

FACILITIES LEAD
Acorn Industrial* (1.00) Bancroft/ Havenscourt
East (1.00) Port Lower* (1.00) Fremont District (1.00) Fruitvale/ Hawthorne (1.00) Uptown/ Downtown (1.00) Bancroft/ Havenscourt East (1.00) Prescott/ Mandela Peralta
(0.99) Eastmont (0.98) Jack London Square (0.99) Jingletown/ Kennedy (0.99) Reservoir Hill/ Meadow
Brook (0.98)
Reservoir Hill/ Manzanita
(0.99) Seminary (0.99)
Port Upper (0.98) Melrose (0.98) Foothill Square/Toler
Heights (0.98) Fitchburg (0.97) Lower San Antonio East
(0.98) Piedmont Ave North (0.98) Brookfield Village (0.98) Chinatown (0.97) Hoover/Foster (0.97) Las Palmas (0.97) Reservoir Hill/ Meadow Brook (0.97) Fremont District (0.97) Downtown/ Old Oakland (0.97) Fremont District (0.97) Oakland Estuary (0.96) Lower San Antonio East
(0.96) Downtown (0.96) Melrose (0.96) Fruitvale (0.96) Lake Merritt (0.96) Lockwood/Coliseum/ Rudsdale (0.96) Clawson/ Dogtown (0.96) Brookfield Village (0.96) Fitchburg (0.95) McClymonds (0.94) Elmhurst (0.96) Piedmont Ave Central (0.96) Lower San Antonio East (0.96)
McClymonds (0.95) Peralta/Hacienda (0.95) Golf Links (0.95) Bunche/Oak Center (0.94) Jingletown/ Kennedy (0.93) Pill Hill (0.95) New Highland (0.95)
Foothill Square/ Toler
Heights (0.94) Chinatown (0.94) Bunche/MLK Jr (0.94) Fruitvale/ Hawthorne (0.94) Sobrante Park (0.93) Lower San Antonio East (0.94) Elmhurst (0.94) Prescott (0.93) New Highland (0.93) Brookfield Village (0.93) Brookfield Village/ Hegenberger (0.93) Chinatown (0.93) Reservoir Hill/ Meadow Brook (0.93) Bancroft/ Havenscourt
East (0.92) Fitchburg (0.92) Prescott/Mandela Peralta (0.92) Bancroft/ Havenscourt
East (0.90) Harrington/ Fruitvale (0.92) Bancroft/ Havenscourt West (0.92) Eastmont (0.91) Arroyo Viejo (0.91) Prescott (0.91) Peralta/ Hacienda (0.90) Lower Laurel/ Allendale (0.91)
Brookfield Village/
Hegenberger (0.91)
Jack London Square (0.90) Elmhurst (0.90) McClymonds (0.90) Brookfield Village (0.90) Golf Links (0.90) Arroyo Viejo (0.90) Note: Bolded and blue census tracts are EJ Communities. * Indicates census tract with low population.

1. Includes only 8 tracts in top decile due to ties. Next highest score is 0.88.

Table EJ-6: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Safe, Healthy, and Affordable Homes 4-8
Chapter 4 | Safe, Healthy, and Affordable Homes

4.2 GOALS AND POLICIES
GOAL EJ-4 COORDINATE RESOURCES TO

IMPROVE HOUSING QUALITY AND
HABITABILITY.

EJ-4.1 Resource Optimization. Coordinate across City departments and with relevant partner agencies including the Oakland Housing Authority, EBMUD, BAAQMD, ABAG,
ACPHD and others, to optimize the use of data, grant
monies, incentives, financial resources, staffing, investments, and programs in addressing displacement and tenant protections; sanitary housing and maintenance
issues; environmental hazards in homes and neighborhoods; and other concerns related to stable, safe, and sanitary housing.

EJ-4.2 Supplemental Funding Sources for Building Rehabilitation. Place a high priority on identifying supplemental funding sources/resources for retrofit, rehabilitation, and upgrade projects that address health and safety in
housing occupied by low-income renters and homeowners, including air quality improvements. Supplemental funding sources could include loans and grants available from the California Strategic Growth Council, CalEPA, CARB, and other entities.

EJ-4.3 Healthy Homes Inspections. As part of the Joint
Lead Hazard Abatement Program in partnership with
ACPHD, improve ongoing ability to screen for and
eliminate lead hazards through proactive approaches,
including proactive inspections of rental property
dwellings and lead-safe certification requirements for
childcare facilities and schools. Prioritize abatement, testing, outreach, and education activities in high-risk areas and serving the populations most likely to live
in high-risk dwellings in EJ Communities, as identified in Figure EJ-18. See also Action 2.1.2 in the 2023-2031 Housing Element.

EJ-4.4 Healthy Homes Awareness. Continue to work with
Oakland HCD, ACPHD, and community organizations
to promote safe and sanitary housing in EJ Communities in Figure EJ-17 by providing owners and occupants with culturally appropriate and linguistically accessible information and resources about home health, including lead/Lead Safe Home Program grants, indoor air pollutants, asthma triggers, hazard zones, and other
information. Efforts may include the development and
dissemination of healthy home checklists, conducting
trainings, workshops, or audits.

EJ-4.5 Improve Indoor Air Quality in Existing Buildings. For new projects and significant rehabilitations of existing buildings, improve indoor air quality and energy efficiency through weatherization and strategies to prevent buildup of mold and mildew.

EJ-4.6 Environmental Quality. In private and non-profit housing projects in EJ Communities, promote and seek ways to incentivize the inclusion of features and amenities that support and enhance the health of occupants and the environment, including:
• On-site health and human services;
• Energy-efficient and electric appliances;
• Green infrastructure, such as green roofs or
appropriate tree planting;
• Car sharing;
• Community gardens or sponsored rides to farmers
markets; and
• Transit and bus passes for lower income workers
and persons with disabilities to reduce emissions.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
5-1
fresh produce. EJ Communities most burdened by food access issues are shown in Table EJ-7. This section describes Oakland’s food network, including availability of food outlets, food availability, and food quality.

5.1 ISSUES AND DISPARITIES
In 2019, 11 percent of California Congressional District 13’s population (encompassing the northwest branch of Alameda County) was food insecure. More than 40 percent of the food insecure population was not eligible for food assistance programs such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, administered as CalFresh in California and formerly known as food stamps) and other nutrition programs because they make more than 200 percent of the federal poverty level.3 Food insecurity rates differ by race and ethnicity: 20 percent of Black individuals and 15 percent of Hispanic people of any race were reported as food insecure, while the food insecurity rate among White, non-Hispanic individuals was seven percent. In Alameda County, 8 percent of residents receive CalFresh (SNAP) benefits, at an average of $219 per 3 Feeding America. 2021. https://map.feedingamerica.org/district/2019/ overall/california/district/13. Accessed Jan 10 2022.
person, per month.4 SNAP users may use their benefits to purchase food at accepting food markets and grocery stores. In addition, benefit cards can be used at participating farmers’ markets, such as those in Temescal and Old Oakland.5,6 SNAP is an important federal tool in reducing food insecurity; thus, places where there is a high rate of SNAP usage may indicate communities that could become food insecure if any federal changes affected SNAP availability or eligibility. In Oakland, tracts with the highest percentage of people receiving SNAP are located in West, East, and deep East Oakland. All tracts in the top tenth percentile for SNAP recipiency are EJ Communities.

The percentage of students receiving free or reduced-price lunch is often used as a proxy measure for the percentage of students living in poverty.7 Beginning in the 2022–2023 school 4 California Department of Social Services. 2022. https://public.tableau.com/ shared/6C68NTX9M. Accessed Dec 28 2022.
5 California Department of Social Services. https://www.cdss.ca.gov/ calfreshoutreach/res/Toolkit/ConsumerFliers/ConsumerFlier_1_ UsingCalFreshBenefitsisSimple_English.pdf. Accessed Dec 28, 2022. 6 United States Department of Agriculture. https://www.usdalocalfoodportal. com/fe/searchresults/?term=&location=Oakland,%20CA,%20
USA&directory=farmersmarket&x=-122.2711639&y=37.8043514&c=0. Accessed Dec 28, 2022
7 National Center for Education Statistics. 2015. “Free or reduced price lunch:

A proxy for poverty?” https://nces.ed.gov/blogs/nces/post/free-or-reducedprice-lunch-a-proxy-for-poverty Accessed Dec 28, 2022

5. Expanding Healthy Food Access
Access to affordable, healthy, nourishing food is one of the most basic human needs. Beyond this, Oakland’s food system also plays a major role in shaping Oakland’s culture, identity, and employment opportunities. However, there are parts of Oakland that lack food access, and many Oaklanders struggle with food insecurity. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines food insecurity as “lack of consistent access to enough food for every person in a household to live an active, healthy life.”1 Food-insecure households are not necessarily food insecure all the time. Food insecurity may reflect a household’s need to make trade-offs between important basic needs such as housing or medical bills and purchasing nutritionally adequate foods.

Challenges to accessing healthy food can lead to a higher risk of chronic diseases such as obesity, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes;2 when people cannot get to grocery stores that sell healthy foods, they may shop at nearby corner stores, which often carry foods high in fat, sugar, and sodium and fewer healthy options like 1 Feeding America. 2021. https://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-inamerica/food-insecurity. Accessed Jan 30 2022 2 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Healthy Food Environments:

Improving Access to Healthier Food,” last updated September 10, 2020, https://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/healthy-food-environments/improvingaccess-to-healthier-food.html, accessed February 23, 2023. 5-2
Chapter 5 | Expanding Healthy Food Access
year, all public and charter schools serving transitional kindergarten through 12th grade are required to provide two free meals to every student each school day, regardless of their eligibility for other meal programs. Served meals must comply with USDA nutrition guidelines, including milk and calorie requirements.

The Universal Meals Program ensures that the nutritional needs of children who require affordable food options are met during the school day. In addition, the City’s Summer Food Service Program provides free breakfast and lunch to Oakland kids and teens during summer break. Tracts with the greatest percentage of students receiving free or reduced-price lunch are located in Acorn/Jack London Gateway, central East Oakland, and deep East Oakland.

FOOD ACCESS
The grocery store is the primary source of healthy food for most Oaklanders, providing access to a wide variety of nutritious and relatively affordable produce and other foods compared to other types of food outlets like convenience stores. However, racial and socioeconomic inequities in access to healthy food have led to differential food access for communities of color, especially in West and East Oakland, where some key food resources have closed.

Current market forces driving the location of chain supermarkets continue to perpetuate food access inequity tied to policies that created residential segregation, poverty, and “supermarket flight” from certain neighborhoods. While incentives or other efforts may be needed to overcome these forces for traditional supermarkets, there are also mission-driven grocery store operators, such as food co-ops, that have emerged as an alternative that can provide healthy, culturally relevant food, while building community power and ownership. Food advocates have also urged more focus and support for smaller independent grocers that have served East and West Oakland for decades.

While development of full-service food retailers is an important strategy, existing convenience stores, dollar stores, corner stores, or gas station markets often provide the only retail food options in some areas of the city. Most corner stores sell a limited selection of non-perishable food items and less nutritious snack foods, though some also carry fresh produce and other nutritious fares. Initiatives to encourage stocking more fresh produce and healthier food options can include financial incentives, promotion and marketing, infrastructure investment (e.g., purchasing new refrigeration units or display stands), and produce supply conserve resources and reduce waste thrown in landfills. The City can support food recovery by supporting existing capacity of food generators and develop new capacity to recover, divert, and redistribute consumable food to those in need.

FOOD ASSISTANCE AND EDUCATION
The price of food—in addition to taste, nutrition, convenience, and other factors—affects people’s food choices, and is one of the greatest barriers to accessing healthy food. Participation in food assistance programs, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (also known as CalFresh) and Women, Infants, and Children nutrition program (WIC), can help to improve food security, offer benefits that enable families to purchase healthier diets, and free up resources for other necessities. The City will seek to understand barriers, promote access and community awareness, and expand acceptance of these benefit programs at retailers and farmers markets in partnership with community organizations.

Given the time limitations and financial and physical barriers people with disabilities and low-income families may face when preparing meals, it is important to increase education around convenient and easy-to-prepare healthy food options. The City will play a role in providing marketing and educational campaigns targeted at increasing food growing and healthy eating to support new healthy food retail in EJ Communities. chain development. The location of full-service food outlets and smaller convenience stores is shown in Figure EJ-19. While there are large grocery stores within a walkable distance for residents of Lake Merritt, Temescal, and Rockridge neighborhoods, considerable portions of East and West Oakland do not have one close by. East Oakland does have key smaller food markets which aim to fill the gap between larger stores.

Community gardens and farmers markets can help to improve fresh food accessibility in areas of lower food access. Community gardens are dedicated plots of land where residents can grow food or other plants; many are started by residents who recognize that their communities are underserved by traditional fresh food retailers. Community gardens can promote the concept of food autonomy, where people are empowered to control their food and food systems. The City can take additional steps to make City-owned land available for community gardens, prioritizing areas and community stewards that will have the greatest impact on food-deprived communities. Some research has shown that people who participate in community gardens eat more fruits and vegetables and worry less about running out of food before the end of the month. Oakland also has several farmers markets that accept SNAP, which benefits both the farmers and low-income shoppers. Moving farmers markets to more central locations, accessible by transit, can also promote food access.

FOOD DISTRIBUTION AND RECOVERY
Supporting a fine-grained network of food distribution points can also help to improve food access. For example, libraries, schools, parks, and even large parking lots can become sites where sales or distribution of fresh food can occur. Improving the effectiveness of existing food distribution programs, especially in underserved areas and those with higher prevalence of food insecurity, can be a cost-effective way to improve access to affordable healthier foods. For example, and the City could coordinate with community organizations to better connect eligible residents and families to federal, State, and local food programs, as well as emergency food assistance.

Edible food recovery programs divert food waste by redistributing unused food from food generators such as grocery stores, supermarkets, restaurants, corporate kitchens, and other wholesaler/distributors. Feeding hungry people through food recovery is the best use for surplus food and a vital way for Oakland to Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
iversity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
WHOLE

FOODS MARKET

CALIFORNIA

MANDELA

GROCERY
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

EMERYVILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
International
Airport
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Chabot
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal

OAKLAND GROCERY

OUTLET FOOD MAXX

SUPERMARKET
#417
FARMER

JOE'S DELI
LUCKY # 736
WHOLE

FOODS MARKET

CALIFORNIA

PIEDMONT

GROCERY

SPROUTS

FARMERS
MARKET

SMART &
FINAL #445

SHOP-RITE

SUPERMARKET
LUCKY #734

FOOD MAXX
#484
SAFEWAY #3132

SAFEWAY
#638 -5
SAFEWAY #1119
SAFEWAY STORE #908

GAZZALIS

SUPERMARKET

FOODSCO
MARKET #534

CARDENAS

KOREANA
PLAZA
MARKET

TRADER JOE'S
TRADER
JOE'S #203

SAFEWAY
INC #2870

SAFEWAY
STORE #654
SOURCE: Alameda County Public Health Department Environmental Health Division, 2021; City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Oakland General Plan Update
Food Resources
Grocery/Supermarket Size (sq ft)
> 25,000 Sq ft
10,000 - 25,000
2,500 - 10,000
Grocery/Supermarket 1/2-mile Radius
Food Market (< 2,500 sq ft)
Farmers' Market
Railroads
Major Roads
City of Oakland
Alameda County
µ
Map Date: 12/27/2022 Parks
Figure EJ-19: Food Access
5-4
Chapter 5 | Expanding Healthy Food Access
Community organizations have led the charge in building local resilience and increasing food security. City Slicker Farms leads the urban farming and food justice movement in West Oakland, having transformed a vacant brownfield site into a thriving community park and farm. City Slicker has built more than 400 backyard and community gardens since 2001, and their West Oakland Farm Park is a vibrant community hub on land that was once heavily contaminated. City Slicker Farms also includes other programs that increase food access (the Backyard
Gardens Program); support food sharing (participation in the Town Fridge collective); and build skills in farming and cooking (the Food and Farming Skill Sharing Program.)
In Deep East Oakland, Planting Justice (PJ) Nursery hires and trains formerly incarcerated people at their two-acre Rolling River tree nursery in the Sobrante Park neighborhood. In the last 10 years, the team has built over 450 edible gardens throughout the Bay Area. In partnership with Sogorea Te’ Land Trust (STLT), an urban indigenous women-led community
organization, PJ facilitated the transfer of the Rolling River Nursery’s plot back into Chochenyo and Karkin Ohlone
stewardship. This partnership recognizes Oakland’s Ohlone history and grants STLT access to the land in perpetuity.

Mandela Grocery Co-op in West Oakland is a worker cooperative (co-op), which is a model that serves as an effective tool for creating long-term, dignified jobs, particularly in urban lowincome communities. The Mandela Grocery Co-op is a grocery store that is operated, centrally governed, and democratically controlled by its worker-owners and sources from local
entrepreneurs and farmers in California with a focus on Black and Brown farmers and food makers.

The Saba Grocers Initiative is a network of Arab immigrant and Black corner store owners working to build a food system where fresh fruits and vegetables are affordable for all. Initially City Slicker Farms Photo Credit: David Jaber Photo Credit: Saba Grocers funded by Oakland’s 2017 “soda tax” after successful community organizing efforts, Saba Grocers helps its network of members secure fresh fruits and vegetables through bulk wholesale purchase and distribution to each member store. They also distribute Saba Food Cards, a closed loop Visa worth $250 each for residents in need of assistance, developed in partnership with 25 independent store owners in Oakland. The Initiative also coordinates a “Fresh 5x” nutrition incentive program funded by the USDA and distributes funds to local grocers that supplement CalFresh and
CalSNAP benefits. For every dollar SNAP recipients spend on fresh produce, they get five additional dollars for additional produce, helping lower-income residents stretch their monthly grocery budgets by a significant amount.

Sources: City Slicker Farms website, Planting Justice
Website, Mandela Grocery Co-op website, Oakland Equitable Climate Action Plan 2030, Saba Grocers Initiative website Building Resilience: Community-Led Food Security
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
5-5
Table EJ-7: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Expanding Healthy Food Access

TRACT NAME (WITH SCORE)
SNAP1,2 FOOD ACCESS2 FARMERS’ MARKETS COMMUNITY GARDENS FREE/REDUCED PRICE MEAL2 Lockwood/Coliseum/ Prescott/Mandela Peralta (0.91) Brookfield Village (1.00) Montclair North (1.00) Port Lower* (0.99) Rudsdale (0.99) Acorn (0.91) Sequoyah (0.99) Glen Highlands (0.99) Acorn Industrial* (0.99) DeFremery/Oak Center (0.99) Brookfield Village (0.91) Redwood Heights West (0.98) Piedmont Pines (0.98) Melrose (0.98) Bancroft/Havenscourt East (0.98) San Antonio/Highland Terrace (0.91) Brookfield Village/ Hegenberger (0.97) Montclair South (0.97) Acorn (0.97) Prescott/Mandela Peralta (0.97) Golf Links (0.91) Lincoln Highlands (0.96) Caballo Hills (0.96) Jack London Gateway (0.96) Fruitvale/Hawthorne (0.93) Prescott (0.91) Lower Dimond School (0.96) Panoramic Hill (0.96) Fremont District (0.96) Cox/Elmhurst (0.93) Bushrod/Childrens Hospital (0.91) Cox/Elmhurst (0.95) Sequoyah (0.95) Elmhurst (0.95) Sobrante Park (0.93) Brookfield Village/ Hegenberger (0.91) Stonehurst (0.94) Oakmore North (0.94) Bancroft/Havenscourt East (0.94) Acorn (0.93) Mills College (0.91) Laurel/Upper Peralta Creek (0.93) Woodminster (0.93) New Highland (0.93) Brookfield Village (0.93) Sequoyah (0.91) Prescott (0.92) Upper Piedmont Ave (0.92) Harrington/Fruitvale (0.92) Fremont District (0.91) Port Lower* (0.91) Woodminster (0.91) Seminary (0.91) Webster (0.91) Bunche/MLK Jr (0.91) Sobrante Park (0.90) Foothill Square/Toler Heights (0.90) Sobrante Park (0.90) Arroyo Viejo (0.90) Note: Bolded and blue census tracts are EJ Communities. * Indicates census tract with low population.

1. Only includes 11 tracts in top decile due to ties. Next highest score is 0.86.

2. Maximum score is not 1.00 due to ties.
5-6
Chapter 5 | Expanding Healthy Food Access

5.2 GOALS AND POLICIES
GOAL EJ-5 SUPPORT A FOOD SYSTEM

THAT PROVIDES NUTRITIOUS,

AFFORDABLE, CULTURALLY

RELEVANT, AND AFFORDABLE

FOOD TO ALL OAKLANDERS
Improving Food Access
EJ-5.1 New Healthy Food Grocers. Leverage tax and fee
deferral/reduction programs, California Food Financing
Initiative funding, and other economic development
grant monies to attract new healthy food grocers and
co-ops and help them establish and/or make necessary improvements. As shown in Figure EJ-19, allow small grocery stores within residential areas. As a priority, efforts should be focused in areas underserved by healthy food retail with good access to the transportation network, where grocery stores and food co-ops are most economically viable.

EJ-5.2 Community Gardens Program. Partner with nonprofits, especially Indigenous groups, to expand the City’s Community Gardens Program, with policies to address
maintenance and permit Indigenous community harvesting/ foraging of parks. The program should include garden spaces, community-maintained edible landscapes, and amenities in public spaces.

Other incentives may include:
• Explore the expansion of outright permitting of
community gardens in areas where a Conditional
Use Permit is currently required, particularly in
the Broadway Valdez District (D-BV) and Central
Estuary (D-CE) zones.
• Incentivize urban agriculture in urbanized areas
by offering reduced property tax assessments or
relief from Oakland vacancy tax in exchange for
converting vacant or unimproved property to an
agricultural use through a contract agreement for
an initial period of five years.

EJ-5.4 Urban Agriculture in New Development. Promote
rooftop gardens, edible gardens, and other sustainable
agricultural landscaping alternatives within multi-unit, commercial, and industrial developments.
• Target creation of rooftop gardens highly visible
from neighboring properties.
• Permit indoor “vertical food farms” in appropriate
areas in the City.
• Reduce permit fees for large-scale farming of edible
products.

EJ-5.5 Entrepreneurship and Food Innovation. Actively support food innovations such as street (sidewalk) vending, food cooperatives, pop-up markets and similar innovations that do not fit into the traditional brick-and-mortar storefront, farmers market, or community garden models. Promote indoor farming of fruits and vegetables in industrial zones. Support individual residents in small-scale agriculture and distribution, through education and financial assistance.

Food Assistance and Nutrition Programs
EJ-5.6 Food Assistance Programs. Work to increase community awareness of and participation in existing federal food assistance programs, such as the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) nutrition program and the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

Approaches can include:
• Providing information in City newsletters, on the
City’s website, and at community centers and other
City facilities.
• Explaining to merchants the incentive to registering
to accept WIC and SNAP payments (immediate
expansion of market of potential customers).
• Supporting additional programs for local grocers
to supplement CalFresh benefits with cash match
incentives, healthy food incentives, or fruit and
vegetable supplemental benefits. Some program
examples include Market Match, Fresh Creds, and
SPUR’s Double Up Food Bucks program.
• Partnering with community organizations that
support low-income community members
who are not eligible for food assistance through
identification of funding or grants.

EJ-5.7 Food Security Resources & Partnerships. Coordinate with citywide community-serving organizations, the
Oakland Unified School District, Alameda County, and
other public agencies to ensure that eligible residents and families have access to federal, State, and local
food programs, as well as emergency food assistance
during public health and other crises. Partner with
these service providers to distribute food at community centers and other central locations in areas with high
food insecurity and/or low access to food. During such
emergencies, support the Alameda County Community Foodbank to expand hours and keep distribution centers operational.
2045 General Plan
| Environmental Justice Element
5-7
EJ-5.8 Education and Awareness. In partnership with local agencies and community organizations, develop curric-
ulum and marketing materials encouraging the growth
and consumption of healthy food. Provide these to the
Oakland Unified School District and community orga-
nizations focused on food justice and nutritional educa- tion. Support community organizations with financial
incentives such as land transfers or discounted water
rates and technical assistance in the form of online and library resources and workshops on gardening basics
and cooking easy, healthy meals with fresh produce.

Food Recovery
EJ-5.9 Food Recovery Program. Support existing capacity of organizations within Oakland’s food system, and
develop new capacity, to recover edible food that is
otherwise wasted, and distribute that food for human
consumption. This includes: • Exploring potential for agroforestry, where trees, shrubs, and agricultural crops are interspersed, in
community gardens or parks, to create additional
food sources.
• Engaging with stakeholders, including local food
donation, recovery, and collection organizations, to
build robust collection and food storage capacity,
and reliable distribution systems to the neediest
populations.
• Engaging with food generators such as
supermarkets, wholesale distributors, large hotels,
and institutions, to donate surplus edible food that
food recovery partners want or will accept and
ensuring food generators comply with the Edible
Food Recovery requirements of SB 1383.
• Informing edible surplus food generators about
strategies and best practices for preventing the
waste of surplus food.
• Expanding community education efforts and
marketing of existing recovery programs, such as
Oakland Recycles.
5-8
Chapter 5 | Expanding Healthy Food Access
This page intentionally left blank.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
6-1

6. Equitable Public Facilities
that EJ Communities receive priority for City investment and programs that are implemented in a timely fashion. Investments in public systems can include park improvements, transportation infrastructure improvements, upgrades to public facilities, and other systems.

Founded in 2006, the Friends of the Hoover Durant Public Library (FOHDPL) is grassroots, volunteer-run nonprofit working to bring a public library branch back to West Oakland’s Hoover, Durant, McClymonds and Clawson neighborhoods. The North Oakland and Telegrove libraries previously serving these areas were closed in 1950 and 1980 respectively, targeted for closure as a result of historic patterns of racially motivated, systemic disinvestment and institutional redlining. Their closures have since reduced accessibility to these vital public spaces, especially as the next closest library branches require crossing major roads and highways. FOHDPL seeks to close this gap and, in the meantime, act as an intermediary providing community events and services such as their Street Corner Library.

Thanks to the efforts of FOHDPL, the City issued a feasibility study for a new 12,000 square-foot library facility that will likely be completed by early 2024.

More information on financing public facilities will be available in the new Infrastructure and Facilities Element in Phase 2 of the General Plan Update.

Building Resilience: Friends of the Hoover Durant Public Library The adequate provision of public facilities is a critical component to the current and future prosperity of a community. Under State law (SB 1000), “public facilities” is an umbrella term that includes “public improvements, public services, and community amenities.” This covers a wide spectrum of publicly provided uses and services including infrastructure, school facilities, parks, transportation, and emergency services. These amenities and services improve the health, safety, and well-being of a community by either enhancing the public sphere or providing services that are available to every resident.

Distribution and investment in a City’s public facilities shapes residents’ access to services and resources to fulfill their needs and wants. Because of past discriminatory land use policies, there are parts of Oakland that have been overlooked for public investments and development of new amenities. Delayed investments and programs can perpetuate current disparities in the built environment, access to opportunity and resources, and other social determinants of health – significantly prolonging these inequities and their corresponding outcomes in health and wellbeing.

As part of SB 1000, environmental justice elements must ensure 6-2
Chapter | Equitable Public Facilities

6.1 ISSUES AND DISPARITIES

COMMUNITY FACILITIES
Public Facilities
Community facilities in Oakland include a wide range of places that provide valuable amenities to the community. These include public libraries and community centers, which offer a variety of educational and recreational programs, community gathering spaces, access to information and technology, and opportunities to participate in a neighborhood’s cultural, political, and social life.

Childcare and early education facilities keep children safe and healthy, help them develop skills they will need for succeeding in and out of school, and create better, more equitable long-term outcomes for children. Free or subsidized childcare programs provide much-needed support for working families. Head Start programs promote the school readiness of infants, toddlers, and preschool-aged children from low-income families. Head Start programs in Oakland are shown in Figure EJ-20. There are 17 Head Start locations across the city, mostly clustered in central and East Oakland. Five Head Start facilities are located near the Lower San Antonio and Fruitvale census tracts in central Oakland, while six Head Start facilities are located near the New Highland and Arroyo Viejo census tracts in East Oakland. There are no Head Start locations west of the I-580 or California State Route 24.

A healthy community also has convenient access to medical services. When health care facilities are accessible via public transit, medical care is more readily accessible to those who do not drive or own cars. As shown on Figure EJ-21, there are multiple medical facilities located within the city, ranging from large hospitals and medical complexes, such as Alta Bates Summit Medical Center, Kaiser Oakland Medical Center, and Highland Hospital.

There are also 79 Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), or community-based health care providers and critical community development facilities that provide primary care services in underserved areas, in Oakland. Most healthcare locations are concentrated in certain census tracts such as Bushrod near the Children’s Hospital, Pill Hill near Summit Campus of Alta Bates Summit Medical Center, and Fruitvale near a cluster of healthcare facilities. Distribution of healthcare facilities in Oakland is not uniform; most clusters are in North Oakland and Downtown, in contrast to the few in West and East Oakland.

As part of the Land Use and Transportation Element (LUTE) update, the City will explore strategies to incentivize additional childcare locations and healthcare facilities in areas of need, prioritizing EJ Communities.

PUBLIC ART, CULTURAL INFRASTRUCTURE, AND

FACILITIES
Sustaining and celebrating Oakland’s cultural and creative diversity can initiate opportunities for artistic engagement, which has the potential to have significant positive effects on health, including decreased anxiety, stress, and mood disturbances.

Music engagement, visual arts therapy, movement-based creative expression, and expressive writing have demonstrated positive outcomes for promoting healing as shown in a study from the American Journal of Public Health.61 The study underscores that this more holistic approach to public health could also help to alleviate the burden of chronic diseases like heart disease and diabetes which are associated with depression and chronic stress.

Oakland’s artistic and cultural landscape is very important. However, Oakland’s arts infrastructure faces challenges: as noted in Oakland’s 2018 Culture and Belonging Report62, cultural organizations face issues related to shrinking investments in arts and culture, retaining cultural spaces in a highly competitive real estate market, lack of adequate performance venues, and a need for more equitable funding. The East Oakland Neighborhood Initiative Plan also emphasized a desire for more arts hubs in local warehouses, creative activation of vacant lots, and the purchasing of foreclosed spaces for these purposes. The East Oakland creative community anchors the character of the neighborhoods, and there is a growing interest in elevating the 61 Stuckey, H. and Nobel, J. The Connection Between Art, Healing, and Public Health: A Review of Current Literature. Am J Public Health. 2010 February; 100(2): 254–263. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2804629/ Accessed Dec 30, 2022.
62 City of Oakland Cultural Affairs Division, Belonging in Oakland: A Cultural Development Plan, 2018, https://cao-94612.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/ Cultural-Plan-9.24-online.pdf, accessed February 23, 2023. creative community through development and funding for the arts. In West Oakland, the West Oakland Cultural Action Network is exploring ways to foster art and preserve cultural spaces that showcase community creativity and artistry, particularly through mural projects.

Policies in the EJ Element give direction to address equitable distribution and access to community and cultural facilities as part of the LUTE. Policies related to facility maintenance and improvement will be addressed as part of the Infrastructure and Facilities Element developed as part of Phase 2.

PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE
In 2019, the City introduced a new process to better reflect public input into the Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) budget, which is the City’s plan for investments over the next three years. This methodology was further refined for the current (fiscal years 2021-2023) budget to capture more equitable representation of requests and projects in East Oakland. Generally, there is an equal geographic distribution of existing CIP and non-CIP projects throughout Oakland. Many new CIPs have also been recommended, including a number in Brookfield Village, Sobrante Park, and Stonehurst neighborhoods in East Oakland, Coliseum Industrial Complex area, and Ralph Bunche and Oak Center neighborhoods in West Oakland.

New CIPs will bring public improvements to street and road conditions, facilitated by the recently proposed 5-Year Paving Plan, which will direct more equitable investment in priority neighborhoods including those with higher concentrations of BIPOC and low-income residents. Policies in the General Plan seek to continue equity-focused Capital Improvement Projects, which will be carried forward in the new Infrastructure and Facilities Element of the General Plan.

Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
attuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
ty Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

Both of these plans leverage repaving to make safety
improvements and are center equity in service provision, with a new focus on neighborhood streets.

The 5YP prioritizes $225 million ($45 million a year) toward local streets, and 76 percent of this budget is programmed in consideration of equity factors to provide greater benefit to underserved populations—including people of color, lowincome households, people with disabilities, households with severe rent burden, people with limited English
proficiency, and youth and older adults (ages 65 and older)— and in geographic areas of greatest needs. Overall, the 5YP represents 350 miles of streets that will receive accessibility improvements including curb ramp improvements, sidewalk repairs, and crosswalk marking upgrades prioritized in local streets and underserved communities.

Source: City of Oakland, 5-Year Paving Plan, 2022
through approximately 930 miles of the City’s sewer network and ultimately deposits at the Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant located in West Oakland. Solid waste services in Oakland are provided by Waste Management of Alameda County, which collects residential and business trash and compost. Residential recycling services are provided by California Waste Solutions.

Electricity and gas are provided by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), and Comcast (also referred to as “Xfinity”) and other companies provide internet service in Oakland. In 2018, Alameda County and 11 of its cities launched the East Bay Community Energy (EBCE) not-for-profit public power agency that governs Community Choice Energy service to help supply clean energy and create local green energy jobs, programs, and clean power projects.

EBCE supplies electricity to residential, business, and municipal accounts that are delivered through PG&E.

A lack of essential services can have a significant impact on the daily lives of residents. Energy is one of these crucial services.

High energy cost burdens can have several negative effects on households. Low-income households may have to make tradeoffs between energy costs and the costs of other necessities such as food and medical care. Households that cut back on energy use due to high cost may experience negative health effects, including asthma and arthritis. High energy cost burden also creates a chronic source of stress, which negatively affects the mental health of household members. In addition, households of color experience greater energy cost burden compared to white households, as seen in Chart EJ-4. This is especially true for Black households in Oakland for which median energy cost burden is

2.34 times higher than for white households. Geographically, the census tracts that are most impacted by energy cost burden include Lockwood/Coliseum/Rudsdale, Lower San Antonio East, and Fitchburg, among others listed in Table EJ-8. Further analysis into public service infrastructure equity issues and financing options, including grants and assistance to lower income populations in EJ Communities, will be explored as part of the new Infrastructure and Facilities Element in Phase 2 of the General Plan Update.

Chart EJ-4: Median Percent of Household
Income Spent on Energy Costs by Race, 2018
Source: Oakland Equity Indicators Report, City of Oakland, 2018.

ENERGY COST BURDEN
Tract Name Score
Lockwood/Coliseum/Rudsdale 1.00
Lower San Antonio East 0.99
Fitchburg 0.98
Castlemont 0.97
New Highland 0.96
Brookfield Village 0.96
Bancroft/Havenscourt East 0.95
Seminary 0.94
Stonehurst 0.93
Webster 0.92
Arroyo Viejo 0.91
Sobrante Park 0.90
Note: Bolded census tracts in blue are EJ Communities.

Table EJ-8: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by
Indicator — Equitable Public Facilities

PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
Public services in Oakland include water and sewage, electricity and gas, and solid waste services. Oakland’s water supply, treatment facilities, and distribution systems are operated and managed by the East Bay Municipality Utility District (EBMUD). The City provides citywide sanitary sewer collection services while EBMUD provides sewage transport, treatment, and discharge services. Sewer discharge from buildings within Oakland flows 6-6
Chapter | Equitable Public Facilities

6.2 GOALS AND POLICIES
GOAL EJ-6 SUPPORT A NETWORK OF WELLMAINTAINED COMMUNITY

FACILITIES THAT ARE EASILY

ACCESSIBLE, CULTURALLY

SUPPORTIVE, AND RESPONSIVE
TO COMMUNITY NEEDS.

Public Facilities
EJ-6.1 Public Facilities Distribution. Ensure equitable distribution of beneficial public safety, civic, and cultural facilities. Prioritize new facilities, resilience hubs, and creative spaces in traditionally underserved areas.

Locations for these public facilities should be identified in collaboration with local schools and neighborhood
groups.

EJ-6.2 Childcare Facilities. As part of planning efforts, ensure appropriate land use designations, zoning, and incentives to facilitate additional affordable and high-quality childcare facilities in areas without sufficient access, as shown in Figure EJ-20.

EJ-6.3 Healthcare Facilities. As part of long-range planning efforts, ensure appropriate land use designations and
zoning to facilitate additional healthcare facilities in areas without sufficient access, as shown in Figure
EJ-21.

EJ-6.4 Facilities Maintenance. Maintain and improve existing civic and public facilities to ensure safer, more attractive facilities that are responsive to community needs.

Prioritize equitable capital improvements and maintenance projects and investments in public and community-driven social infrastructure in EJ Communities.

EJ-6.5 Public Service Coordination. Maintain interagency coordination agreements with neighboring jurisdictions and partner agencies that provide urban public facilities and services within the City/County to ensure effective and efficient service delivery. Ensure strong coordination between agencies during climate emergencies, with in-language and culturally appropriate outreach targeted to the most vulnerable communities.

EJ-6.6 Public Restroom Facilities. Distribute restrooms equitably across the city to support all residents, including Oakland’s unhoused population. Access to safe, clean
sanitation is globally recognized as essential for public health. Public toilets should be accessible to all Oaklanders, without social or physical barriers preventing usage. A public toilet facility’s design and upkeep should offer privacy and safety, ensure cleanliness,
provide required sanitation-related resources, and be
gender equitable.

Credit: Black Cultural Zone
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
7-1
practices. These practices have meant fewer opportunities for physical activity, such as fewer parks, recreation facilities, and safe pedestrian connectivity networks. This section describes some of the top barriers to physical activity and health and lays out a framework for addressing other considerations in the LUTE and Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation (OSCAR) Elements.

7.1 ISSUES AND DISPARITIES

MOBILITY AND SAFETY
Accessible land use patterns with amenities in close distance, robust transportation options, and access to safe pedestrian and bicycle networks are important components of community livability. In addition to serving as spaces where people can recreate, pedestrian and bicycle facilities can help encourage residents to maintain an active and healthy lifestyle.

Bicycle Facilities
“Let’s Bike Oakland” (2019), an addendum to the LUTE that forms the City’s Bicycle Plan, takes an equity-focused approach to bicycle planning. The plan establishes a vision that Oakland will be a bicycle-friendly city where bicycling provides affordable, safe, and healthy mobility for all Oaklanders. The plan highlights new projects and programs that will work to enhance existing communities and their mobility needs. Existing and planned bicycle infrastructure from Let’s Bike Oakland is shown in Figure EJ-22.

The plan acknowledges the lack of bicycle infrastructure in East Oakland despite a strong desire among residents for more opportunities to bike and proposes significant investments in low-stress

7. Promoting Physical Activity
Building complete neighborhoods with open spaces, parks, urban forest, and safe sidewalks and bikeways can support a greener, healthier City, with more opportunities for residents to get out and play, socialize, experience nature, and exercise. Physical inactivity is one of the key contributors to chronic disease in California. In fact, people who are physically active tend to have a higher life expectancy and lower risk for heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, some cancers, and other health-related illnesses.1 In Oakland, areas with the greatest prevalence of obesity include DeFremery/Oak Center and Acorn in West Oakland as well as Havenscourt/Coliseum, Bancroft/Havenscourt, and Seminary in East Oakland, whereas tracts in the Oakland Hills consistently have lower incidences of obesity.

The built environment plays an integral role in determining how communities can access opportunities for physical activity by providing places and encouraging land uses that support active transportation and other forms of exercise. The built environment of impacted communities can be negatively impacted by a history of inequitable investments and discriminatory land use 1 Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Physical Inactivity, September 2022, https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/resources/ publications/factsheets/physical-activity.htm, accessed September 8, 2022.

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

Transit Facilities
Oakland’s 2018 Equity Indicators identified that bus frequency is relatively equitable compared to other citywide issues assessed in the report. Nevertheless, there are still some disparities in frequency between racial groups. Specifically, residents in majority Black census tracts experience less than half the average number of buses per hour than residents in majority White tracts.

In addition, data from the 2019 American Community Surveys (ACS) demonstrates that provision of services does not align with needs, as almost all racial groups have similar percentages (approximately 25 percent) of working residents who commute by transit, except for Hispanic/Latinx, Native American/Alaskan, and Other races (18 percent and lower).4 Oakland’s existing transit infrastructure and bus route frequency as of 2017 is shown in Figure EJ-23.

AC Transit and OakDOT updated their Transit Action Strategy in 2020 which highlights actions to reduce transit costs for low-income transit users and identifies transit improvements 2 Low-stress bikeways involve little traffic interaction based on the roadway’s vehicle speeds and volumes. Examples include trails, separated or buffered bike lanes on high-speed and high-volume roadways, and neighborhood bike routes.
3 Supportive infrastructure includes bicycle parking, wayfinding, and intersection treatments.
4 U.S. Census Bureau, 2019 American Community Surveys 5-Year Estimates Table S0802 [generated for Oakland city, California], https://data.census. gov/table?q=2019+oakland,ca+s0802&tid=ACSST5Y2019.S0802, accessed February 24, 2023.
crashes. About six percent of these accidents resulted in severe injury, and just over one percent resulted in death. The leading causes of these crashes are speeding (24 percent), improper turning (17 percent), violation of traffic signals/signs (16 percent), and violation of automobile right-of-way (14 percent).7
According to the Citywide Crash Analysis of crashes from 2012- 2016, 60 percent of severe and fatal crashes in Oakland occur on just 6 percent of the total street network. Further, reported crash data reveal that certain demographic groups and geographic areas experience a disproportionate share of crashes in Oakland.

For example, Black Oaklanders are twice as likely to be killed or 7 University of California, Berkeley Safe Transportation Research and Education Center, Traffic Injury Mapping System, California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System query for crashes in Oakland between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020, obtained March 3, 2022: https://tims. berkeley.edu/help/Query_and_Map.php
that would benefit vulnerable populations, such as addressing gaps in bus frequency. These actions also address infrastructure upgrades, such as repaving transit streets, upgrading bus stops, and installing pedestrian lighting.

Pedestrian Network
In 2021, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released an update to its Smart Location Database (version 3.0), which includes an analysis of transportation accessibility according to factors like location and quality of employment. Census block groups in Oakland generally fall within the higher (more walkable) range. Areas where there is less walkability include census block groups along the northern edge of the city, in addition to the industrial area of West Oakland (west of I-880) and Oakland International Airport. According to “Oakland Walks,”, an addendum to the LUTE that forms the City’s Pedestrian Plan, sidewalks in East and West Oakland are more likely to be damaged and to be missing critical amenities such as curb ramps, and these neighborhoods are disproportionately burdened by traffic collisions resulting in fatalities and severe injuries.5 Figure EJ-24 shows sidewalk gaps as identified in the Oakland Walks Plan. The neighborhoods along International Boulevard and parts of West Oakland north of Adeline Street are less likely to have sufficient tree coverage, exposing people walking to an uncomfortable environment characterized by extreme heat and pollution.6 The traditional approach to transportation planning and design has prioritized expeditious vehicular mobility over safety, resulting in an over-engineered transportation network that poses dangers to people walking and biking, along with segregating neighborhoods. The Oakland Equity Indicators Report also found that pedestrian safety is one of the 12 indicators that received the lowest possible score and is a therefore a top issue for equity.

As mapped in Figure EJ-25, there were 12,333 crashes that occurred between 2016 and 2020 in Oakland, including 1,552 pedestrian (13 percent), 848 bicycle (7.0 percent), 969 motorcycle (7.9 percent), 406 truck (3.0 percent), and 8,559 car (6.0 percent) 5 City of Oakland Department of Transportation, Oakland Walks! 2017 Pedestrian Plan Update, https://cao-94612.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/ Ped-Plan-2017-rev-sep2018-compressed.pdf.
6 Ibid.
errito
a
Coliseum
Downtown
Berkeley
North
Berkeley
West Oakland
12th St/Oakland City
Center
Lake
Merritt
MacArthur
Rockridge
19th St/Oakland
Ashby
Fruitvale
Oakland
International
Airport
Aî

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEAN

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

EMERYVILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
International
Airport
To Richmond
To San
Francisco
To Antioch
Lake
Merritt
Lak
Chab
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal
Reinhardt Redwood
Regional Park
Anthony Chabot
Regional Park
Tilden Regional Park
Sibley Volcanic
Regional Preserve
Martin Luther King Jr.

NOTE: Transit Streets frequency information is based on AC Transit schedules and routes from Fall 2017.

Figure EJ-23: Oakland Transit Network, 2017
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
versity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

EMERYVILL E
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
International
Airport
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Chabot
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London
Square
Ferry Terminal
Bay Farm Island
Ferry Terminal
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
SOURCE: City of Oakland, 2017-2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Oakland General Plan Update
Sidewalk Gaps
Data collected 2004-2007, as shown
in 2017 Pedestrian Master Plan
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
Figure EJ-24: Sidewalk Gaps in Oakland (2004-2007)
*Pending data from OakDOT*
Jc
Jc
Jc
!
#
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
#
#
!
#
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
#
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
! !
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
! !
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
! !
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
# !
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
#
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
#
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
# #
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
#
#
!
#
#
#
#
#
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! #
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
! !
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
# !
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
! !
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! #
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
# #
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# #
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
#
#
!
#
#
#
#
#
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
#!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
! !
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
! !
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! #
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
##
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
! !
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
# !
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
# !
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
#
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
#
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
#
#
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! #
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
#
! !
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
#
!#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
#
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! #
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
! !
# !
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
#
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
##
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
! !
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
##
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
!
! !
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
# !
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
# #
!
!
!
!
!
#
! !
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
#
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
#
!
# # !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
!
! !
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
! !
# !
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
# !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
#
!
#
#
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
#
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
niversity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

EMERYVILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
International
Airport
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Chabot
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
SOURCE: Transportation Injury Mapping System (UC Berkeley), 2022; City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2022 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Oakland General Plan Update
# Fatal or Severe Injury
! Not Fatal or Severe Injury
Base Map
Railroads
Major Roads
Parks
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
Includes crashes that occurred between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020.

Figure EJ-25: Crashes in Oakland 2016-2020
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
7-7
severely injured in a crash compared to all other Oaklanders.8 Based on data from the City’s 2018 High Injury Network (HIN), which tracks the intersections and corridors with the greatest volume of crashes in the city, Chart EJ-5 demonstrates how these crashes occur predominantly, and disproportionately, in majority Hispanic/Latinx tracts – more than double the proportion seen in tracts with other racial pluralities. In addition, both Black and Asian populations make up roughly 20 percent of the city’s population and experience similar proportions of crashes (i.e., close to a one-to-one ratio), which is a significantly higher rate than for white populations.

Poor lighting alongside secluded walking environments or minimal street activity can increase pedestrian vulnerability. In 2004, the Metropolitan Council awarded Oakland a $2.2 million grant to transform four crosswalks with pedestrian-scale lighting and retimed signals, which resulted in a more friendly and visible pedestrian environment. However, there is a continued need for 8 City of Oakland, Citywide Crash Analysis, August 29, 2018, https://cao94612.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/CityofOakland_CrashAnalysis_ Infographic_08.29.18.pdf.
investment in pedestrian safety and security. For example, the Oakland 2017 Pedestrian Plan encourages investigation into identifying targeted investments to bring all sidewalks up to minimum standards for pedestrian security using pedestrian-scale lighting or improved street lighting.

As part of the LUTE update, the City can work to ensure that new street design and redesign supports pedestrian safety by minimizing traffic volumes and/or speed, incorporating street trees, implementing leading pedestrian intervals (which give pedestrians the opportunity to enter the crosswalk 3-7 seconds before the vehicles are given the green signals), and adding pedestrian-scale lighting.

Issues and opportunities related to Oakland’s roadway, bikeway, and pedestrian network will be further analyzed as part of the LUTE update. The City will focus on creating more accessible neighborhoods and identifying specific locations and strategies for improved street design and safety measures in EJ Communities and those most burdened by collisions.

Chart EJ-5: High Injury Network Crashes by Census Tract Racial Majority, 2018 Note: Share of Total Population shows the percentage that each racial group represents of Oakland’s total population (not by census tract). Share of Tract Pluralities shows the proportion of Oakland census tracts that each racial group has the greatest plurality in.

Building Resilience: Safe Oakland
Streets
Safe Oakland Streets (SOS) is a citywide initiative launched in 2021 to prevent serious and fatal traffic crashes and eliminate crash inequities on Oakland’s streets by prioritizing safety over speed with a focus on historically underserved communities. The SOS approach recognizes that all severe and fatal traffic crashes are preventable. One way the City is implementing this approach is through “Safe Systems,” through which roadways are designed to anticipate human error and protect those who are most vulnerable rather than the traditional traffic safety approach that often relies on perfecting individual human behavior.

SOS is working across departments and building partnerships with the community to implement the most effective and
equitable strategies. Previous planning efforts have laid the foundation for SOS, including OakDOT’s 2016 Strategic Transportation Plan, Oakland Walks, and Let’s Bike Oakland, which prioritize taking an integrated safety and equitydriven approach. For instance, OakDOT’s Geographic Equity Toolbox—which identifies Priority neighborhoods to leverage attention and funding to neighborhoods that may have been historically and currently overlooked by City services and planning processes—and information from the HIN helps the department set data-informed priorities for improvements and reduce the incidence of crashes. Additionally, OakDOT maintains a contracted “community-based organization
on-call” to continue to support the values of equity and engagement. This contracting mechanism allows OakDOT
to pay non-profit organizations for the valuable work they do in support of transportation justice, ranging from grassroots engagement to policy input and meeting facilitation. These include organizations such as Bike East Bay, Safe Passages, Urban Strategies Council, Walk Oakland Bike Oakland, East Bay Asian Local Development Corporation, Transform, Cycles of Change, Eastside Arts Alliance, Building Opportunities for Self Sufficiency.

Source: City of Oakland, “Safe Oakland Streets”
7-8
Chapter 7 | Promoting Physical Activity
Building Resilience: Interstate 980
Study - Vision 980
The Vision 980 study is a joint effort by Caltrans and the City of Oakland that will define transportation and land use strategies to reconnect Downtown Oakland and West
Oakland communities along the I-980 corridor. The study will focus on community integration and environmental
justice to establish a vision for I-980 that will guide the delivery of equitable outcomes for the City of Oakland, the Bay Area region, and the State of California. This currently ongoing effort will be accomplished by engaging study
partners, stakeholders, and the public in developing and recommending a new collective vision for the corridor,
such as:
• A broad range of multi-modal options, including
bus and rail transit, active transportation, freight
movement and emerging mobility and micro-mobility
services.
• Land use options, including reallocating right-of-way to reconnect communities divided by the freeway.

The Vision 980 study will occur in two phases. The shared vision will be developed in the first phase, then the plan for accomplishing the shared vision will be developed in the second phase.

PARK ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE
Green spaces in parks and natural areas are valuable public assets that can greatly improve community livability, support healthy and active lifestyles, and provide ecological benefits. Overall, Oakland has excellent access to parks and open space, but there are also geographic disparities on the neighborhood level. As shown in Figure EJ-26, the Oakland Hills are almost entirely bordered by and include some regional parks (several of which are owned by the East Bay Park District rather than the City of Oakland).

The hills also include large resource conservation areas and open spaces. The Oakland flatlands contain a much smaller total area of the City’s parkland, with most parks being small neighborhood parks. Lake Merritt is the exception as it is surrounded by substantial community parkland; however, it is also surrounded by some of the densest neighborhoods in the city and a significant share of the population lives within close proximity, resulting in heavy use of these spaces.

Based on data from the Trust for Public Land, Oakland—which is the 45th most populous city—ranks 84th among the 100 most populous cities in the country. Residents in neighborhoods of color have access to 69 percent less park space per person compared to those in white neighborhoods. Specifically, white neighborhoods have access to 135 percent more park space per person relative to the city median, whereas Hispanic/Latinx neighborhoods have access to the least amount of park space, with 32 percent less than the city median.

In addition to provision of parkland, distribution of city investments can determine whether park quality is equitable. In 2020, the Oakland Parks and Recreation Foundation surveyed Oakland residents to better understand how to improve citywide park equity. This study found that park quality generally needs improvement, particularly for Black respondents; white respondents had the highest scoring perception of park quality.9 Furthermore, the study highlighted that maintenance and safety are primary factors in park use, anecdotally showing that some residents feel they “have to drive to find a park that feels safe, has 9 Oakland Parks and Recreation Foundation, Parks and Equity: The Promise of Oakland’s Parks, December 2020, https://www.oaklandparks.org/wpcontent/uploads/2021/01/OPRF-Parks-And-Equity-2021-01-12.pdf, accessed February 17, 2022.
basic amenities, and functioning restroom and playground equipment,” which was particularly true for residents of the East Oakland/South Hills area. In face of such issues, the City will need to balance park priorities between providing additional acreage and improving existing facilities to meet the needs of its residents.

As part of the OSCAR Element update and creation of a new Infrastructure and Facilities Element, the City can analyze major and minor CIP park projects and maintenance by funding and location as well as work orders connected to park facilities to better understand distribution of investments.

URBAN FOREST AND URBAN GREENING
Urban Forest
Shaded trees and greenery play a major part in improving the urban environment. Urban trees balance the natural with the built environment and provide both shade and beauty. Trees play a key role in the climate as they absorb carbon dioxide and help manage stormwater runoff. They also help fight pollution by improving air quality, aid in cooling on hot days, and generally make it more pleasant to recreate outside.

In 2021, the City began the process of developing an Urban Forest Plan, an equity-focused guide on how the urban forest will be planned, managed, and protected over the next 50 years for the next generation of Oaklanders. Based on studies of community tree canopy, portions of West Oakland, North Oakland, East Oakland, and Deep East Oakland have the least amount of tree canopy coverage. The City’s tree inventory, shown in Figure EJ-27, is also disproportionately distributed; while white residents make up only about a third of the City’s population, they live in census tracts that contain more than half of the City’s tree inventory. In comparison, Oakland’s Asian population represents 17 percent of the total population, they live in census tracts where only nine percent of city trees are located. As part of development of the Urban Forest Plan, the City will include targeted planting efforts, tree maintenance, and investment strategies to increase and maintain tree canopy cover in these areas.
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
kkkj
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(!(
RR
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
!(
R
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
iversity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
Temescal
Creek
Park
Fremont
Plaza
Picardy
Park
Metropolitan
Golf Links
23rd Ave
Overpass
Berkeley
Open Space
City Of Oakland
Open Space
East Bay MUD
Open Space
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

EMERYVILLE
ORINDA
MORAGA
San Francisco Bay
Oakland
International
Airport
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Chabot
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London
Square
Ferry Terminal
Bay Farm Island
Ferry Terminal
Reinhardt Redwood
Regional Park
Anthony Chabot
Regional Park
Tilden Regional Park
Sibley Volcanic
Regional Preserve
Martin Luther King Jr.

Regional Shoreline
Oyster Bay
Regional Shoreline
McLaughlin
Eastshore
State Park
Crown
Beach
Leona Canyon
Open Space
Temescal
Recreation Area
Huckleberry Botanic
Regional Preserve
Claremont
Canyon
Preserve
Alameda Point
Shoreline Trail
Knowland
Park
Lake Chabot
Regional Park
Joaquin Miller
Park
Leona
Heights
Park
Lake Chabot
Golf Course
Dunsmuir
Estate Park
Glen Daniels
Park
Lakeside
Park
Brookfield
Park
San
Antonio
Park
Mosswood
Park
Dimond
Park
Middle Harbor
Shoreline
Park
South
Prescott
Park
Lowell
Park
Estuary
Channel
Park
Bushrod
Park
Raimondi
Park
Shepherd
Canyon
Park
Arroyo
Viejo
Park
Union Point
Park
Grizzly Peak
Open Space
Montclair
Park
Dimond
Canyon
Curt
Flood
Field
Brookdale
Park
Allendale
Park
Greenman
Field
Concordia
Park
Lion Creek
Park
Stonehurst
Park
Lyons
Field
Sobrante Park
Sheffield
Village
Park
Carter
Park
Wilkins
Park
Tassafaronga
Park
Rainbow
Park
Hacienda
Park
Lazear
Field
Garfield
Park
Central
Reservoir
Park
Morcom
Rose
Garden
Golden Gate
Park
DeFremery
Park
Poplar
Park
Peralta
Park
Columbian
Gardens
Holly Mini
Park
Maxwell
Park
Burckhalter Park
88th Ave
Mini Park
Eula Brinson
Mini Park
Cryer
Site
Josie de la
Cruz Park
Franklin
Park
Clinton
Square
Martin Luther
King Jr. Plaza/
Dover Park
Colby
Park
Ayala
Mini
Park
Rockridge
Park
Chabot
Park Ostrander
Park
Linden
Park
Gateway
Gardens
Park Caldecott
Park
McClymond's
Mini Park
Grover
Shafter
Park
Tomas MeleroSmith Park
Santa
Rita
Land
Trust
Garber (John)
Park
Helen
McGregor
Plaza
Glen
Echo
Park
Oak
Glen
Park
Oak
Park
St. Andrews
Park
Bertha
Port
Park
14th Street
Pocket
Park
Willow
Mini
Park
Cypress
Memorial
Park
Wade
Johnson
Park
Bay
Pointe
Park
Jefferson
Square
Marston
Campbell
Park
Lafayette
Square
Chinese
Garden
Park
Madison
Square
Channel
Park
Lincoln
Square
Snow
Park
Frank
Ogawa
Plaza
Davie
Tennis
Stadium
Splash
Pad
Park
Lakeshore@
Longridge
Mini Park
Mandana
Plaza
Park
Eastshore
Park
Bella Vista
Park
FM Smith
Park
Park Blvd
Plaza Park
Cleveland
Cascade
Avenue
Terrace
Park
Redwood
Heights
Park McCrea
Park
Pinto
Park
Grass Valley
Field
Hellman
Park
Peralta
Oaks
Park
Dolphin
Mini
Park
Nicol
Mini
Park
Courtland
Creek
Park
Oakport
Field
Morgan
Plaza
Park
Manzanita
Park
Vantage Point
Park
Athol
Plaza
Park
Pine
Knoll
Park
Foothill
Meadows Park
Foothill Meadows
Park Extension
Fruitvale
Plaza
William D
Wood Park
66th Ave
Overlook
Tyrone Carney
Park (closed)
Lazear
Mini Park
Montclair
Railroad
Trail Beaconsfield
Canyon
Marjorie
Saunders
Park
Castle
Canyon
Butters
Land
Trust
Redwood Creek
Open Space
City
Stables
Arroyo Viejo
Rec Center
Durant
Park
25th Street
Mini Park
(closed) Bishop
Begin
Plaza
Hardy Park
Frog Park
Redondo
Park
Franklin
Rec Center
Rotary
Nature
Center
Lake Merritt
Boating
Center
DeFremery
Rec Center
Malonga
Casquelourd Center
Otis
Spunkmeyer
Field
Studio One
Art Center
Poplar
Rec Center
Dimond
Rec Center
Bushrod Rec Center
Rainbow
Rec Center
Mosswood
Rec Center
Allendale
Rec Center
Montclair
Rec Center
Brookdale
Rec Center
Golden Gate
Rec Center
Tassafargona
Rec Center
Verdese Carter
Rec Center
Redwood Heights Rec Center
Campbell Village Rec Center
Sheffield Village
Rec Center
Ira Jinkins
Rec Center
Carmen Flores
Rec Center
Manzanita
Rec Center
San Antonio
Rec Center
FM Smith Rec
Center
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
0 0.5 1 2
MILES
SOURCE: ParkServe, Trust for Public Land, 2022; City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023 Oakland General Plan Update
10-minute Walking Distance from Parks
Residential Parcel
Parks & Open Space
Mini Park/Plaza
Neighborhood Park
Community Park
Special Use Park
Linear Park/Greenbelt
Athletic Field
Resource Conservation Area/Open Space
Other Park
Regional Parks & Open Space
!(
R Recreation Centers
kjkk Community Gardens
Base Map
Railroads
Major Highways
Major Roads
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
Figure EJ-26: Parks Walkability
Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
iversity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

To identify areas that would be most affected by climate change-related factors, indicators that measure projected maximum temperatures during future heat health events, energy cost burdens, and flood hazards due to sea level rise were combined.

As seen in Figure EJ-28, areas in southwest Oakland are the most cumulatively vulnerable to climate change effects, notably those closest to downtown and San Francisco Bay. Improving climate resiliency in these areas, such as by increasing urban forestry, can help lessen the burden on these frontline communities.

In many areas of Oakland, there are opportunities to create greener, more environmentally sustainable and livable communities by creating new parks, improving existing parks and green spaces, green walls, and planting trees. With the right design, these projects can filter stormwater, improve groundwater recharge, and improve water quality. Projects may also provide additional benefits such as reducing urban heat island effects, improving air quality, increasing walkability and increasing neighborhood safety. Urban greening’s co-benefits have been included in the 2019 Green Stormwater Infrastructure Plan, and several community plans, including the West Oakland Community Action Plan and East Oakland Neighborhoods Initiative, have identified urban greening projects as one of the top community priorities. The City can also prioritize projects in Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs), which qualify for funding from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC).

TRACT NAME (WITH SCORE)
TREE CANOPY PARK ACCESS ROAD SAFETY1
Port Lower* (1.00) Glen Highlands (1.00) Chinatown (1.00) Melrose (0.98) Lincoln Highlands (0.99) Fruitvale (0.99) Acorn Industrial* (0.98) Montclair North (0.98) Adams Point East (0.98) Brookfield Village/Hegenberger (0.96) Adams Point North (0.97) Downtown/Old Oakland (0.97) Port Upper (0.96) Millsmont (0.96) Downtown (0.96)
Jingletown/Kennedy (0.95) Oakland Estuary (0.96) Jingletown/Kennedy (0.96) Oakland Estuary (0.95) Trestle Glen (0.95) Acorn (0.95) McClymonds (0.91) Redwood Heights Central (0.94) Fruitvale/Hawthorne (0.94) Chinatown (0.91) Adams Point West (0.93) Chinatown/Laney (0.93) Downtown (0.91) Crocker Highland (0.92) Fitchburg (0.92) Uptown/Downtown (0.91) Redwood Heights East (0.91) Bunche/MLK Jr (0.91) Durant Manor (0.90)
Note: Bolded and blue census tracts are EJ Communities. * Indicates census tract with low population.

1. Includes only 11 tracts in top decile due to ties. Next highest score for Tree Canopy is 0.87 and next highest for Road Safety is 0.89.

Table EJ-9: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator — Promoting Physical Activity Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
iversity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAK LAN D

AL AME DA

SAN LE AND RO

BE R KE LE Y

PIE DMO NT

EME RYVI LL E

ORI NDA

MO RAGA
S a n F r a n c i s c o B a y
Oaklan d
In te rna tio nal
Airpo r t
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
SOURCE: City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2022 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Figure X-X: Climate Change Category Score
This map shows the EJ Communities Screening Analysis score for the Climate Change Category, calculated from the Heat Health Events, Energy Cost Burden, and Sea Level Rise indicators.

O a k l a n d G e n e r a l P l a n U p d a t e
Climate Change Score
81% - 100% (Most Impacted)
61% - 80%
41% - 60%
21% - 40%
0% - 20% (Least Impacted)
Railroads
Major Roads
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
J:\GISData\582_Oakland_GP\GIS\Projects\EJ\Fig x-x Climate Change Category Score.mxd Figure EJ-28: Climate Change Category Score
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
7-13

7.2 GOALS AND POLICIES
GOAL EJ-7 CREATE ENVIRONMENTS THAT

SUPPORT PHYSICAL ACTIVITY,

RECREATION, AND HEALTHY

LIFESTYLES THROUGH SAFE,
COMFORTABLE AND ADACOMPLIANT WALKABLE, BIKEABLE

NEIGHBORHOODS, WITH ACCESS

TO TRANSIT, GREEN SPACE, TREES,
PATHS, AND PARKS.

Land Use Planning
Additional policies will primarily be developed as part of the Phase 2 LUTE update.

EJ-7.1 Complete Neighborhoods. Promote “complete neighborhoods”— where residents have safe and convenient access to goods and services on a daily or regular
basis—that address unique neighborhood needs and
support physical activity, including walking, bicycling, active transportation, recreation, and active play.

EJ-7.2 Accessible Neighborhoods. Encourage active modes of transportation and transit accessibility by supporting neighborhoods that provide access to a range of daily
goods, services, and recreational resources within comfortable walking or biking distance. Encourage transit providers to prioritize, establish, and maintain routes to jobs, shopping, schools, parks and healthcare facilities that are convenient to EJ Communities.

Collisions
Additional policies will primarily be developed as part of the Phase 2 LUTE update.

EJ-7.3 Street Design for Safe Speeds. Work to maximize
the safety of the transportation network by designing/redesigning streets for lower driving speeds and enforcing speed limits as well as promoting safe driving behavior. Strategies could include implementing leading pedestrian intervals for crosswalks in residential neighborhoods and providing pedestrian scale lighting. Prioritize speed reduction efforts in EJ Communities with the highest concentrations of pedestrian and bicyclist crashes. Study enforcement patterns annually
to avoid racial profiling.

EJ-7.4 Safe Oakland Streets. Use a community engagement-rooted, data-driven and systematic approach to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries, while increasing safety, health, and equitable mobility for all.

EJ-7.5 Bicyclist-and Pedestrian-Friendly Design. Prioritize designs that protect people biking and walking, such
as improvements that increase visibility of bicyclists
and pedestrians, traffic calming, and safer intersection crossings and turns. Improvements should also prioritize universal design so that improvements are usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialization.

EJ-7.6 Collaborative Safety Solutions. Collaborate with educational institutions, senior living facilities, community organizations, and other stakeholders, particularly those who reside in EJ Communities, when developing
and implementing programs and improvements that
increase safety and encourage the use of active transportation modes. Identify and plan for improvements in collaboration with existing neighborhood residents
and businesses to address concerns about gentrification and displacement.

EJ-7.7 Equitable Paving. Continue to plan and distribute paving program resources based on equity, road
condition and safety metrics. Align paving programs
with other city infrastructure priorities including the West Oakland Specific Plan, the 2019 Oakland Bike
Plan, and the 2017 Oakland Walks Pedestrian Plan. In
addition, align the paving program with the GSI Plan
to ensure flood resilience and pollution prevention is
incorporated.

Parks, Programming, and Access
Additional policies will primarily be developed as part of the Phase 2 OSCAR update.

EJ-7.8 Park Distribution. As part of park planning efforts, prioritize development of new parks in EJ Communities that are underserved, as identified in Figure EJ-26.

EJ-7.9 Enhancing Access to Parks. Pursue strategies that increase community access to safe, high qualityopen space, parks and recreational facilities, including increasing access to pedestrian and bicycle amenities
around open space or recreational areas, expanding
joint use agreements with schools and educational
institutions; removing of physical barriers to access
(ex: fences); and providing a choice of legible routes to and from park areas through the installation of new
or improved multi-use shared paths, wayfinding, and
signage.

EJ-7.10 Parks Programming. Create high-quality inclusive programming that encourages the use of the park facilities by a variety of users including older adults, youth, and people with disabilities throughout the day and
evenings. Opportunities should be taken to incorporate
local heritage and culture.

EJ-7.11 Partnerships� Coordinate partnerships with Caltrans and the Port to activate and increase access to parks
and greenways with community programming and
events, as well as to explore the potential for new greenway resources, including ways to reconnect areas divided by I-980 and I-880.
7-14
Chapter 7 | Promoting Physical Activity
EJ-7.12 Park Safety. Use Crime Prevention Through Environmental design (CPTED) and other best practices for landscaping, lighting, and other components when designing open space and recreational spaces. Take into consideration locational indicators related to crime and perception of safety when prioritizing park safety improvements or programs.

EJ-7.13 Park Maintenance. When evaluating park projects and funds for maintenance—such as routine trash collection, cleaning of restroom facilities, provision of safety lighting, and other operational functions—include equity and presence in EJ Communities as a priority weighted factor.

EJ-7.14 Community Input. Provide ongoing opportunities for public engagement and input into the parks and recreation planning process, including priorities for amenities, facilities, programming, and improvements.

Greening and the Urban Forest
EJ-7.15 Urban Forest. Implement the Urban Forest Master Plan, a comprehensive, area-wide urban canopy and vegetation
plan that identifies locations where trees can be added and maintained, such as parks, streets, and rights-of-way.

Develop a plan to maintain and protect existing trees that provide shade, reduce urban heat island impacts, reduce flooding, reduce pollution, and reduce exposure to air pollution emissions in communities most affected by air pollution. Align tree canopy with climate resilience planning, including green stormwater infrastructure. Trees should be low on the allergenic scale, to serve EJ communities most impacted by air pollution and asthma. This includes partnering with local nonprofit groups, encouraging trees on private property, and working with the community
on tree maintenance and (as needed) removal. Prioritize tree canopy in EJ Communities with the least amount of
canopy, as shown in Figure EJ-27.

EJ-7.16 Urban Greening. Promote collaboration with community-based organizations in identifying, funding, developing, and maintaining specific green infrastructure projects in EJ Communities. Align urban greening efforts with flood and pollution prevention, prioritizing green stormwater infrastructure, especially in areas at risk of flooding. 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
8-1

ENGAGEMENT BEST PRACTICES
Achieving inclusive, authentic community engagement and closing equity gaps requires direct participation by impacted communities in the development and implementation of solutions and policy decisions that directly affect them. As shown in the image below, community engagement can be conducted on a spectrum that ranges from informing to power sharing. This spectrum can also be thought of as series of steps essential for building capacity for community collaboration and governance, and the City will assess and orient community engagement efforts that advance the level of public impact toward greater community ownership. When the City conducts community engagement, it will start by identifying community assets and build sustained partnerships to support cultural brokers and community-based organizations who already have in-depth knowledge and established relationships in the community.

When designing community engagement efforts, it is crucial to identify potential barriers and address them as part of Provide residents
with info and assist
in understanding
problems, alternatives,
and solutions
Obtain public
feedback on an
analysis, alternatives,
and decisions.

Work directly with
residents and
consistently consider
their concerns and
aspirations.

Partner with
residents in decisionmaking, including
in indentification of
solutions.

Residents are making
decisions and leading
solution-based efforts.

Figure EJ-29: Community Engagement Spectrum

8. Engaged
Communities
SB 1000 seeks to facilitate transparency and public engagement in local governments’ planning and decision-making processes, reduce harmful pollutants and the associated health risks in environmental justice communities, and promote equitable access to health-inducing benefits to address the inequitable distribution of pollution and associated health effects in low-income communities and communities of color. Meaningful participation of all people in decisions that affect their lives and communities is a critical component of environmental justice and a prerequisite for a sustainable and equitable city. As discussed in Chapter 2, the most socioeconomically disadvantaged and environmentally impacted communities in Oakland have been institutionally barred out of decision-making processes, and the result has been a pattern of underinvestment and disinvestment in these communities. Redressing inequities will require a sustained effort to rebuild trust, engage and empower historically underrepresented communities, and focus investments and actions in areas that are cumulatively most affected by environmental, social, and economic burdens.

INFORM CONSULT INVOLVE COLLABORATE EMPOWER
Credit: Graphic designed by Local Initatives Support Corporation (LISC), based on the framework developed by the Internationanl Association for Public Participation (IAP2).
8-2
Chapter 8 | Engaged Communities
implementation. The City will seek to remove technology, language, education, cultural, and other barriers that have limited participation of Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC); low-income; non-English speaking people; older adults; youth; people with disabilities; individuals across the sexual orientation/ gender identity spectrum; unhoused people; formerly incarcerated persons; and other historically marginalized groups. Strategies to address barriers include provision of food and childcare at meetings; transportation vouchers; compensation for time and effort; translation services and materials available in people’s desired language, including Braille or other languages accessible to people with disabilities or limited reading ability; venues and materials that are accommodating of work schedules and cultures; physically accessible venues; accessible marketing and informational materials with simple, relevant language; culturally relevant events and meeting formats; partnerships with trusted community organizations; expansion of internet access and coaching in digital skills; and establishment of pathways and resources for City staff follow-up.

8.1 ISSUES AND DISPARITIES

LINGUISTIC ISOLATION
One of Oakland’s strengths is its diversity: residents come from many different cultures and backgrounds. Nearly 27 percent were born in another country, and common languages spoken at home (by at least one percent of the city’s population, ages 5 and over) include Spanish, Vietnamese, Arabic, and Chinese (including Mandarin and Cantonese).1
However, many of these residents do not speak or read English as a first language or at all and experience barriers to civic engagement, health and safety as a result. The people and institutions that provide social services and medical care often fail to provide translation or interpretation for adults who are not able to speak or read English well, which means they may not get the health care and information they need. Linguistically isolated households may not hear or understand important information when there is an emergency like a fire, earthquake, or extreme heat waves. A household’s limited English proficiency can create even more barriers to social and civic inclusion. A household is considered linguistically isolated when all adults primarily speak a language other than English and have limited English proficiency. Figure EJ-30 shows areas of linguistic isolation, which are greatest in the Jack London Gateway, Chinatown, Lower Laurel/ Allendale, and Elmhurst Park tracts in addition to a large portion of south-central Oakland throughout Fruitvale and adjacent neighborhoods. The City will prioritize interpretation, translation, and connection to linguistically appropriate services in these communities. interpretation, translation, and connection to linguistically appropriate services in these communities. Policies in the Safety Element address linguistic barriers in community education, emergency preparedness, and emergency response. 1 U.S. Census Bureau, 2019American Community Surveys 1-Year Estimates Table B16002 [generated for Oakland city, California], https://data.census. gov/table?q=b16002+oakland,+ca&t=Language+Spoken+at+Home&tid= ACSDT1Y2019.B16002.

INTERNET ACCESS
Reliable access to the internet and telecommunications systems plays an increasingly important part in daily and civic life, helping people to work, learn, access services, participate in government, and stay connected to friends and family. Despite this importance, there are still households without access to the Internet or to computers at home. The impacts of digital isolation, especially for older adults, people with disabilities, and communities of color, include less access to resources and decreased ability to participate in civic political and non-political activities, which compounds other barriers to civic engagement and increases impacts of racial disparities in access to resources and opportunities. Figure EJ-31 shows that tracts with the greatest proportion of households without Internet access are located in the Lockwood/Coliseum neighborhood in East Oakland and neighborhoods in Jack London Square. According to the 2018 Equity Indicators Report, Black individuals were the most likely to not have high speed internet access at home (40.8 percent), followed by Hispanic/Latinx individuals (33.5 percent). White individuals were least likely to lack high speed Internet access at home (14.6 percent). Among Asian individuals, 25.2 percent did not have access to high-speed internet at home, slightly lower than the citywide percent (26.8 percent). Black residents were 2.79 times more likely than white residents to not have high speed Internet access at home. Additional strategies to foster digital equity may include leveraging City infrastructure to provide access to households in underserved areas and partnering with telecommunications and cable providers to offer discounted wireless and broadband plans to low-income customers.

Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
ersity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

OAKLAND

ALAMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BERKELEY

PIEDMONT

24.4% - 36.3%

16.8% - 24.3%

9.7% - 16.7%

4.5% - 9.6%
0% - 4.4%
No Data/Low Population Area
Base Map
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
Figure EJ-31: Internet Access at Home, 2019
2045 General Plan
| Environmental Justice Element
8-5
Building Resilience: Bridging the
Digital Divide
Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, essential activities like completing homework, finding a job, working from home,
starting a business, making appointments, and accessing government services increasingly take place online. Yet, according to 2019 American Community Surveys (ACS) fiveyear estimates, over 15,000 Oakland residents do not have a computer and 27,600 do not have internet at home. Inability to access internet or broadband excludes the marginalized from educational and economic benefits available to those who are connected; this disparity between the have and
have-nots is referred to as the “digital divide.” The City has developed a program for “digital inclusion” with the objective of achieving digital equity. By targeting four intervention points—advocacy and awareness, internet access, devices, and digital literacy (skills)—the program can positively impact education, healthcare, employment, and economic
development.

Funded through the federal CARES Act, the Oakland CARES Act: OAK WiFi Initiative provides free internet access for students, older adults, job seekers, small businesses, the underserved, and unconnected. Beginning in November 2020, the City has provided OAK WiFi live hotspots throughout the city, greatly expanding coverage from West Oakland through Downtown and along the International Boulevard corridor to the San Leandro border.

The #OaklandUndivided campaign is a partnership between the City Office of Education, Oakland Promise, Oakland Public Education Fund, Oakland Unified School District, and Tech Exchange that provides free school-loaned laptop computers, reliable internet connection, and ongoing tech support to public school students.

The City of Oakland also has also collaborated with the Greenlining Institute to address barriers to digital access through a year-long program called The Town Link, which builds digital inclusion and digital literacy through trainings and educational programs; builds awareness around free
and affordable broadband plans; provides computers and
tablets to residents that lack devices; and provides $100,000 in grants and technical assistance to 10 local organizations ($10,000 per organization) with the goal of increasing internet adoption and digital literacy in priority communities and neighborhoods.

In October 2021, the Greenlining Institute announced the grant recipients, which included the following 10 grassroots Oakland organizations: Allen Temple Baptist Church, El Timpano, Homies Empowerment, Oakland Workers Fund, Vietnamese American
Community Center of East Bay, Center for Empowering Refugees and Immigrants, Roots Community Health Center, The Unity Council, St. Mary’s Center, and Building Opportunities for Self-Sufficiency.

Sources: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2019; City of Oakland Digital Inclusion Report; City of Oakland “OAK WiFi – A Small Step to Closing the Digital Divide” website; #OaklandUndivided website; Greenlining website

ECONOMIC WELL-BEING
Economic well-being and employment represent a means by which people engage in community life. A state of economic well-being, where people can meet their basic needs, can also make it easier for people to participate in civic processes. Access to jobs and employment opportunities is an indicator of a place’s economic health, and many of Oakland’s smaller businesses rep- resent the beating heart of Oakland’s culture. As the city plans for employment of the future, the city is well-positioned to capture additional jobs in fast-growing Bay Area sectors related to soft- ware, social media, life sciences,- and the “green economy”, given its burgeoning labor force already employed in these industries as well as its central, transit-accessible location and abundant real estate redevelopment opportunities. By providing enough jobs and the means to live near those jobs, cities can significantly help foster community and support residents. Figure EJ-32 shows where high-wage jobs are located in Oakland by census block group, based on data from 2017 in the EPA Smart Location 3.0 database. Currently, areas between International Boulevard and I-580 throughout central and East Oakland have a lower per- centage of high-wage employment. Downtown Oakland and the industrial area of West Oakland have high proportions of highwage jobs, ranging between 73 and 90 percent of workers in the census block group.
8-5
Jc
Jc
Jc
Skyline Blvd
Ashby Ave
Doolittle Dr
Otis Dr
E 12th St
11th St
Fruitvale Ave
Claremont Ave
Edes Ave
Mandela Pkwy
98th Ave
High St
Island Dr
Tunnel Rd
San Leandro St
Main St
Dwight Way
Alcatraz Ave
Park Blvd
Piedmont Ave
Webster St
Golf Links Rd
Keller Ave
Oak St
Santa Clara Ave
Powell St
Posey Tube
35th Ave
Pacific Ave
Lincoln Ave
73rd Ave
Grand St
E 21st St
Harrison St
77th Ave
Versailles Ave
51st St
Bancroft Ave
Maitland Dr
82nd Ave
College Ave
Shattuck Ave
Sea View Pkwy
Park St
Broadway
Davis St
Adeline St
23rd Ave
E 14th St
14th St
Hegenberger Rd
Hollis St
versity Ave
Park St
Foothill Blvd
Claremont Ave
11th St
W Grand Ave
Market St
Broadway
Telegraph Ave
San Pablo Ave
14th St
Grand Ave
International Blvd
Bancroft Ave Foothill Blvd
Seminary Ave
Bancroft Ave
Dutton Ave
Macarthur Blvd
98th Ave
Doolittle Dr
35th Ave
14th Ave
Broadway
Park Blvd
E 20th St
E 12th St
MLK Jr Way
Oakland Ave
Harrison St
!"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAK LAN D

AL AME DA

SAN LE A ND RO

BE R KE LEY

PIE DMO NT

EME RY VI LL E

ORI NDA

MO RAGA
S a n F r a n c i s c o B a y
Oaklan d
In te rna tio nal
Airpo r t
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Chabot
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
SOURCE: US EPA, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Figure 5-1: High-Wage Employment, 2017 (EPA Smart Location Database 3.0) O a k l a n d G e n e r a l P l a n U p d a t e
Percent High-Wage Workers (by workplace)
Natural Jenks (See Appendix for definition)
0% - 14%
15% - 31%
32% - 45%
46% - 62%
63% - 90%
No Data/Low Population Area
Base Map
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
Figure EJ-32: High-Wage Jobs by Census Block Group, 2017 (EPA Smart Location Database 3.0) 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
8-7

TRACT NAME (WITH SCORE)
LINGUISTIC ISOLATION UNEMPLOYMENT INTERNET1
Chinatown (1.00) DeFremery/Oak Center (1.00) Webster (1.00) Lower San Antonio East (0.99) Acorn (0.99) Lockwood/Coliseum/ Rudsdale (0.99) Fruitvale/Hawthorne (0.98) Oakland Estuary (0.98) Chinatown (0.98) Eastlake (0.97) Fremont District (0.97) Fremont District (0.96) Jack London Gateway (0.96) Seminary (0.96) Arroyo Viejo (0.96) San Antonio/Sausal Creek (0.96) Eastmont Hills (0.96) Uptown/Downtown (0.95) Chinatown/Laney (0.95) Cox/Elmhurst (0.95) Fitchburg (0.95) Lower San Antonio West (0.94) Fruitvale (0.94) Stonehurst (0.93) Downtown (0.93) Lower San Antonio West (0.93) Castlemont (0.93) Oakland Estuary (0.92) Melrose (0.92) New Highland (0.91) Harrington/Fruitvale (0.91) Jack London Gateway (0.90) Elmhurst (0.91) Eastlake Clinton East (0.90) Mills College (0.90)
Note: Census tract names that appear in red are EJ Communities.

1. Includes only 11 tracts in the top decile due to ties. Next highest score for is 0.88.

Preserving existing Oakland businesses is a key component in an Table EJ-10: Top 10th Percentile Tracts by Indicator – Civic Engagement equitable economic future. Many of these businesses represent the “beating heart” of Oakland’s culture that strengthens and reflects the neighborhoods they are a part of. However, new economic growth can also mean displacement pressures, and the City must take action to protect these important community assets.

Entrepreneurship, specifically business ownership, is also an indicator of economic opportunity at both an individual and neighborhood level. Policies in the General Plan seek to overcome racial disparities in entrepreneurship opportunities. Additionally, through industry, government, and community partnerships, the City can help build a support system of education, training, and mentorship for industries of the future. These resources can support youth, women, people of color, and formerly incarcerated individuals with the skills and connections to new economic pathways.

The LUTE update will include additional strategies for employment related to business attraction, land use and infrastructure planning, revitalization of underperforming commercial corridors, and a more comprehensive equitable business development and support strategy. The EJ Element includes a focus on opportunities that promote equitable, inclusive, and sustainable growth and support for existing Oakland businesses, culture keepers, and entrepreneurs.
8-8
Chapter 8 | Engaged Communities

8.2 GOALS AND POLICIES
GOAL EJ-8 FOSTER MEANINGFUL CIVIC

ENGAGEMENT AND SUPPORT

COMMUNITY POWER- AND
CAPACITY-BUILDING.

EJ-8.1 Meaningful, Relevant Engagement. Design and
implement public engagement processes and events
that facilitate participation from low-income communities and communities of color; are driven by resident priorities, are easily accessible and understandable, and provide meaningful opportunities for participants to
influence outcomes.

EJ-8.2 Sustained Engagement. Develop and maintain communication channels that allow for ongoing dialogue with neighborhood groups and individual residents;
consult with AB 617 Steering Committees; track issues
and priorities at the neighborhood level; and foster
transparency and accountability. Use this information
to inform development of City programs, projects, and
services, sharing information across departments to
optimize the effectiveness of efforts, and share outcomes with groups.

Strategies to explore may include participatory budgeting, participatory action research, providing staff assistance to support community-driven planning
and policy efforts, or other approaches that emphasize
the active participation of community members most
affected by the questions at issue.

EJ-8.4 Community Partners. Partner with community-based organizations that have relationships, trust, and cultural competency with target communities as to support engagement for local initiatives and issues. Seek opportunities to support community partners in these
efforts such as by providing technical assistance, data, meeting spaces, funding and other support services as
feasible.

EJ-8.5 Community Capacity Building. Empower historically marginalized community members to participate in
local decision-making and engage meaningfully in
planning efforts, including through increased representation in employment and civic life; providing educational/training workshops and programs about civic involvement and processes, such as through fellowships and internships; providing organizational support to community-based organizations; and other capacity
building activities.

Develop flexible but sustained infrastructure for twoway information sharing between City and partner agencies and community members.

EJ-8.7 Interagency and Interdepartmental Collaboration.

Collaborate with and among public agencies and City
departments to leverage resources, avoid duplication of effort and enhance the effectiveness of public participation.

EJ-8.8 Youth-Centered Events. Seek out opportunities
for meaningfully and authentically involving young
people—particularly from EJ Communities—in the
planning and implementation of youth-centered
events that develop confidence and leadership skills.

EJ-8.9 Events for Older Adults. Provide greater opportunity for older adults (ages 65 and over), particularly those from EJ Communities, to be integrated into community events and intergenerational exchanges. Involve older adults in the planning and implementation of
events that are accessible to older adults.

EJ-8.10 Linguistically Isolated Communities. Continue to provide interpretation and translation services, assistance in accessing community services and programs, and
direct engagement with specific demographic groups.

Prioritize EJ Communities as identified in Figure EJ-30.

EJ-8.11 Digital Access. Ensure that all meetings, materials, and other engagement that use technology are easily
accessible by mobile devices. Invest in high-speed
internet in underserved low-income communities to
expand digital access and engagement opportunity.

Prioritize expanded internet in public facilities and EJ Communities as identified in Figure EJ-31.

EJ-8.12 Mental Health and Community Well-Being. Support programs and services that support the health and well
being of residents through community-based collaboration with a range of partners. 2045 General Plan
| Environmental Justice Element
8-9
GOAL EJ-9 EXPAND ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT, INCOME

EQUALITY, AND OPPORTUNITY
FOR ALL OAKLANDERS.

Economic Development and Opportunity
EJ-9.1 Investments for Inclusive, Equitable Growth. Make intentional investments to increase and diversify eco-
nomic growth and living wage jobs in an inclusive and
equitable manner that focuses on neighborhoods and
their unique needs, particularly in EJ Communities.

EJ-9.2 Small Business/Startup Support. Support the devel- opment and retention of small business startups and
new firms — particularly POC/women/veteran owned
businesses - by providing assistance with business
planning, expansion, and access to capital.

EJ-9.3 Business Incubators. Encourage occupancy of exist- ing buildings with incubators for specific industry/trade groups and for artisans and craftspeople, where small
startup businesses can share existing facilities and
equipment.

EJ-9.4 Public Procurement. Continue to use the public pro- curement process to stimulate small business devel-
opment, prioritize certified underrepresented business
enterprises, including businesses owned by people of
color, women, LGBTQIA+ community members, veter-
ans, and individuals with disabilities, and locally-owned businesses in particular, and coordinate with anchor
institutions such as universities, hospitals, public agen- cies, and school districts to help launch new products
and services.

EJ-9.5 Local Business Needs Assessment. Continually assess business workforce needs and other requirements
and use the findings to assist in developing a qualified workforce that meets the demands of established and
emerging business and smaller, value-added busi-
nesses such as artisan foods, digital media, recording
and sound technologies, smart engineered, cooling
technologies, green industries (such as urban agri-
culture, urban forestry, riparian restoration, infrastruc- ture resilience, and others and green building product
development.

Workforce Development and Training
EJ-9.6 Labor Force Skills Development. The City shall partner with educational institutions, employers, and commu-
nity-based organizations to develop a local labor force with skills to meet the needs of the area’s businesses
and industries. Continue and expand local-hire initia-
tives, just transition and clean energy training, appren- ticeships, and partnerships with employers.

EJ-9.7 Barriers to Workforce Participation. The City shall col- laborate with regional and local partners to identify and address barriers to workforce participation and access
to training. Solutions to explore may include: • Two-generation programs that link education, job training, and career-building for low-income
parents with supports for their children;
• Bridge programs that prepare people with low
academic skills for further education and training;
and
• Transitional jobs programs that provide short-term
subsidized employment or training for formerly
incarcerated individuals.

EJ-9.8 Entrepreneurship and Social Enterprise Training.

Support education and training in entrepreneurship
and social enterprise as an alternative pathway to tra- ditional jobs.
8-10
Chapter 8 | Engaged Communities
This page intentionally left blank.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
9-1
GOAL EJ-10 PRIORITIZE IMPROVEMENTS

AND PROGRAMS THAT MEET
THE NEEDS OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COMMUNITIES.

EJ-10.1 Prioritizing EJ Communities. Implement topic-specific actions as shown in the Goals, Policies, and Actions table, prioritizing improvements,
programs, investments, and partnerships in
Environmental Justice Communities, as shown in
Figure EJ-7. Implementation could include technical assistance, support with grant applications seeking federal, state and philanthropic funding, access to data sources, and other resources.

Spend or distribute resources to EJ communities
in ways that meet the existing community’s priority needs and improve resident’s quality of life.

EJ-10.2 Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation
Plan. To increase transparency and accountability, adopt an implementation monitoring and evaluation plan with achievable milestones,
periodic evaluation, and a reporting mechanism,
such as an online portal or newsletter to track
outcomes and keep residents informed.

9. Implementation
Actions and
Programs

9.1 PRIORITIZING IMPROVEMENTS

AND PROGRAMS THAT MEET THE

NEEDS OF EJ COMMUNITIES
SB 1000 requires that Cities prioritize programs and public and private investment in EJ Communities to meet identified community needs. Goals and policies related to monitoring and evaluation will also serve as a tool to track outcomes in EJ communities as they are implemented over time.

The following table includes specific actions that address the unique needs of EJ Communities as identified in the prior sections.

Each of the actions includes a “Responsibility” field, which indicates departments or agencies that will lead and/or coordinate on implementing the action, as well as a “Timeframe” field, which indicates approximately how long it could take to complete the action. The timeframes are defined as follows:
• Short: 0-5 years
• Medium: 5-10 years
• Long: 10+ years
• Ongoing: Efforts currently underway that the City will continue to implement

POLICY ACTION
GOAL EJ-1: REDUCE POLLUTION, MITIGATE THE IMPACTS OF POLLUTION ON EXISTING SENSITIVE LAND USES, AND ELIMINATE ASSOCIATED PUBLIC HEALTH DISPARITIES.

EJ-1.1 Toxic Air Contaminants. Reduce the public’s exposure to toxic air contaminants through appropriate land use and transportation strategies, identified through the LUTE update in Phase 2 of the GPU process, particularly in Environmental Justice Communities and other areas most burdened by air pollution, as identified in Figure EJ-12 EJ-A.1. Amend the City’s Zoning code to include the following changes:
• Allow greater residential density in less-polluted areas, including existing single-family residential neighborhoods. • Condition the permitting of heavy industrial uses within six hundred (600) feet or whatever minimum is required by State Law of a zone that permits residential activities.
• Establish special permit criteria for truck-intensive industrial activities located within five hundred (600) feet or whatever minimum is required by State Law of any zone that permits residential activities.
• Establish special performance standards and standard conditions of approval for Truck-Intensive Industrial Activities located within six hundred (600) feet or whatever minimum is required by State Law of any zone that permits residential activities. • Amend the permit procedures for nonconforming Truck-Intensive Industrial Activities • Condition the permitting of commercial kitchen operations designed for online ordering and food delivery.
• Modify the S-19 Health and Safety Protection Combining Zone to prohibit use of diesel generators as the primary source of power within six hundred (600) feet or whatever minimum is required by State Law from any Residential, Open Space, or Institutional Zone boundary.

Responsibility: Planning & Building
Timeframe: Short-term
EJ-A.2. Adopt more stringent air quality construction and operations requirements for development near or within industrially zoned land as part of standard conditions of approval.

Responsibility: Planning & Building
Timeframe: Medium
EJ-A.3. Work with BAAQMD and other partners in the region to explore creation of a grant program for installation and maintenance of air filtration devices/systems in existing buildings. Develop a list of priority buildings near heavy industrial uses, including schools, nursing homes, and other sensitive uses within EJ Communities, AB617 designated communities, and areas most affected by air quality issues, shown in Figure EJ-12.

Responsibility: Planning & Building, Office of Sustainability and Resilience Division, City Administrator’s Office
Timeframe: Medium
EJ-1.2 Truck Emissions and Pollution Exposure. Minimize air pollution and exposure of sensitive uses to truck pollution, particularly in EJ Communities and other areas most burdened by air pollution, while recognizing the Port of Oakland’s role as the highest-volume shipping port in Northern California.

EJ-1.3 Industrial Uses Near Sensitive Land Uses. Ensure that heavy industrial uses are adequately buffered from residential areas, schools, and other sensitive land uses. In new developments, require adequate mitigation of air contaminant exposure and vegetative barriers near large stationary and mobile sources of air pollution. Prioritize nature-based mitigation solutions such as vegetative barriers wherever feasible, and align with other greening opportunities such as canopy need, green stormwater infrastructure, and high heat areas to plan for multiple benefits.

EJ-1.4 Performance Standards. Develop zoning standards applicable to new industrial and commercial developments in order to minimize or avoid the potential for adverse effects related to air quality, noise, or safety on adjacent existing residential uses and Environmental Justice Communities, including the possibility of creating an overlay that focuses on air quality issues.

EJ-1.6 Enhanced Enforcement. Prioritize code enforcement to address illegal land uses and activities that cause pollution and are hazardous to health in EJ Communities.

EJ-1.7 Truck-Related Impacts. For new warehouses and truck-related businesses, reduce impacts from truck loading and delivery including noise/vibration, odors, air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions.

EJ-1.8 Air Filtration. Consistent with the State’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards for air filtration in effect as of January 1, 2023, require newly constructed buildings of four or more habitable floors to include air filtration systems equal to or greater than Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) 16 (ASHRAE Standard 52.2), or a particle size efficiency rating equal to or greater than 50 percent in the 0.3-1.0 μm micrometer range and equal to or greater than 85 percent in the 1.0-3.0 μm micrometer range (AHRI Standard 680).

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 9-2
Chapter 9 | Implementation Actions and Programs

POLICY ACTION
EJ-1.9 Electric Vehicle Charging. Require industrial and warehouse facilities and truck-attracting businesses to provide electrical connections for electric trucks and transport refrigeration units in support of CARB regulations.

EJ-A.4. In partnership with representative groups from EJ Communities, develop a Carbon Sequestration Incubator in Oakland to incubate and develop green jobs in urban agriculture, urban forestry, green stormwater infrastructure maintenance and management, aquatic and riparian restoration, and/or other forms of carbon removal. Establish a program for both voluntary and compliance GHG mitigation fees to be invested locally and fund the Incubator.

Responsibility: Public Works, Parks Recreation, and Youth Services Department, Office of Sustainability and Resilience Division, City Administrator’s Office, Economic & Workforce Development Department
Timeframe: Medium
EJ-A.5. As part of a feasibility study implement an amortization pilot in AB617 areas, which allows the City to identify and prioritize nonconforming land uses (which could include existing polluting industries, truck-intensive uses, autobody uses, recycling uses, etc) to phase out over time prioritizing areas within 1,000 feet of primarily residential impacted areas.

The study/pilot should include an implementation plan that includes with criteria to determine which industries to amortize. Criteria should include total cost of land and improvements; cost of moving and reestablishing the use elsewhere in the city; whether the use is significantly non-conforming; compatibility with existing land use patterns and densities; and possible threat to public health, safety, or welfare.

Responsibility: Planning & Building (in coordination with BAAQMD) Timeframe: Medium
EJ-A.6. Prioritize and implement vegetative buffer projects, including those between industrial land and sensitive land uses, and along heavy-duty truck/goods movement corridors and freeways as identified in specific plans and community plans, including EONI and WOCAP, and the City’s Priority Conservation Area/Sustainable Communities Plan (PCA).

Responsibility: Planning & Building
Timeframe: Short
EJ-A.7. As part of the LUTE update in Phase 2, evaluate residential/industrial conflicts, especially in areas such as West and East Oakland, and evaluate measures, including limiting additional residential development in high pollution areas and ensuring adequate buffering between industrial and residential land uses through land use designations.

Responsibility: Planning & Building
Timeframe: Short
EJ-1.10 Reduce Emissions from Port Operation. Support Port of Oakland’s efforts reduce emissions as part of operation and compliance with CARB regulations. This could include:
• Support of zero-emission drayage truck operations through appropriate local ordinance amendments, including allowable weight limits for single-axle, zero-emission trucks on local streets, and developing an investment plan for needed upgrades. • Provision of data or staff time to study of the effects on truck flow and congestion due to increasing visits from larger container ships, the feasibility of an off-terminal container yard that utilizes zero-emission trucks to move containers to and from the marine terminals, and the potential efficiency gains from increasing the number of trucks hauling loaded containers on each leg of a roundtrip to the Port.

EJ-1.11 Building Electrification. Continue to enforce compliance with Oakland’s Building Electrification Ordinance, which requires new and newly renovated buildings to be natural gas-free and support the transition of existing buildings to natural gas alternatives in order to improve safety and air quality and reduce health risks. This could include:
• Ensuring that all new developments reduce on-site natural gas combustion through electrification of heating and cooking technologies.

EJ-1.12 Construction Site Impacts. Through standard conditions of project approval, code enforcement, and other regulatory mechanisms, require new development to minimize disturbances of natural water bodies and natural drainage systems caused during construction and to implement measures to protect areas from road dust, erosion, and sediment loss.

EJ-1.13 Emissions from Construction Activities. Require projects to implement construction air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions controls and applicable mitigation strategies for all construction sites to the maximum extent feasible. Refer to Best Construction Practices and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) recommended by BAAQMD.

EJ-1.14 Reduced Exposure to Air Pollution for Project Occupants. Incorporate measures to improve indoor air quality and reduce exposure to air pollution in new development projects.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
9-3

POLICY ACTION
EJ-1.15 Sensitive Uses. Coordinate with BAAQMD and community partners in evaluating human exposure to toxic air contaminants, particularly in Environmental Justice Communities, and impose conditions as appropriate on projects to protect public health and safety beyond those in the City’s 2020 standard conditions of approval.

EJ-A.8. As part of the LUTE update in Phase 2, explore modifications to truck routes and truck management in partnership with the Port of Oakland and WOIEP and Communities for a Better Environment. The West Oakland Truck Management Plan (WOTMP), approved by the City and Port of Oakland in 2019, should be used as the framework to explore modifications to truck routes.

Responsibility: OakDOT, Planning & Building
Timeframe: Short
EJ-A.9. Designate an adequate system of roads connecting port terminals, warehouses, freeways and regional arterials, and other important truck destinations that minimizes impacts to sensitive uses. This system should rely upon arterial streets away from residential neighborhoods.

Responsibility: OakDOT, Planning & Building
Timeframe: Short
EJ-A.10. Adopt requirements that new commercial and employment uses that generate truck traffic are located along existing truck routes to the extent feasible and work with project proponents to develop preferred truck routing that avoids sensitive land uses, such as schools, hospitals, elder and childcare facilities, and residences wherever feasible Responsibility: OakDOT, Planning & Building
Timeframe: Short
EJ-A.11. Work with OakDOT and Oakland Sustainability program to develop a zero emission Medium Heavy Duty Fleets Vehicle Charging Overlay Zone.

Responsibility: Oakland Planning and Building
Timeframe: Short (2025, as indicated in the State’s Zero Emissions Vehicle Action Plan) EJ-A.12. Work with Caltrans and other regional/state/federal agencies to promote the greening of Oakland’s primary goods-movement freeways including equipping the freeways with ZEV truck infrastructure, developing strategic green canopies or lids, as well as installing vegetative buffers alongside freeway corridors.

Responsibility: Oakland Planning and Building, OakDOT
Timeframe: Medium
EJ-1.16 Community Air Protection. On an ongoing basis, support BAAQMD, community members, businesses, and other stakeholders in developing and implementing Community Air Monitoring Plans, Community Emissions Reduction Plans, and other air pollution control initiatives pursuant to AB 617. Supportive City actions may include:
• Participation on steering committees and technical advisory committees. • Co-investments that leverage additional funding for actions in EJ Communities. • Utilization of community-collected air quality data in policy development and evaluation. • Co-development of a public information campaign targeting residents living 1,000 feet of freeways that focuses on education about air pollution mitigation measures. • Contracts with community partners and other air pollution monitoring organizations to obtain more granular pollution data.

EJ-1.17 Data-Informed Efforts. Collaborate with BAAQMD, community organizations, and other stakeholders, to use air quality monitoring data to inform area-specific improvement actions outside of AB 617-related efforts. Such actions may include:
• Prioritizing areas for capital investments with co-benefits for air quality, such as the planting of trees, green stormwater infrastructure for flood management, and installation of EV charging infrastructure. Ideally, to maximize resiliency co-benefits will address multiple climate and environmental hazards. • Integrating air quality improvement actions into planning efforts, such as new specific plans, master plans, or area plans that will guide development in impacted areas. • Limiting the establishment of new sources of air pollutants in areas with elevated levels of pollutant concentrations unless appropriate mitigation is implemented. • Obtaining and using hyperlocal data along with community ground-truthing to more accurately inform development of air quality improvement strategies that are most effective and responsive to the needs of EJ Communities. This data will be accessible for residents to utilize. • Seeking opportunities to enhance existing air monitoring efforts, such as by working with BAAQMD and helping to expand the current monitoring network, especially where sensitive uses are within close proximity (within 500 feet) of pollution sources. • Partnering with industrial and warehouse facility owners, community-based environmental and energy justice organizations to install rooftop solar PV systems to power EV charging stations.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 9-4
Chapter 9 | Implementation Actions and Programs

POLICY ACTION
EJ-1.18 Impact Assessment and Mitigation. Continue to use BAAQMD modeling tools and guidance documents as appropriate to identify and mitigate air quality impacts from proposed development projects.

EJ-A.13. Coordinate with public agencies in the Bay Area region to catalyze the development and deployment of zero emission medium- and heavy-duty fleets and support development of shared charging hubs and resources. Support advocacy efforts for significant additional funding for retrofitting or replacing diesel trucks with zero-emission EV trucks, prioritizing a just transition approach by including economic support for independent truckers to compensate for lost wages while waiting for retrofitted or new EV trucks.

Responsibility: Office of Sustainability and Resilience Division, OakDOT, City Administrator’s Office, Planning & Building Timeframe: Ongoing
EJ-A.14. Work with the Port of Oakland to establish permanent locations for parking and staging of Port-related trucks and cargo equipment, i.e. tractors, chassis, and containers.

Such facilities will provide long-term leases to parking operators and truck owner-operators at competitive rates. Such facilities will be at the City or Port logistics center or otherwise not adjacent to Oakland residents who are disproportionately impacted by poor air quality.

Responsibility: City Administrator’s Office, Planning & Building, OakDOT Timeframe: Medium
EJ-1.19 Regional Coordination. Support air quality planning efforts led by other local, regional, and State agencies while simultaneously leveraging City authority and resources to focus on reducing air pollution burden in EJ Communities.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
9-5

POLICY ACTION
GOAL EJ-2: PROTECT OAKLAND WATER SUPPLIES FROM CONTAMINATION.

EJ-2.1 Clean Water Programs. In partnership with Oakland community organizations, promote environmental stewardship and pollution prevention activities with outreach, assistance and incentives for residents and businesses, particularly in EJ Communities and areas with impaired surface and groundwater, as identified in Figure EJ-13.

EJ-A.15. Continue to participate in the Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program to protect creeks, wetlands, and the San Francisco Bay. Prioritize creek restoration projects in Environmental Justice Communities with the lowest Tree Canopy and Park Access scores.

Responsibility: Public Works, Sustainability and Resilience Division, City Administrator’s Office Timeframe: Ongoing
EJ-A.16. Fund and implement a green infrastructure program for the installation and maintenance of projects and existing civic resources such as the parks system and public spaces, to improve stormwater management, support biodiversity, reduce air pollution exposure, improve water quality, and increase access to natural spaces, including trees. Prioritize investment in frontline communities, and particularly in residential neighborhoods dominated by concrete and asphalt with limited green space and elevated air pollution, in Priority Conservation Areas, and in areas where green infrastructure, including trees and other types of vegetated buffers, can effectively address stormwater management issues and reduce air pollution exposure among sensitive populations.
• Consider and give priority to specific projects identified in the West Oakland Specific Plan, EONI and other community and specific plans. Continue to work with community groups throughout the implementation process and to develop & implement community-based stewardship models.
• Utilize the Priority Conservation Areas “Equity Checklist” Responsibility: Public Works, Sustainability and Resilience Division, City Administrator’s Office Timeframe: Medium
EJ-2.2 Water Quality Hazard Prevention. Remediate and clean up sites with known or potential contamination, as mapped in Figure EJ-14 or identified on GeoTracker, that impact or potentially impact water quality. Continue to support the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board and California Department of Toxic Substances Control to assess cleanup sites, leaking underground storage tanks, and gasoline stations in EJ Communities with high water contamination threat.

EJ-2.3 Protect and Restore Creeks and Wetlands. Protect, enhance, and restore riparian corridors and wetlands, increasing biodiversity as well as increasing access for residents to existing creeks and wetlands. Collaborate with environmental justice organizations and EJ community residents to co-develop environmental stewardship and pollution prevention programs with outreach, assistance, and incentives for residents and businesses.

EJ-2.4 Stormwater Management. Reduce stormwater runoff by implementing the Green Stormwater Infrastructure Plan to help conserve water, protect water bodies, comply with stormwater protection regulations, and mitigate localized flood risk from large storm events. Review opportunities for greening, additional open space, and safe Non-Motorized Transportation (NMT) infrastructure and prioritize improvements, workforce development, programs, investments, and partnerships in Environmental Justice Communities.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 9-6
Chapter 9 | Implementation Actions and Programs

POLICY ACTION
GOAL EJ-3: PREVENT, REDUCE AND CLEAN UP ILLEGAL DUMPING.

EJ-3.1 Design for Graffiti Reduction. Establish guidelines based on Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) standards and other best practices that decrease opportunity for graffiti.

EJ-A.17. In partnership with school districts, community college networks, local vocational programs, labor unions, Community Based Organizations, businesses, in the recycling and waste diversion sector, and unhoused residents who depend on recycling for their survival, co-create a community reuse and repair program to increase waste diversion, reduce material consumption, and create green jobs. Target this program for residents of neighborhoods with the highest unemployment rates.

Responsibility: Public Works
Timeframe: Medium
EJ-3.2 Blight Control and Prevention. Control and mitigate impacts of blight-producing industrial and commercial activities with a high tendency of attracting trash and litter, such as recyclers, fast food restaurants, warehouses and industrial sites, and other businesses that may attract blight.

Additionally, vacant lots should be routinely maintained by property owners and kept clean.

EJ-3.3 Proactive Illegal Dumping Cleanup. Support the expansion of proactive cleanup crews that target illegal dumping “hot spot” areas first in EJ Communities, as identified in Figure EJ-15.

EJ-3.4 Illegal Dumping Enforcement. Continue to enforce dumping as an illegal activity, including increased monitoring of hot spots on weekends and before/after business hours, ticketing, and expansion of Environmental Enforcement Officers (EEO). Every two years, as part of the budget process, assess enforcement efforts to ensure discriminatory patterns do not emerge.

EJ-3.5 Community Education on Illegal Dumping. Expand community campaigns in EJ Communities in partnership with community members to prevent dumping, inform neighbors about affordable services and ways to report illegal dumping, and support youth leadership. Develop campaign outreach materials in a variety of languages. Examples include education about Bulky Block parties and engagement of the Oaktown PROUD Student Ambassadors.

GOAL EJ-4: COORDINATE RESOURCES TO IMPROVE HOUSING QUALITY AND HABITABILITY.

EJ-4.1 Resource Optimization. Coordinate across City departments and with relevant partner agencies including Oakland Housing Authority, EBMUD, BAAQMD, ABAG and others, to optimize the use of grant monies, incentives, financial resources, staffing, investments, and programs in addressing displacement and tenant protections; sanitary housing and maintenance issues; environmental hazards in homes and neighborhoods; and other concerns related to stable, safe, and sanitary housing.

EJ-A.18. As part of the LUTE update in Phase 2, explore incentives and strategies to promote health-promoting features in housing projects that are built in EJ Communities.

Health-promoting features may included, but are not limited to, enhanced filtration and ventilation systems; low-emitting and environmentally responsible materials; bicycle storage facilities; access to open spaces; and enhanced protection from external pollution sources and indoor air contaminants.

Responsibility: Planning & Building, Oakland Housing and Community Development Timeframe: Short
Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
9-7

POLICY ACTION
EJ-4.2 Supplemental Funding Sources for Building Rehabilitation. Place a high priority on identifying supplemental funding sources/resources for retrofit, rehabilitation, and upgrade projects that address health and safety in housing occupied by low-income renters and homeowners, including air quality improvements. Supplemental funding sources could include loans and grants available from the California Strategic Growth Council, CalEPA, CARB, and other entities.

EJ-A.19. Compile a database of all lead hazards identified within the City of Oakland and maintain comprehensive and up-to-date public records on lead hazards and rehabilitation and remediation efforts. Enter every dwelling or other facility where habitability issues are found into an Equitable Lead Hazard Abatement Program database. Once ready, the database will be publicly accessible on the city’s website.

Responsibility: Oakland Department of Housing and Community Development, Residential Lending Division; Sustainability and Resilience Division, City Administrator’s Office
Timeframe: Medium
EJ-A.20. Increase Renovation, Repair, and Painting training and certification opportunities for existing small local businesses through targeted outreach to businesses registered to do business in Oakland, particularly those owned by people of color.

Responsibility: Economic and Workforce Development Department Timeframe: Ongoing
EJ-4.3 Healthy Homes Inspections. As part of the Joint Lead Hazard Abatement Program in partnership with ACPHD, improve ongoing ability to screen for and eliminate lead hazards through proactive approaches, including proactive inspections of rental property dwellings and lead-safe certification requirements for childcare facilities and schools. Prioritize abatement, testing, outreach, and education activities in high-risk areas and serving the populations most likely to live in high-risk dwellings in EJ Communities, as identified in Figure EJ-18. See also Action 2.1.2 in the 2023-2031 Housing Element.

EJ-4.4 Healthy Homes Awareness. Continue to work with Oakland HCD, Alameda Department of Public Health, and community organizations to promote safe and sanitary housing in EJ Communities in Figure EJ-17 by providing owners and occupants with culturally appropriate and linguistically accessible information and resources about home health, including lead/Lead Safe Home Program grants, indoor air pollutants, asthma triggers, hazard zones, and other information. Efforts may include the development and dissemination of healthy home checklists, conducting trainings, workshops, or audits.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 9-8
Chapter 9 | Implementation Actions and Programs

POLICY ACTION
GOAL EJ-5: SUPPORT A FOOD SYSTEM THAT PROVIDES NUTRITIOUS, AFFORDABLE, CULTURALLY RELEVANT, AND AFFORDABLE FOOD TO ALL OAKLANDERS.

EJ-5.1 New Healthy Food Grocers. Leverage tax and fee deferral/reduction, California Food Financing Initiative funding, and other economic development grant monies to attract new healthy food grocers and co-ops and help them establish and/or make necessary improvements. As shown in Figure EJ-19, allow small grocery stores within residential areas. As a priority, efforts should be focused in areas underserved by healthy food retail with good access to the transportation network, where grocery stores and food co-ops are most economically viable.

EJ-A.21. Promote availability of permits – such as for Cottage Food Operations or Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operation (MEHKO) – that allow for preparation, cooking and serving food to consumers on the same day from a private residence, either through delivery, take-out, or dine-in the home. Focus outreach and promotional efforts in EJ Communities where home-based operations or other innovations can serve as both a source of healthy food and an opportunity for entrepreneurship. Reduce permit fee for income-qualified individuals.

Responsibility: Planning & Building
Timeframe: Medium
EJ-A.22. In underserved areas shown on Figure EJ-19 for existing where convenience stores and other retail outlets, develop and implement a program to incentivize and assist business owners to stock fresh and healthy food at affordable prices. Prioritize local neighborhood resident-owned businesses, such as corner stores and liquor stores.

Program elements could include:
• Funding for refrigeration equipment;
• Business counseling and technical assistance;
• Nutritional education; and
• Store design support.

Responsibility: Economic and Workforce Development, Planning & Building Timeframe: Medium
EJ-A.23. As part of the LUTE update in Phase 2, explore potential locations and other strategies, such as incentives, zoning overlays, land use changes, density or intensity bonuses, or others, for prioritization of new full-service grocery stores over a certain square footage.

Prioritize grocery store development in EJ Communities with the lowest food access, so that more neighborhoods are within walking distance of a grocery store, and incentivize community-led, neighborhood resident-owned and coopera- tively-owned full-service grocery stores that also provide culturallly appropriate foods for BIPOC communities.

Responsibility: Planning & Building
Timeframe: Short
EJ-A.24. Community Gardens Initiative. Consider community gardens an integral part of the city’s park, recreation, and open space system. Acquire land for public community gardens, leveraging the City’s park impact fee, along with the Parks & Recreation Fund and grant money from sources such as Proposition 84 (which funded the City Slickers Community Garden). Collaborate with EJ Community groups, schools, food justice and urban farming organizations to collaboratively steward and develop standards for community gardens as part of the OSCAR Element update in Phase 2.

Responsibility: Planning & Building, Public Works
Timeframe: Short
EJ-5.2 Community Gardens Program. Partner with nonprofits, especially indigenous groups, to expand the City’s Community Gardens Program in areas with low food access, with policies to address maintenance and permit Indigenous community harvesting/ foraging of parks. The program should include garden spaces, community-maintained edible landscapes, and amenities in public spaces.

EJ-5.3 Community and Home Gardening. Support community and home gardening efforts and – particularly in EJ Communities underserved by healthy food retail – by providing financial incentives such as land transfers and technical assistance in the form of online and library resources and workshops on gardening basics and cooking easy, healthy meals with fresh produce. Work with community groups to increase the prevalence of accessible, local gardens. Other incentives may include:
• Explore the expansion of outright permitting of community gardens in areas where a Conditional Use Permit is currently required, particularly in the Broadway Valdez District (D-BV) and Central Estuary (D-CE) zones.
• Incentivize urban agriculture in urbanized areas by offering reduced property tax assessments or Oakland vacancy tax in exchange for converting vacant or unimproved property to an agricultural use through a contract agreement for an initial period of five years.

EJ-5.4 Urban Agriculture in New Development. Promote rooftop gardens, edible gardens, and other sustainable agricultural landscaping alternatives within multi-unit, commercial, and industrial developments.
• Target creation of rooftop gardens highly visible from neighboring properties. • Permit indoor “vertical food farms” in appropriate areas in the City. • Reduce permit fees for large-scale farming of edible products.

EJ-5.5 Entrepreneurship and Food Innovation. Actively support food innovations such as street (sidewalk) vending, food cooperatives, pop-up markets and similar innovations that do not fit into the traditional brick-and-mortar storefront, farmers market, or community garden models. Promote indoor farming of fruits and vegetables in industrial zones. Support individual residents in smallscale agriculture and distribution, through education and financial assistance.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
9-9

POLICY ACTION
EJ-5.6 Food Assistance Programs. Work to increase community awareness of and participation in existing federal food assistance programs, such as the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) nutrition program and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Approaches can include:
• Providing information in City newsletters, on the City’s website, and at community centers and other City facilities.
• Explaining to merchants the incentive to registering to accept WIC and SNAP payments (immediate expansion of market of potential customers). • Supporting additional programs for local grocers to supplement CalFresh benefits with cash match incentives, healthy food incentives, or fruit and vegetable supplemental benefits. Some program examples include Market Match, Fresh Creds, and SPUR’s Double Up Food Bucks program. • Partnering with community organizations that support low-income community members who are not eligible for food assistance through identification of funding or grants.

EJ-A.25. Healthy Community Markets Program—utilize grants, funding, etc. to promote the creation of local businesses that sell produce in areas where healthy food access is limited including food innovations such as street (sidewalk) vending, food cooperatives, pop-up markets and similar innovations that do not fit into the traditional brick-andmortar storefront, or community garden models. Increase the size, frequency, and number of farmers markets.

Responsibility: Economic and Workforce Development
Timeframe: Long
EJ-5.7 Food Security Resources & Partnerships. Coordinate with Citywide community-serving organizations, the Oakland Unified School District, Alameda County, and other public agencies to ensure that residents and families have access to federal, state, and local food programs, as well as emergency food assistance during public health and other crises. For undocumented food insecure residents, that do not qualify for public food assistance, work with partner agencies and organizations to provide food and benefits to all residents, regardless of legal status. During emergencies, support the Alameda County Community Foodbank to expand hours and keep distribution centers operational.

EJ-5.8 Education and Awareness. In partnership with local agencies and community organizations, develop curriculum and marketing materials encouraging the growth and consumption of healthy food. Provide these to the Oakland Unified School District and community organizations focused on food justice and nutritional education. Support community organizations with financial incentives such as land transfers or discounted water rates and technical assistance in the form of online and library resources and workshops on gardening basics and cooking easy, healthy meals with fresh produce.

EJ-5.9 Food Recovery Program. Support existing capacity of organizations within Oakland’s food system, and develop new capacity, to recover edible food that is otherwise wasted, and distribute that food for human consumption. This includes:
• Exploring potential for agroforestry, where trees, shrubs, and agricultural crops are interspersed, in community gardens or parks, to create and recover other food sources • Engaging with stakeholders including local food donation, recovery, and collection organizations to build robust collection and food storage capacity, and reliable distribution systems to the neediest populations.
• Engaging with food generators such as supermarkets, wholesale distributors, large hotels, and institutions, to donate surplus edible food that food recovery partners want or will accept, and ensuring food generators comply with the Edible Food Recovery requirements of SB 1383. • Informing edible surplus food generators about strategies, existing programs, and best practices for preventing the waste of surplus food. • Expanding community education efforts and marketing of existing recovery programs, such as Oakland Recycles.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 9-10
Chapter 9 | Implementation Actions and Programs

POLICY ACTION
GOAL EJ-6: SUPPORT A NETWORK OF WELL-MAINTAINED COMMUNITY FACILITIES THAT ARE EASILY ACCESSIBLE, CULTURALLY SUPPORTIVE, AND RESPONSIVE TO COMMUNITY NEEDS.

EJ-6.1 Public Facilities Distribution. Ensure equitable distribution of beneficial public safety, civic, and cultural facilities. Prioritize new facilities, resilience hubs, and creative spaces in traditionally underserved areas. Locations for these public facilities should be identified in collaboration with local schools and neighborhood groups.

EJ-A.26. As part of the update of the LUTE and OSCAR Elements, and the creation of a new Infrastructure and Facilities Element, include policies that address equitable distribution and maintenance of public facilities in EJ Communities.

Responsibility: Planning & Building, Public Works
Timeframe: Short
EJ-A.27. As part of the LUTE update in Phase 2, explore land use changes that are supportive of cultural organization operation in partnership with community groups, small business associations, and the Cultural Affairs office.

Responsibility: Planning & Building, Economic and Workforce Development Timeframe: Short
EJ-6.2 Childcare Facilities. As part of long-range planning efforts, ensure appropriate land use designations, zoning, and incentives to facilitate additional affordable and high-quality childcare facilities in areas without sufficient access, as shown in Figure EJ-20.

EJ-6.3 Healthcare Facilities. As part of long-range planning efforts, ensure appropriate land use designations and zoning to facilitate additional healthcare facilities in areas without sufficient access, as shown in Figure EJ-21.

EJ-6.4 Facilities Maintenance. Maintain and improve existing civic and public facilities to ensure safer, more attractive facilities that are responsive to community needs. Prioritize equitable capital improvements and maintenance projects, and investments in public and community-driven social infrastructure in EJ Communities.

EJ-6.5 Public Service Coordination. Maintain interagency coordination agreements with neighboring jurisdictions and partner agencies that provide urban public facilities and services within the City/ County to ensure effective and efficient service delivery. Ensure strong coordination between agencies during climate emergencies, with in-language and culturally appropriate outreach targeted to the most vulnerable communities.

EJ-6.6 Public Restroom Facilities. Distribute restrooms equitably across the city to support all residents, including Oakland’s unhoused population. Access to safe, clean sanitation is globally recognized as essential for public health. Public toilets should be accessible to all Oaklanders, without social or physical barriers preventing usage. A public toilet facility’s design and upkeep should offer privacy and safety, ensure cleanliness, provide required sanitation-related resources, and be gender equitable
Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
9-11

POLICY ACTION
GOAL EJ-7: CREATE ENVIRONMENTS THAT SUPPORT PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, RECREATION, AND HEALTHY LIFESTYLES THROUGH SAFE AND COMFORTABLE WALKABLE, BIKEABLE NEIGHBORHOODS, WITH ACCESS TO GREEN SPACE, TREES, PATHS, AND PARKS.

EJ-7.1 Complete Neighborhoods. Promote “complete neighborhoods”— where residents have safe and convenient access to goods and services on a daily or regular basis—that address unique neighborhood needs, and support physical activity, including walking, bicycling, active transportation, recreation, and active play.

EJ-A.28. As part of the LUTE update in Phase 2, include policies that promote a fine-grained neighborhood land use pattern that encourages walking, biking, and getting around without a car.

Responsibility: Planning & Building
Timeframe: Short
EJ-A.29. As part of the LUTE update and creation of the new Capital Facilities and Infrastructure Element in Phase 2, include policies that prioritize bicyclist, pedestrian, and roadway improvements that prioritize safety and comfort of non-auto users. Target and prioritize these improvements in EJ Communities and areas identified in Figure EJ-22.

Responsibility: Planning & Building, OakDOT
Timeframe: Short
EJ-A.30. As part of the updates to the LUTE and OSCAR in Phase 2, develop a citywide greenway network that will connect communities via an active transportation network that includes trails, bikeways, walking paths, etc., and expand access to open recreation and green spaces. This network should prioritize establishing connections between Oakland’s neighborhoods, parks on the Bay shoreline, and regional parks (such as the MLK Jr. Shoreline Park and Middle Harbor Shoreline Park) as well as identify zones in need of green infrastructure investments.

Responsibility: Planning & Building, Oakland Public Works, Sustainability and Resilience Division Timeframe: Short
EJ-A.31. As part of LUTE update and creation of the new Capital Facilities and Infrastructure Element in Phase 2, study shuttles and other local transit programs that are supportive of AC Transit’s core service to foster local mobility and connections between neighborhoods and rail transit. Prioritize investments in EJ Communities that lack active transportation infrastructure.

Responsibility: Planning & Building, OakDOT
Timeframe: Short
EJ-7.2 Accessible Neighborhoods. Encourage active modes of transportation and transit accessibility by supporting neighborhoods that provide access to a range of daily goods, services, and recreational resources within comfortable walking or biking distance. Encourage transit providers to prioritize, establish and maintain routes to jobs, shopping, schools, parks and healthcare facilities that are convenient to EJ Communities.

EJ-7.3 Street Design for Safe Speeds. Work to maximize the safety of the transportation network by designing/redesigning streets for lower driving speeds and enforcing speed limits as well as promoting safe driving behavior, while protecting against discriminatory policing, racial profiling, or racial bias in enforcement. Strategies could include implementing leading pedestrian intervals for crosswalks in residential neighborhoods and providing pedestrian scale lighting. Prioritize speed reduction efforts in EJ Communities with the highest concentrations of pedestrian and bicyclist crashes. Study enforcement patterns annually to avoid racial profiling.

EJ-7.4 Safe Oakland Streets. Utilize a community-engagement-rooted, data-driven, and systematic approach to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries, while increasing safety, health, and equitable mobility for all.

EJ-7.5 Bicycle- and Pedestrian-Friendly Design. Prioritize designs that protect people that are biking and walking, such as improvements that increase visibility of bicyclists and pedestrians, traffic calming, and safer intersection crossings and turns. Improvements should also prioritize universal design so that improvements are usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialization.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 9-12
Chapter 9 | Implementation Actions and Programs

POLICY ACTION
EJ-7.6 Collaborative Safety Solutions. Collaborate with educational institutions, senior living facilities, community organizations, and other stakeholders, particularly those who reside in EJ Communities, when developing and implementing programs and improvements that increase safety and encourage the use of active transportation modes. Identify and plan for improvements in collaboration with existing neighborhood residents and businesses to address concerns about gentrification and displacement.

EJ-A.32. Prioritize urban greening projects identified in community plans, such as EONI, WOCAP, and others. Implement projects in partnership with community groups in EJ Communities.

Responsibility: OakDOT, CAO Sustainability & Resilience Division, Planning & Building Timeframe: Medium
EJ-7.7 Equitable Paving. Continue to plan and distribute paving program resources based on equity, road condition and safety metrics. Continue to plan and distribute paving program resources based on equity, road condition and safety metrics. Align paving programs with other city infrastructure priorities including the West Oakland Specific Plan, the 2019 Oakland Bike Plan, and the 2017 Oakland Walks Pedestrian Plan. In addition, align the paving program with the GSI Plan to ensure flood resilience and pollution prevention is incorporated.

EJ-7.8 Park Distribution. As part of park planning efforts, prioritize development of new parks in EJ Communities that are underserved, as identified in Figure EJ-26.

EJ-7.9 Enhancing Access to Parks. Pursue strategies that increase community access to parks and recreational facilities, including expanding joint use agreements with schools and educational institutions; removing of physical barriers to access (ex: fences); and providing a choice of legible routes to and from park areas through the installation of new or improved multi-use shared paths, wayfinding, and signage.

EJ-7.10 Parks Programming. Create high-quality inclusive programming that encourages the use of the park facilities by a variety of users including older adults, youth, and people with disabilities throughout the day and evenings. Opportunities should be taken to incorporate local heritage and culture.

EJ-7.12 Park Safety. Use Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) and other best practices for landscaping, lighting, and other components when designing open space and recreational spaces. Take into consideration locational indicators related to crime and perception of safety when prioritizing park safety improvements or programs.

EJ-7.13 Park Maintenance. When evaluating park projects and funds for maintenance, include equity and presence in EJ Communities as a priority weighted factor.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
9-13

POLICY ACTION
EJ-7.14 Community Input. Provide ongoing opportunities for public engagement and input into the parks and recreation planning process, including priorities for amenities, facilities, programming, and improvements. Focus engagement in EJ Communities. EJ-7.15 EJ-7.15 Urban Forest. Implement the Urban Forest Master Plan, a comprehensive, area-wide urban canopy and vegetation plan that identifies locations where trees can be added and maintained, such as parks, streets, and rights-of-way. Develop a plan to maintain and protect existing trees that provide shade, reduce urban heat island impacts, reduce flooding, reduce pollution, and reduce exposure to air pollution emissions in communities most affected by air pollution. Align tree canopy with climate resilience planning, including green stormwater infrastructure. Trees should be low on the allergenic scale, to serve EJ communities most impacted by air pollution and asthma. This includes partnering with local nonprofit groups, encouraging trees on private property, and working with the community on tree maintenance and (as needed) removal. Prioritize tree canopy in EJ Communities with the least amount of canopy, as shown in Figure EJ-27.

EJ-7.16 Urban Greening. Develop equitable partner agreements with community-based organizations and collaboratively work to identify, fund, develop, and maintain specific green infrastructure projects in EJ Communities. Align urban greening efforts with flood and pollution prevention, prioritizing green stormwater infrastructure, especially in areas at risk of flooding.

GOAL EJ-8: FOSTER MEANINGFUL CIVIC ENGAGEMENT AND SUPPORT COMMUNITY POWER- AND CAPACITY-BUILDING.

EJ-8.1 Meaningful, Relevant Engagement. Design and implement public engagement processes and events that emphasize participation from low-income communities and communities of color; that are driven by resident priorities, that are easily accessible and understandable and that provide meaningful opportunities for participants to influence outcomes.

EJ-A.33. Study the feasibility of establishing a fund that City departments draw on for community outreach, including funding for community group partnerships. The fund would provide a source of funds to supplement departmental budgets and grant funding in order to ensure that City objectives for community outreach can be achieved, and that community groups are fairly compensated for their engagement.

Responsibility: City Administrator’s Office, Department of Finance Timeframe: Long
EJ-A.34. Develop a participatory budgeting process for EJ Community investments and explore expansion into other departments. Related to Housing Element Action 5.2.9.

Responsibility: City Administrator’s Office, Department of Finance Timeframe: Long
EJ-8.2 Sustained Engagement. Maintain communication channels that allow for ongoing dialogue with neighborhood groups and individual residents; consult with AB 617 Steering Committees; track issues and priorities at the neighborhood level; and foster transparency and accountability.

Use this information to inform development of City programs, projects, and services, sharing information across departments to optimize the effectiveness of efforts, and share outcomes with groups.

EJ-8.3 Innovative Methods and Creative Strategies. Explore innovative strategies for increasing community involvement in civic processes and ownership of outcomes, tailoring strategies to best reach target audiences. Strategies to explore may include participatory budgeting, participatory action research, or other approaches that emphasize the active participation of community members most affected by the questions at issue.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 9-14
Chapter 9 | Implementation Actions and Programs

POLICY ACTION
EJ-8.4 Community Partners. Partner with community-based organizations that have relationships, trust, and cultural competency with target communities as to support engagement for local initiatives and issues. Seek opportunities to support community partners in these efforts such as by providing technical assistance, data, meeting spaces, funding and other support services as feasible.

EJ-A.35. Host an annual City-wide conference of Neighborhood Empowerment Councils, where community-based organizations, neighborhood councils, neighborhood organizing support networks, youth networks, and residents plan proactively for healthy communities and provide feedback on General Plan implementation.

Responsibility: City Administrator’s Office
Timeframe: Long
EJ-A.36. Integrate community-led and community-driven initiatives into City planning processes, such as other General Plan elements, future action and area plans, the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) process, the adopted City budget, bond measures, and other City investments and resource allocations.

Responsibility: City Administrator’s Office
Timeframe: Ongoing
EJ-A.37. Support opportunities for providing mental health education and resource-sharing, especially for youth, as part of an inclusive and meaningful community involvement strategy.

Responsibility: Department of Violence Prevention
Timeframe: Ongoing
EJ-8.5 Community Capacity Building. Empower historically marginalized community members to participate in local decision-making and engage meaningfully in planning efforts, including through increased representation in employment and civic life; providing educational/training workshops and programs about civic involvement and processes, such as through fellowships and internships; providing organizational support to community-based organizations; and other capacity building activities.

EJ-8.6 Engagement Infrastructure. Build City technology, staffing, funding and systems resources to conduct more inclusive, meaningful and community-empowered engagement, including seeking grant funding. Develop flexible but sustained infrastructure for two-way information sharing between City and partner agencies and community members.

EJ-8.7 Interagency and Interdepartmental Collaboration. Collaborate with and among public agencies and City departments to leverage resources, avoid duplication of effort and enhance the effectiveness of public participation.

EJ-8.8 Youth-Centered Events. Seek out opportunities for meaningfully and authentically involving young people – particularly from EJ Communities - in the planning and implementation of youth-centered events that develop confidence and leadership skills.

EJ-8.10 Linguistically Isolated Communities. Continue to provide interpretation and translation services, assistance in accessing community services and programs, and direct engagement with specific demographic groups. Prioritize EJ Communities as identified in Figure EJ-30.

EJ-8.11 Digital Access. Ensure that all meetings, materials, and other engagement that use technology are easily accessible by mobile devices. Invest in high-speed internet in underserved low-income communities to expand digital access and engagement opportunity. Prioritize expanded internet in public facilities and EJ Communities as identified in Figure EJ-31.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
9-15

POLICY ACTION
EJ-8.12 Mental Health and Community Well-Being. Support programs and services that support the health and well being of residents through community-based collaboration with a range of partners.

GOAL EJ-9: EXPAND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, INCOME EQUALITY, AND OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OAKLANDERS.

EJ-9.1 Investments for Inclusive, Equitable Growth. Make intentional investments to increase and diversify economic growth and living wage jobs in an inclusive and equitable manner that focuses on neighborhoods and their unique needs, particularly in EJ Communities.

EJ-A.38. As part of land use planning efforts, explore the following strategies in partnership with community organizations based in EJ Communities:
• Corridor revitalization
• Zoning opportunities to facilitate smaller, “microretail” spaces that are more affordable to new or smaller businesses. • Cultural Districts that showcase, support, and preserve existing cultural identity of retail and commercial services. For example, programs that support restoration of historical Black business districts in West Oakland.
• Neighborhood retail and local business conservation strategies to prevent conversion of existing neighborhood-retail uses in neighborhoods that would otherwise lose easy access to nearby shops and neighborhood services, including through anti-displacement strategies.
• Anti-displacement strategies for artists and creative businesses Responsibility: Planning & Building
Timeframe: Short
EJ-9.2 Small Business/Startup Support. Support the development and retention of small business startups and new firms — particularly POC/women/veteran owned businesses - by providing assistance with business planning, expansion, and access to capital.

EJ-9.3 Business Incubators. Encourage occupancy of existing buildings with incubators for specific industry/trade groups and for artisans and craftspeople, where small startup businesses can share existing facilities and equipment.

EJ-9.4 Public Procurement. Continue to use the public procurement process to stimulate small business development, prioritize certified underrepresented business enterprises, including businesses owned by people of color, women, LGBTQIA+ community members, veterans, and individuals with disabilities, and locally-owned businesses in particular, and coordinate with anchor institutions such as universities, hospitals, public agencies, and school districts to help launch new products and services.

EJ-9.5 Local Business Needs Assessment. Continually assess business workforce needs and other requirements, using the findings to assist in developing a qualified workforce that meets the demands of established and emerging business and smaller, value-added businesses such as artisan foods, digital media, recording and sound technologies, smart engineered, cooling technologies, green industries (such as urban agriculture, urban forestry, riparian restoration, infrastructure resilience, and others) and green building product development.

EJ-9.6 Labor Force Skills Development. Partner with educational institutions, employers, and community-based organizations to develop a local labor force with skills to meet the needs of the area’s businesses and industries. Continue and expand local-hire initiatives, just transition and clean energy training, apprenticeships, and partnerships with employers.

Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions 9-16
Chapter 9 | Implementation Actions and Programs
Table EJ-11: Implementation — Goals, Policies, and Actions

POLICY ACTION
EJ-9.7 Barriers to Workforce Participation. Collaborate with regional and local partners to identify and address barriers to workforce participation and access to training. Solutions to explore may include:
• Two-generation programs that link education, job training, and career-building for low-income parents with supports for their children; • Bridge programs that prepare people with low academic skills for further education and training; and
• Transitional jobs programs that provide short-term subsidized employment or training for formerly incarcerated individuals
EJ-9.8 Entrepreneurship and Social Enterprise Training. Support education and training in entrepreneurship and social enterprise as an alternative pathway to traditional jobs.

GOAL EJ-10: PRIORITIZE IMPROVEMENTS AND PROGRAMS THAT MEET THE NEEDS OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COMMUNITIES.

EJ-10.1 Prioritizing EJ Communities. Implement topic-specific actions as shown in the Goals, Policies, and Actions table, prioritizing improvements, programs, investments, and partnerships in Environmental Justice Communities, as shown in Figure EJ-7. Implementation could include technical assistance, support with grant applications seeking federal, state and philanthropic funding, access to data sources, and other resources. Spend or distribute resources to EJ communities in ways that meet the existing community’s priority needs and improve resident’s quality of life.

EJ-A.39. In partnership with community groups, develop an implementation monitoring and evaluation plan framework and reporting mechanism. The EJ Element reporting system will be updated regularly and accessible online to the public. The EJ Element reporting system will be updated regularly and accessible online to the public.

Responsibility: Planning & Building
Timeframe: Short
EJ-A.40. Staff will provide a biennial report on the progress on climate actions identified in the 2030 ECAP and actions identified in the Environmental Justice Element.

Responsibility: Planning and Building Department, CAO Sustainability and Resilience Division
Timeframe: Ongoing
EJ-10.2 Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. To increase transparency and accountability, adopt an implementation monitoring and evaluation plan with achievable milestones, periodic evaluation, and a reporting mechanism, such as an online portal or newsletter to track outcomes and keep residents informed.
2045 General Plan | Environmental Justice Element
9-17
This page intentionally left blank.
9-18
Chapter 9 | Implementation Actions and Programs
v
2045 General Plan Update | Environmental Justice Element ion

ENVIRONMENTAL

JUSTICE ELEMENT

APPENDICES
Hearing Draft
July 2023
EXHIBIT B:2

1. Introduction
APPENDIX A: EJ

COMMUNITIES

SCREENING ANALYSIS

RESULTS

TRACT ZIP NUMBER
4078 94673
4079 94679
4080 94679
4087 94679
4082 94605
4083 94605
4084 94605
4085 94627
4086 94605
4087 94605
4088 94627
4089 94627
4090 94627
4097 94603
4092 94603
4093 94603
4094 94603
4095 94627
4096 94627
4097 94605
4098 94605
4099 94605
4700 94605
4707 94605
4702 94603
4703 94603
4704 94603
4705 94607
9879 94607
9820 94607
9832

TRACT NEIGHBORHOOD NAME
Mills College
Redwood Heights East
Wood minster
Caballo Hills
Millsmont
Eastmont Hills
Eastmont
Arroyo Viejo
Bancroft/Havenscourt East
Bancroft/Havenscourt West
Lockwood/Coliseum/Rudsdale
Fitchburg
Brookfield Village/Hegenberger1
Brookfield Village
Sobrante Park
Stonehurst
Elmhurst
New Highland
Webster
Castlemont
Golf Links
Sequoyah
Chabot Park
Foothill Square/Toler Heights
Las Palmas
Cox/Elmhurst
Durant Manor
DeFremery/Oak Center
Port Lower
Acorn Industrial
Jack London Square 94607
Note: Neighborhood names are based on those used in the Lead Paint Hazards REIA (2027), with some modifications to describe the neighborhood geographically.

1. This census tract includes Columbia Gardens
4 Jc
Jc
Jc
Brookfield
Village/ Hegenberger
Port
Upper
Port
Lower !"c$
%&t(
%&n(
%&n(
%&n(
%&t(
%&v(
Aî
AÞ
AÞ
Aâ
A|
A}

OAK LAN D

AL AMEDA

SAN LEANDRO

BER KELEY

PIEDMO NT

EMERYVILL E
ORINDA

MO RAGA
S a n F r a n c i s c o B a y
Oakland
International
Airport
Lake
Merritt
Lake
Chabot
Coast Guard
Island Alameda
Alameda Gateway
Ferry Terminal
Jack London Square
Ferry Terminal
Caballo
Hills
Chabot
Park
Sequoyah
Panoramic
Hill
Melrose
Piedmont
Pines
Glen
Highlands
Golf
Links
Montclair
North
Woodminster
Pill
Hill
Oakland
Estuary
Elmhurst
Upper
Piedmont
Ave
Glenview
Longfellow
Upper
Rockridge
Lake
Merritt Stonehurst
Mills
College
Jingletown/
Kennedy
Lincoln
Highlands
Millsmont
Eastmont
Hills
Webster
Fruitvale Fitchburg
Crocker
Highland
Arroyo
Viejo
Oakmore
North
Castlemont
Trestle
Glen
Ivy
Hill
Lakeshore
Montclair
South
Gaskill
Acorn
Shafter/
Rockridge
Maxwell
Park
Rockridge
Eastmont
Durant
Manor
Temescal
West
Hoover/
Foster
Seminary
New
Highland
Bella
Vista
McClymonds
Redwood
Heights
East
Las
Palmas
Chinatown/
Laney
Grand
Lake
Sobrante
Park
Lockwood/
Coliseum/
Rudsdale
Peralta/
Hacienda
Temescal
East
Jefferson/
Fruitvale
Redwood
Heights
West Oakmore
South
Lower
Laurel/
Allendale
Redwood
Heights
Central
Fairfax/
Lower
Maxwell
Park Cox/
Elmhurst
Cleveland
Heights
North
Fremont
District
Laurel/
Upper
Peralta
Creek
Santa
Fe/
North
Oakland
Clawson/
Dogtown
Brookfield
Village
Jack
London
Square
Bushrod/
North
Oakland
Paradise
Park/
Golden
Gate
Eastlake
Piedmont
Ave
North
Adams
Point
North
Lower
Dimond
School
Reservoir
Hill/
Manzanita
Lower
San
Antonio
West
Lower
San
Antonio
East
San
Antonio/
Sausal
Creek
Acorn
Industrial
Prescott
Downtown
Bancroft/
Havenscourt
West
Chinatown
Bancroft/
Havenscourt
East
Prescott/
Mandela
Peralta
Foothill
Square/
Toler
Heights
Oakland/
Harrison
West
DeFremery/ Oak
Center
Uptown/
Downtown
Upper
Telegraph/
Fairview
Park
Fruitvale/
Hawthorne
Bunche/
MLK
Jr
Harrington/
San Fruitvale
Antonio/
Highland
Terrace
Bunche/
Oak
Center
Piedmont
Ave
South Upper
San
Antonio/
Highland
Park
Eastlake
Clinton
West
Jack
London
Gateway
Eastlake
Clinton
East
Reservoir
Hill/
Meadow
Brook
Bushrod/
Childrens
Hospital
Downtown/
Old
Oakland
Adams
Point
Adams East
Point
West
Piedmont
Ave
Central
Cleveland
Heights
South
Oakland/
Harrison
East
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
SOURCE: EJ Solutions/Urban Strategies Council, 2021; City of Oakland, 2021; ALAMEDA County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021 0 0.5 1 2
MILES
Figure A-1: Census Tract Names
O a k l a n d G e n e r a l P l a n U p d a t e
Census Tract Boundary
Major Roads
City of Oakland
µ
Alameda County
Note: Low population areas in the Port of Oakland (comprised of the Oakland International Airport and the seaport) that have been designated as Priority Production Areas by MTC have been masked out.

2045 General Plan I Environmental Justice Element
Acorn 0.93 0.99 0.70 0.73 0.74 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.93 0.91 0.56 0.94 0.46 0.13 0.24 Acorn Industrial* 0.54 0.40 0.63 0.85 0.81 0.00 0.38 0.98 0.73 0.07 0.07 0.68 0.08 0.58 7.00 Adams Point East 0.34 0.27 0.92 0.57 0.21 0.00 0.03 0.81 0.30 0.13 0.22 0.03 0.29 0.07 0.49 Adams Point 0.38 0.36 0.94 0.57 0.34 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.40 0.29 0.08 0.04 0.39 0.86 0.20 North
Adams Point 0.50 0.33 0.79 0.61 0.38 0.00 0.04 0.81 0.18 0.35 0.25 0.09 0.38 0.84 0.38 West
Arroyo Viejo 0.90 0.79 0.24 0.19 0.71 0.00 0.91 0.00 0.87 0.71 7.00 0.39 0.96 0.79 0.87 Bancroft/ 0.80 0.86 0.16 0.27 0.63 0.00 0.95 0.00 0.97 0.74 0.98 0.48 7.00 0.96 0.84 Havenscourt E
Bancroft/ 0.65 0.66 0.73 0.32 0.60 0.64 0.87 0.00 0.85 0.89 0.77 0.75 0.77 0.82 0.78 Havenscourt W
Bella Vista 0.56 0.52 0.69 0.39 0.20 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.27 0.47 0.75 0.33 0.38 0.47 0.23 Brookfield 0.47 0.63 0.86 0.49 0.85 0.00 0.96 0.00 0.99 0.69 0.67 7.00 0.80 0.92 0.95 Village
Brookfield 0.49 0.83 0.77 0.96 0.99 0.00 0.79 0.97 0.96 0.93 0.69 0.96 0.63 0.94 0.73 Village/
Hegenberger
Bunche/MLK Jr 0.83 0.47 0.83 0.93 0.64 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.62 0.36 0.27 0.46 0.77 0.20 0.80 Bunche/Oak 0.87 0.78 0.60 0.77 0.68 0.00 0.57 0.88 0.76 0.75 0.40 0.49 0.75 0.73 0.29 Center
Bushrod/ 0.75 0.28 0.75 0.78 0.33 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.34 0.10 0.46 0.29 0.24 0.05 0.37 Childrens Hospital
29 Table AA-15: Topic Scores of All Tracts

1. Introduction
APPENDIX B:

METHODOLOGIES OF

ANALYSIS

FROM EJ AND RACIAL

EQUITY BASELINE REPORT,
MARCH 2022
Data Values
Frequency of Values
Low High
0th Percentile 100th Percentile
Defined Intervals
Equal Intervals
Natural
Jenk
•••

1. tion
APPENDIX C: Existing
City Policies Tracking
Tool

Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy Category EJ Category (if applicable) HDG Adapt to climate change in
project design and
development
EH3.3 Restoration of creeks and wetlands. Restore on-site riparian corridors and wetlands, increasing the
biodiversity on project sites and increasing access for residents to existing creeks and wetlands
OSCAR- Conservation
ECAP Eliminate Disposal of
Compostable Organic
Materials to Landfills
MCW-1 Fully fund and implement the requirements of
California SB1383 (Short-Lived Climate Pollutants:

Organic Waste Methane Emissions Reduction), reduce
surplus food waste, and eliminate disposal of
compostable organic materials to landfills. Ensure
robust engagement with businesses and institutions,
including schools, and continued residential outreach
to reduce wasted food and Effectively keep
compostable material out of the landfill-bound waste
stream. Work closely with franchise hauler to ensure
that the compostable material stream is
uncontaminated so that compost created is highquality .

Infrastructure and FacilitiesWaste
ECAP Strengthen Infrastructure
and Partnerships for Edible
Food Recovery
MCW-2 Support existing capacity, and develop new capacity, to recover edible food that is otherwise wasted, and
distribute that food for human consumption. Engage
with stakeholders including local food donation,
recovery, and collection organizations to build robust
collection and food storage capacity, and reliable
distribution systems to the neediest populations.

Engage with food generators such as supermarkets,
wholesale distributors, large hotels, and institutions, to donate surplus edible food that food recovery partners
want or will accept, and to ensure food generators
comply with the Edible Food Recovery requirements of
SB 1383. Inform edible surplus food generators about
strategies and best practices for preventing wasting
surplus food. EJ- Food Systems Healthy Food Access
ECAP Expand and Protect Green
Infrastructure & Biodiversity
A-6 Fund and implement a green infrastructure program for the installation and maintenance of projects and
existing civic resources such as the parks system and
public spaces, to improve stormwater management,
support biodiversity, reduce air pollution exposure, and increase access to natural spaces, including trees.

Prioritize investment in frontline communities, and
particularly in residential neighborhoods dominated by
concrete and asphalt with limited green space and
elevated air pollution, in Priority Conservation Areas, and in areas where green infrastructure, including trees and other types of vegetated buffers, can effectively
address stormwater management issues and reduce
air pollution exposure among sensitive populations. By
2023, identify funding to expand green stormwater
infrastructure citywide. Infrastructure and FacilitiesGreen Infrastructure ECAP Rehabilitate Riparian Areas
and Open Space
CR3 Identify funding to continue and expand programs to restore creeks and provide ecosystem services in
coordination with stormwater management planning,
prioritizing investment that reduces climate risks in
frontline communities. Include funding for ongoing
maintenance and public access.

OSCAR- Conservation and Open
Space
ECAP
Explore Regional Aquatic
Sequestration Opportunities CR-6
Coordinate with other Bay Area municipalities, nonprofits, and agencies to develop a regional approach to aquatic sequestration in San Francisco Bay by 2030.

OSCAR- Conservation and Open
Space
Coliseum Area Specific Plan
Establish variety of open
spaces that strengthen the
public realm, foster
connectivity, and enhance
habitat values. CD Policy 4-21
Projects should be configured and designed to
increase public access to the Bay, enhance natural
habitat values (particularly along Damon Slough), and
provide public educational opportunities about the Bay
ecosystem for Oakland and Bay Area residents.

Current and new residents should be encouraged to
become stewards of the new parks, open spaces and
restored habitat areas. OSCAR (Open Space); EJ
Downtown Oakland Specific Plan
Policy CH-1.15* - Protecting & Enhancing Natural
Resources: Protect, maintain, and enhance the natural
resources that surround downtown, including Lake
Merritt and the Channel, estuary waterfront areas, and
parks/plazas/open spaces.

Downtown Oakland Specific Plan
Policy CH-1.15* - Protecting & Enhancing Natural
Resources: Protect, maintain, and enhance the natural
resources that surround downtown, including Lake
Merritt and the Channel, estuary waterfront areas, and
parks/plazas/open spaces
OSCAR- Conservation and Open
Space
Environmental Conservation-Related Plans/Policies
Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy Category EJ Category (if applicable) Environmental Conservation-Related Plans/Policies
Downtown Oakland Specific Plan Outcome CH-2:

Environmental stewardship
and climate change
resilience informs
operational, planning, and
capital improvement
decisions to create a more
sustainable downtown where
everyone can adapt and
thrive in the face of changing
conditions.

Policy CH-2.4 - Low-Impact Stormwater Detention
Requirements: Require new developments to install
and maintain low-impact stormwater detention systems
on private property to limit the amount of runoff into
drains or surface water bodies including Lake Merritt,
the Lake Merritt Channel, and the Oakland Estuary.

Infrastructure and FacilitiesGreen Infrastructure
Downtown Oakland Specific Plan Outcome CH-2:

Policy CH-2.5 - Reflective Rooftops & Paving: Require
high-albedo (reflective) surfaces on rooftops and
paving where appropriate, allowing green roofs where
appropriate, to reduce the urban heat island effect in
downtown.

EONI Healthy Surroundings
Existing City of Oakland project: Urban ReLeaf urban
greening plan (included in TCC Implementation Grant
application) OSCAR; EJ
EONI Grow Community Wealth
Habitat restoration was suggested as a local jobs
option, in conjunction with the San Leandro Creek Trail as well as park maintenance jobs. OSCAR; EJ
HDG EH3. Adapt to climate
change in project design
and development.

EH3.1 Increased tree canopy. Incorporate tree
plantings on the site and adjacent street frontage as
specified by OMC Chapter 17.124.

OSCAR; EJ
HDG EH3. Adapt to climate
change in project design
and development.

EH3.4 Stormwater management. Conserve water,
protect water bodies, and mitigate the effects of large storm events by reducing stormwater runoff through
such strategies as retaining and infiltrating stormwater onsite, as required by SCA 48 (Site Design Measures
to Reduce Stormwater Runoff), SCA 49 (Source
Control Measures to Limit Stormwater Pollution), and
SCA 50 (NPDES C.3 Stormwater Requirements). Infrastructure and FacilitiesGreen Infrastructure HDG EH3. Adapt to climate
change in project design
and development.

EH3.5 Outdoor water conservation and landscaping.
(1) Revisions to existing SCA 17 (Landscape Plan)
(additions underlined):

The project applicant shall submit a final Landscape
Plan for City review and approval that is consistent
with the previously approved preliminary Landscape
Plan. The Landscape Plan shall be included with the
set of drawings submitted for the construction-related
permit and shall comply with the landscape
requirements of chapter 17.124 of the Planning Code.

Proposed plants shall be predominantly droughttolerant. (2) No revisions necessary to SCA 81 (Recycled
Water).

Infrastructure and FacilitiesGreen Infrastructure
HDG EH3. Adapt to climate
change in project design
and development.

EH3.7 Weatherization and improved indoor air quality.

For new projects and significant rehabilitations of
existing buildings, improve energy efficiency and
prevent buildup of mold and mildew through design
elements such as weatherization, adequate insulation
of walls and attics, sealing of windows to prevent heat loss, and use of building materials that are weatherized and resistant to water intake and moisture
accumulation, consistent with CalGreen.

EJ Safe and Sanitary Homes
Plan Overarching
Goal
Strategy
# Strategy
Current Work in
Progress to Address
Strategy
(May 2021)
Related Work in
Progress to Address
Overarching Goal
Previous Work
Done to Address
Strategy (2020)
Lead Agency Staff Assigned
Category EJ Category (if applicable)
WOCAP 26
The City and Port of Oakland will work to establish permanent locations for parking and staging of Port related trucks and cargo equipment, i.e. tractors, chassis, and containers. Such facilities will provide long-term leases to parking operators and truck owneroperators at competitive rates. Such facilities will be at the City or Port logistics center or otherwise not adjacent to West Oakland residents.
[7/2/2021]: OMSS currently
provides truck parking and
related services to nearly 300
operators at the Burma/Wake
Ave site. We are working to
improve the Wake Ave side
of the site and under the
freeway so OMSS can
expand its offering and
truckers will have the options
of using the facility as a selfserve basis. With the new Master Fee Schedule, the
City now has fees for monthly
and daily parking.

City
Administrator
TMP, John
Monetta, Corey
Alvin, Michael
Ford
LUTE, EJ, Industrial
Lands
Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
WOCAP 36
The City of Oakland requires industrial and warehouse facilities to provide electrical connections for electric trucks and transport refrigeration units in support of CARB regulations.

The City has included
external electrical
connections as part of the
options list for GHG
mitigation under CEQA for
the Howard Terminal
development. Staff have not
identified another mechanism
for requiring these
connections for existing
buildings.

In-progress. These
standards are part of the
Zero Emission Vehicle
Action Plan currently under
development, expected to
be brough to Council for
consideration in early 2022.

Planning,
Public Works,
OakDOT
Corey Alvin,
Shayna
Hirshfield-Gold,
Daniel Hamilton;
Kerby Olsen,
Michael Randolph
LUTE, EJ Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
WOCAP 39
The City of Oakland, consistent with the West Oakland Truck Management Plan: 1) improves signage regarding existing truck routes; 2) works with businesses on preferred routes to use when destinations are not located on truck routes; and 3) adds to, or changes, truck routes and prohibited streets.

In the summer of 2020, the
City and Port engaged West
Oakland Stakeholders to get
feedback on the truck routes
and truck parking proposals
contained in the Truck
Management Plan (TMP).

Concerns were raised about
Frontage Road and since
then, the City and Port
studied various scenarios for
Frontage Road. An
announcement will be made
soon about the availability of
the Frontage Road study.

Check the TMP website for
updates.

Planning,
OakDOT Alicia Parker LUTE
WOCAP 40
The City of Oakland, consistent with the West Oakland Truck Management Plan, implements, in consultation with West Oakland residents, traffic calming measures to keep truck traffic off residential streets.
2020 actions related to
consultant development of
scenarios to address
Frontage Road
OakDOT Alicia Parker,
Colin Piethe LUTE- Design
WOCAP 42
The City and Port of Oakland award long-term leases to vendors that will deliver trucker services (including mini-market and convenience stores, fast food, and fast casual restaurants), and parking to keep trucks off West Oakland streets.

See update for Strategy 26 City of
Oakland & Port John Monetta LUTE, EJ Food Access
WOCAP 37
The Port of Oakland, as part of the 2020 and Beyond Seaport Air Quality Plan, supports the transition to zero-emission drayage truck operations, including setting interim year targets out to 2035, coordinating an extensive zero-emission truck commercialization effort, working with the City of Oakland to amend local ordinances to increase the allowable weight limits for single-axle, zero-emission trucks on local streets located within the Port and the Oakland Army Base/Gateway areas, and developing an investment plan for needed upgrades to the Port’s electrical infrastructure. The Port of Oakland also works with the California Public Utilities Commission and the California Energy Commission to study the development of time-ofday electric rate structures favorable to truck operators.

Port of Oakland LUTE
WOCAP 3
The Air District will study the potential air pollution and health outcomes of allowing truck traffic on I-580 and designating a truck lane on I-880. Allowing truck traffic on I-580 would require legislative approval, re-engineering, and re-construction
Air District Nicole Ferrara
Colin Piethe LUTE, EJ
Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
LHMP O-13
The Port has determined that in order to mitigate risk and prepare for imminent seismic events, it is necessary to conduct a liquefaction study at the marine terminals. This study will evaluate the liquefaction potential throughout the marine terminals at the Port of Oakland and its effects on Port infrastructure. The study will identify areas and facilities most at risk for liquefaction and outline a plan for mitigation, retrofit, and emergency response.

LHMP O-17
The Port of Oakland’s Sea-Level Rise Vulnerability and Assessment Improvement Plan will assess the potential effects of sea-level rise on maritime facilities. The study will assess facilities Port-wide for sea-level rise vulnerability and develop an implementation plan for near-term and long-term strategies to address the potential impacts.

The study will analyze the need for infrastructure such as sea walls, wharf improvements, and changes in port operations. In addition, the study will help to establish design standards.

Safety-Sea Level Rise
ECAP
Reduce
Emissions
from Port
Vehicles and
Equipment.

P-1
• By 2022, develop a long-term plan for full electrification of drayage trucks.
• By 2024, develop a zero-emissions transportation master plan for all airport operations.
• By 2026, develop and install sufficient electric charging infrastructure for 50% of all yard trucks and cargo handling equipment.
• Plan electric charging infrastructure as part of a comprehensive backup power and climate resilience effort to insulate the Port of Oakland from the impacts of changing electric power reliability. • Study the feasibility of renewable diesel in Port sources of GHG emissions as an interim strategy on the pathway to all-electric vehicles.
• Study the effect of the extra weight of battery electric trucks on the overweight corridor.
• Work with State and private businesses to develop and host a renewable hydrogen production, storage, and fueling infrastructure pilot project.
• Analyze the potential for establishing entry fees for GHG-producing vehicles as a funding source for PEV infrastructure.

LUTE, EJ
Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
ECAP
Reduce
Emissions
from
Electricity
P-2
The City of Oakland recommends that the Port Board of
Commissioners reduce emissions from electricity in the
following way:
• By 2023, Port of Oakland should procure 100% carbon-free electricity for Port operations and all electricity supplied to tenants or other end users.

Utilities and
Infrastructure
Port and Freight-Related Plans/Policies
Outside of City of Oakland Jurisdiction
Plan Overarching
Goal
Strategy
# Strategy
Current Work in
Progress to Address
Strategy
(May 2021)
Related Work in
Progress to Address
Overarching Goal
Previous Work
Done to Address
Strategy (2020)
Lead Agency Staff Assigned
Category EJ Category (if applicable)
Port and Freight-Related Plans/Policies
ECAP
Create a Zero
Emission
Vehicle (ZEV)
Action Plan
TLU-5
By 2021, develop a ZEV Action Plan to increase adoption of electric vehicles and e-mobility while addressing equity concerns and prioritizing investment in frontline communities. The plan must set ambitious targets for ZEV infrastructure and must be coordinated with other land use and mobility options so that ZEV ownership is not necessary for access to ZEV trips, and ZEVs increase as a percentage of all vehicles while overall vehicle miles traveled decreases. The plan must address the following sectors: medium and heavy-duty vehicle electrification, including trucks and delivery vehicles; personal vehicle charging infrastructure in multifamily buildings, including affordable buildings; curbside charging; school and transit buses; and coordination with private and public fleet operators.

LUTE, EJ
Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
EONI
105th Avenue Greening (Upper) from Edes Avenue to San Leandro Street - safer Railroad crossing, street repairs, stormwater tree wells, designated for bikes, eco-landscaping, & art (in partnership with Stonehurst).

EJ
Prioritizing improvements and programs
for addressing the needs of EJ
Communities
EONI
105th Avenue Greening (Upper) from Edes Avenue to San Leandro Street - safer Railroad crossing, street repairs, stormwater tree wells, designated for bikes, eco-landscaping, & art (in partnership with Stonehurst).

EJ
Prioritizing improvements and programs
for addressing the needs of EJ
Communities
EONI
Edes Avenue (98th to Bergedo) Greening - a) Street repairs, stormwater tree wells, desig-nated for bikes, eco-landscaping, and art (mural). b) Zoning study vis-a-vis industry adjacent to residential.

LUTE; Industrial
Lands Policy
EONI
Union Pacific Rail Road Right Of Way - a) Walking/bike trail connection (from Rail-road Avenue to Edes and in other direction to Doolittle Dr.). b) Neighbor fencing, sound wall/vegetative buffer , garden improvement for health, sound and air protection.

LUTE; EJ
Prioritizing improvements and programs
for addressing the needs of EJ
Communities
EONI
54th Ave Channel greenway connector with bridge over railroad.

East Oakland Green Network Plan
LUTE; EJ
Prioritizing improvements and programs
for addressing the needs of EJ
Communities
EONI
Rail Road Ave greening, landscaping, anti-dumping, bike path. East Oakland Green Network Plan
LUTE; EJ
Prioritizing improvements and programs
for addressing the needs of EJ
Communities
EONI
Upper 105th Ave. green street connections, from Union Pacific Railroad to International.

LUTE; EJ
Prioritizing improvements and programs
for addressing the needs of EJ
Communities
Downtown Oakland
Specific Plan
(DOSP)
Policy M3.10
Policy M-3.10 - Truck Management Plan: Maintain truck routes to, from, and within Jack London to facilitate safe and efficient goods movement from industrial and warehousing facilities. Develop a truck management plan for the larger Downtown Oakland area, focused on making truck deliveries more efficient and minimizing the disruption from trucks, including design standards for existing truck routes and a policy allowing use of certain underfreeway areas at the periphery of downtown near the Port as electric charging stations for electric trucks (West Oakland Community Action Plan #1 LUTE
W. Oakland Truck
Management Plan
Strategy 1: IMPROVE SAFETY AT STREET INTERSECTIONS
NEAR THE PORT Improve safety for pedestrians, bicycles, and cars at intersections near the Port on Union Street and Adeline Street.

LUTE- Safety
W. Oakland Truck
Management Plan
Strategy 2: IMPROVE TRUCK ROUTING Identify preferred truck routing for truck-oriented businesses to reduce trucks driving on streets with residences or other non-industrial streets. LUTE W. Oakland Truck
Management Plan
Strategy 3: UPDATE THE NETWORK OF TRUCK ROUTES AND
TRUCK PROHIBITED STREETS Propose additions or changes to the Truck Routes and Truck Prohibited Street network so that Truck Routes are more effective.

LUTE
W. Oakland Truck
Management Plan
Strategy 4: IMPROVE TRUCK ROUTE SIGNAGE Provide better
signage to help truck drivers identify and stay on Truck Routes. LUTE W. Oakland Truck
Management Plan
Strategy 6: USE URBAN DESIGN TO PROMOTE USE OF
TRUCK ROUTES Install a pilot project to keep trucks driving on Truck Routes and parking in preferred areas.

LUTE
W. Oakland Truck
Management Plan
Strategy 8: CHANGE PARKING REGULATIONS Change the
parking regulations so they are applicable to more streets in West Oakland and are easier to enforce.

W. Oakland Truck
Management Plan
Strategy 9: CONSIDER INCREASING TRUCK PARKING FINES
Consider revisions to the City’s Master Fee Schedule to increase truck parking fines or other penalties.

W. Oakland Truck
Management Plan
Strategy 10: CONDUCT TARGETED PARKING ENFORCEMENT
Provide targeted enforcement of parking regulations at specific times and locations
Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy Category EJ Category (if applicable) WOCAP
1 The City of Oakland continues working with California Waste Solutions and CASS, Inc. to relocate operations
to the former Oakland Army Base and works with the
property owners and local residents to redevelop the
former sites in West Oakland with new business and
light industrial uses that fit into a green economy.

Green Businesses Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities
WOCAP
4 Consistent with measures in the West Oakland
Specific Plan, the City of Oakland identifies locations outside of West Oakland for heavier industrial
businesses currently in West Oakland that contribute to air pollution emissions and negative health outcomes in West Oakland.

Heavy Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
WOCAP
5 The City of Oakland and Port of Oakland amends
existing Ordinances, Resolutions, or Administrative
policies to accelerate relocation of truck yards and
truck repair, service, and fueling businesses in West
Oakland currently located within the freeway
boundaries that do not conform with the zoning
designations adopted in the West Oakland Specific
Plan.

Heavy Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
WOCAP
6 The City of Oakland uses incentives and subsidies to
relocate businesses away from West Oakland that do
not conform with the zoning designations adopted in
the West Oakland Specific Plan. The Air District will
provide emissions data and technical support to assist
the City in these efforts and to ensure that any
relocated businesses do not cause exposure issues at
the new location.

Heavy Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
WOCAP
7 The City of Oakland revises business licensing
procedures to require current and proposed businesses
to disclose truck visits per day and works with Caltrans to determine the number of trucks that park in the
Caltrans right-of-way near West Oakland. Caltrans
works with WOEIP and the Air District to address air
quality issues from truck parking leases, such as by
modifying leases to allow for collecting surveys and
partnering with the Air District and CARB to allow
enforcement access.

Pollution, Transportation Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
WOCAP
8 The City of Oakland amends existing City Ordinances
and Administrative policies to list new truck yards and truck service, repair and fueling businesses as
prohibited uses within the area of West Oakland that is inside the freeways (excluding the Port, OAB, and 3rd
St. corridor of Jack London Square from Brush St. to
Union St.).

Location of Heavy
Industrial
Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
WOCAP 9 The City of Oakland develops a plan to limit the hours that trucks can operate in the community. Pollution, Transportation Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality West Oakland Specific Plan
Make necessary investments in public
transportation and infrastructure systems to
support and sustain new development.

Reduce truck traffic impacts on residential
neighborhoods; Pollution, Transportation Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
Expand upon, improve and stabilize the
range of available housing opportunities.

Reduce conflicts between neighborhoods and industrial
uses and limit the intrusion of truck routes and heavy
traffic into residential areas;
Transportation Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
Create a safe, physically attractive and
environmentally sustainable community.

Relocate recycling operations, trucking operations, and other uses that contribute to unhealthy conditions; Location of Heavy Industrial
Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
Minimize the intrusion of sensitive land use
types such as residential, schools, etc. within
the established industrial areas of West
Oakland. Support the retention of industrial
uses and industrial land use and
zoning.

Industrial Land
Retention-1
With limited exceptions as specifically provided under
this Plan, prohibit the expansion of new residential uses into the industrial areas of West Oakland so as to
encourage business development and job growth.

Location of Heavy
Industrial
Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Industrial Land
Retention-2
Retain the land currently zoned M-30 within the 3rd
Street Opportunity Area for industrial and business
purposes.

Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
Anticipate and encourage new technologies
such as light industrial, research and
development, low impact manufacturing, and
commercial operations while concurrently
accommodating older industries.

Industrial Differentiation1Retain viable older industrial space and facilitate more intensive use of existing facilities. Intensified business activities in existing buildings can lower vacancies and increase utilization.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Industrial Differentiation1Develop and implement an economic development program focused on encouraging innovative reuse of
existing buildings with a focus on retention of existing industries, as well as incubator space for specific
industry groups, adaptable space for artisans and
craftspeople, and flexible small spaces where start-up
businesses can share facilities and equipment.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan ""
Industrial Differentiation1Retain existing lower-intensity, light industrial uses. Light Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Industrial Differentiation2Identify specific sites that are either vacant or which contain derelict and non-viable buildings for new,
smaller-scale industrial space.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Industrial Differentiation2Encourage uses that provides for new urban manufacturing, construction, and other light industrial businesses that provide good-paying, middle-wage
jobs.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Industrial Differentiation2Capture a greater share of the shifting regional market, which is seeing a change from traditional industrial use to more modern flexible space that can accommodate
a wide variety of business sectors.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Industrial Differentiation3Promote the growing trend towards small, value-added businesses such as artisan foods, digital media,
recording and sound technologies, smart engineered,
cooling technologies, and green building product
development.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Industrial Differentiation3Identify specific sites that are appropriate for new, largerscale industrial, business or institutional uses, based on large parcel sizes, highly prominent locations, or future economic opportunities.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Industrial Differentiation3Surround intensely developed business and industrial sites with a network of smaller business-to-business
suppliers (commonly known as “backstreet
businesses”). Production jobs in industries such as
construction materials, food processing, and
fabrication, as well as technical skills training, are
needed to support larger businesses and institutions.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
Industrial Lands-Related Plans/Policies
Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy Category EJ Category (if applicable) Industrial Lands-Related Plans/Policies
West Oakland Specific Plan
Fully establish Subarea 1A of the
Mandela/West Grand Opportunity Area as a
thriving business and employment center with
a wide mix of business and industrial uses,
while enhancing the interface of this business
area with the adjacent residential
neighborhoods.

M/WG 1A-1 Implement planned streetscape improvement plans for Adeline Street (see also Chapter 5: Circulation),
reating a catalyst for new economic development
opportunity and generally improving the
industrial/residential edge of the Subarea 1A. Streetscape Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
M/WG 1A-3 Focus initial revitalization efforts on intensification of use and infill of existing underutilized older warehouse space, especially within the more notable larger
structures.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
M/WG 1A-4 Attract traditional light industrial and business uses, similar to the types of uses already well-established in this area.

Discourage heavy industrial development between
Adeline Street and Magnolia Street, minimizing the
potential for creating greater incompatible land use
adjacencies.

Light Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
M/WG 1A-5 M/WG 1A-5: Capitalize on the expected relocation of one or more existing recycling operations to the former Oakland Army Base, by redeveloping the property with
new lower impact businesses and light industrial uses
• New uses should be incorporated into the area, such
as science and technology, research and development,
and cleangreen tech that have a combination of
industrial, manufacturing, research and administrative
functions within a consolidated site.

Light Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
Improve the Mandela/West Grand intersection
to signify this area as an important “gateway”
into West Oakland, with
attractive and inviting space, an improved
overall image, and a distinctive West Oakland
character.

M/WG 1B-4 As demand for the arts industry space increases, additional multi-tenant custom manufacturing, studio
and creative office space could be created
within the adjacent Pacific Pipe building.

Add new low-rise buildings that accommodate new
light industrial/industrial arts uses on underutilized
portions of the Pacific Pipe site.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
Improve the business character of the
southern portion of Subarea 1C, which is
currently defined in large part by several
logistics and recycling operations, into a more
environmentally sustainable yet more intensive
employment center with a wide variety of
employment-based uses.

M/WG 1C-1: Focus initial efforts throughout the northwest quadrant of the Mandela/West Grand Opportunity Area on
intensification of use and infill of existing underutilized older warehouse space, and on the re-use of vacant,
blighted and underutilized properties.

Target newer light industrial and business uses, and the types of uses which benefit from immediate proximity
to the Port of Oakland.
• Subarea 1C (especially in the southern
portion near West Grand Avenue) has virtually no
residential neighbors, enabling this area to
accommodatemore intensive commercial and
industrial business uses.

Light Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
M/WG 1D-3: Focus business and industrial
revitalization efforts for the area generally
south of 17th Street on intensification of
existing underutilized older buildings and warehouses,
and on the re-use of vacant,
blighted and underutilized properties.

Light Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
Intent: Maintain and enhance the residential
edge along Pine Street, with light
industrial/business uses serving as a buffer
between the residential uses and the I-880
freeway.
7th Street Lower Pine2:Sites adjacent to the I-880 freeway should be utilized for low impact business uses. • A landscaped buffer
should be established between these business uses
and the new housing and business mix area facing
Pine Street.

Light Industrial, Buffer Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
Enhance the 3rd Street Opportunity Area as a
business and employment center,
focusing on manufacturing and light industrial
uses that benefit from adjacency to the Port of
Oakland, as well as commercial
uses that enliven the area during the day and
night.
3rd Street-1 Because this area has a long
history of heavier industrial uses which
provide essential services to the adjacent
Port (i.e., recyclers, truck-dependent uses,
etc.), maintain space for these Port-serving
industrial uses, accommodating and
blending these older uses with newer, more
vibrant yet compatible commercial and light
industrial uses
Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
3rd Street-2 Capitalize on this area’s proximity
to the Port of Oakland and the regional
freeway network with targeted infill of
vacant and underutilized sites as locations for new
businesses that reflect the existing mix of uses in the area.

Promote infill of smaller vacant and underutilized sites throughout this area with light industrial, service
commercial, food and beverage production,
manufacturing, distribution, and construction-related
businesses.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
The purpose of the proposed new Business
Enhancement zone is to retain existing
buildings, intensify existing business activities,
lower vacancies and increase utilization. This
CIX industrial zone acknowledges the
architectural and historical character of many
existing buildings
Business Enhance-4 Encourage occupancy of existing buildings with incubators for specific industry/trade groups and for
artisans and craftspeople, where small startup
businesses can share existing facilities and equipment. Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Business Enhance-5 Continue the re-use of the
area’s obsolete industrial buildings into
workspaces for art studios, creative spaces
such as Trapeze Arts, and art-related
businesses and institutions like the Crucible.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Business Enhance-6 Discourage removal of existing structures for surface parking for cars or trucks, or for storage of shipping
containers. Shipping containers used as an
architectural form for new adaptive and perhaps
temporary ‘pop-up’ uses may be considered, based on
a design review approval.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy Category EJ Category (if applicable) Industrial Lands-Related Plans/Policies
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Business Enhance-7 Limit the expansion or
introduction of new freight/truck terminal,
truck yard, and primary waste collection
centers to only those zones located within
the 3rd Street Opportunity Area.

Heavy Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
Attract new businesses and different business
market sectors to West Oakland by facilitating
and encouraging appropriately sited new
business and industrial developments. Ensure
that such new development projects contribute
to the economic and environmental health of
the West Oakland community.

Low Intensity Bus-1: Capture a greater share of the shifting regional market, which is seeing a change from traditional industrial use to more modern flexible space that can accommodate
a wide variety of business applications. Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Low Intensity Bus-2 Develop marketing and outreach programs to target the attraction of advanced manufacturing companies
and other “new economy” commercial ventures, as well
as the expansion of Oakland's
creative economy arts and “makers” industries.

Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Low Intensity Bus-3 Designate certain sites where new development can encourage lower-scale, light industrial uses and
development that provides for custom artisan, additive
and advanced manufacturing (also known as ‘urban
manufacturing’), technical design engineering and
construction businesses, and other light industrial
business uses that provide good-paying, middle-wage
jobs.

Light Industrial, Buffer Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Low Intensity Bus-5 Prohibit establishment of new sites for parking of trucks and shipping containers to only those zones within the
3rd Street Opportunity Area, except where the new
repurposing and adaptive reuse of shipping containers
as in interim use (for retailing, arts-based use, etc.) can be implemented, pending design review approval.

Light Industrial, Buffer Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
West Oakland Specific Plan
""
Restrictions on use Modify the list of permitted
and conditionally permitted uses on those
properties with a High Intensity zone, to
restrict the permanent establishment of the
types of uses which generate substantial
truck traffic, and which have the potential to
result in air and noise pollution within the
nearby neighborhoods, and that would
preclude more desired uses.

Industrial Lands Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
Coliseum Specific Plan Industrial Lands
Central Estuary Area Plan New industrial and commercial development emphasizes marine uses, food production, green technology and other industries impIndustrial Lands Central Estuary Area Plan
""
Policy CE-2 MAINTAIN THE INDUSTRIAL CHARACTER AND

ROLE OF THE FOOD INDUSTRY CLUSTER AS A

PLACE FOR FOOD PROCESSING AND

MANUFACTURING, AND RETAIN LIGHT
INDUSTRIAL USES.

Food, light industrial Promote Food Access
City of Oakland
Economic Development
Strategy
2018-2020
Develop or refresh the City’s sector growth
strategies and supportive policies
Supporting the formation and expansion of incubators
and industry-specific associations Flexible Industrial Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
City of Oakland
Economic Development
Strategy
2018-2021
City wants to see an additional 400
manufacturing jobs created, with
manufacturing contributing 12% to the city’s
economy by 2020.

We will help makers and small manufacturers address
rising rents, innovate, grow, and access new supply
chains and markets. The City will also continue to
invest in, and promote, training pathways for local
residents to secure apprenticeships and jobs in
manufacturing and will promote manufacturing as a
viable career
Flexible Industrial
City of Oakland
Economic Development
Strategy
2018-2022
""
strike a balance between the development of cannabisrelated industries and other manufacturing sectors. We will protect zoning for industrial land and leverage
private investment to encourage the rehabilitation of
older, industrial building stock and will invest in
infrastructure and promote Oakland as a center for new
Flexible Industrial
City of Oakland
Economic Development
Strategy
2018-2022
attract more businesses and foreign direct
investment to Oakland
develop compelling propositions to attract target
businesses to Oakland’s manufacturing, logistics, food
and beverage production, green and clean technology,
arts, tourism, and retail clusters.

Flexible Industrial
Downtown Oakland Specific
Plan (DOSP)
Downtown provides affordable, accessible
space for businesses and community
organizations, and sustains employment
opportunities across a broad array of job skills.

Economic Opp (E-2.7) Ensure City policies and actions maintain sufficient industrial space downtown to accommodate user
needs—especially maintaining downtown’s unique
existing strengths in providing space for smallscale
light industrial uses.

Flexible Industrial
Downtown Oakland Specific
Plan (DOSP)
Incentivize retention and growth of commercial a
Economic Opp (E-2.4) Review and revise zoning and other City requirements to allow custom manufacturing uses in ground-floor
commercial spaces so that tenants can make and sell
products in the same space.

Flexible Industrial
Economic Opp (E-2.5) Policy E-2.5 - Maintaining Arts & Production Space:

Ensure City policies and actions maintain sufficient
industrially-oriented commercial space downtown to
accommodate the needs of Oakland’s creative
community— especially maintaining downtown’s
unique existing strengths in providing space for smallscale production uses such as artisan production, food production, arts, and distribution.

Flexible Industrial
Downtown Oakland Specific
Plan (DOSP) Access to services, jobs, education, and
training gives all Oaklanders an opportunity to
find local employment and economic security.

Economic Opp (E-3.3) Continue and expand local-hire initiatives, training, apprenticeships, and partnerships with employers
and Laney College to develop a job pipeline in the
technology sector, “clean and green” sector, and
other major industry sectors in downtown.

Flexible Industrial
Downtown Oakland
Specific Plan (DOSP)
Economic Opp E-2.11 Policy E-2.11 - Maintaining Industrial/Port-Related Uses: As described in the land use chapter, maintain
industrial uses in an area west of Martin Luther King Jr.

Way, between the Embarcadero and I-880, near port
and freight infrastructure. Extend applicable policies of West Oakland’s 3rd Street Opportunity Area to the
east, accommodating necessary truck activity while
ensuring appropriate buffers to other uses and
designing new buildings and street infrastructure to
contribute to a high-quality environment.

Flexible Industrial
Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy Category EJ Category (if applicable) Industrial Lands-Related Plans/Policies
Downtown Oakland Specific
Plan (DOSP)
Make downtown’s streets comfortable, safe,
and inviting and improve connections to the
city as a whole so that everyone has efficient
and reliable access to downtown’s jobs and
services.

Mobility 3.9 Maintain truck routes to, from, and within the Jack London to facilitate safe and efficient goods movement
from industrial and warehousing facilities. Develop a
truck management plan for the larger Downtown
Oakland area.

Transportation Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
Downtown Oakland Specific
Plan (DOSP) Establish, invest in, and better connect
downtown Cultural Districts.

Culture Keeping C-1.4 Encourage or incentivize new developments and infrastructue projects to seek out local culturallyspecific artisan producers and industrial fabricators to supply district-appropriate furniture, lighting, railing, textiles, art work, etc.

Streetscape
EONI Vegetative buffer along E and (partial) Gould Streets – aligned also with 300-ft industrial zone buffer. buffer Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality EONI I-880 freeway vegetative buffer project (with Caltrans). buffer Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
EONI GE/Gatorade site development. BRT TOD Plan buffer Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
EONI
GE site brownfield clean-up and greening space/Art
Walk, International to San Leandro Street. BRT TOD
Plan
buffer Reduce Pollution Exposure, including
improving Air Quality
EONI Vegetative buffer along E and (partial) Gould Streets – aligned also with 300-ft industrial zone buffer. buffer Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality EONI G Street Buffer 92nd Ave. to 77th Ave as part of 300-ft industrial buffer zone. Elmhurst Plan buffer Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality EONI Vegetative buffer along AC Transit corporate yard
between Seminary Ave. and 63rd Ave. buffer Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy EJ Category
HDG Reduce exposure to pollution
EH1.7
Project-wide no-smoking policy. Amend OMC Chapter 8.30 (Smoking) to include the following: for any multi-unit residential project (defined as having 2+ units), prohibit indoor smoking inside all units, indoor and outdoor common areas, patios and balconies, AND within 25 feet of project doors, windows, and air intakes, through the passage of a 100% smoke-free multi-unit housing policy. OR: Amend OMC Chapter 8.30 (Smoking) to include protections from residential secondhand smoke in the form of a 100% smoke-free multi-unit housing policy.

Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality \
F1.1
Support for edible parks program. Require or incentivize developer to provide support to an edible parks program in coordination with the Office of Parks and Recreation and Public Works Agency. Promote Healthy Food Access HDG
F1.2
Onsite space for healthy food retail. Increase neighborhood access to healthy food by at least one of the following:Dedicate outdoor or indoor community space appropriate for hosting a California Certified farmers’ market or produce stand that is open or will operate at least once weekly for at least eight months annually. A planned farmers’ market must have commitments from farmers and vendors that the market will meet all of the above requirements and be in full operation by the time 50% of the project’s total floor area is occupied. OrDedicate space within mixed-use or commercial projects for a grocery store, market, or food retailer that sells or distributes fresh produce.

Promote Healthy Food Access
HDG
F1.3
Garden space and amenities. Dedicate permanent and viable gardens and growing space or related facilities. Promote Healthy Food Access HDG Expand access to high-quality open space and
increase opportunities for physical activity and recreation OS1.1
Increased access to open and recreational spaces. In areas without open space and recreational spaces within a 1⁄2-mile (800-meter) walking distance, design the development project to include publicly accessible open space or recreation spaces at least 1 acre in area, or a publicly accessible indoor recreational facility of at least 25,000 square feet that meets community needs. Consider cultural preferences of local residents and community needs in the design. Open space and recreational spaces can include: community gardens, pocket parks, play spaces, and other uses that promote outdoor recreation, which may include “tot lots,” swimming pools, and sports fields, such as baseball diamonds.

Promote Physical Activity, Promote Public Facilities, Promoting community engagement in the public decision-making process HDG Protect, maintain and reuse existing community
spaces.

OS2.1
Preservation of existing community spaces. If the project site has a recognized existing use as community space (e.g., play field, skate park, community center, community garden, etc.), designate space equivalent to at least 80 percent of the existing use for the purposes of continuing said use, and maintain public accessibility to space. Design project to provide improvements and rehabilitation to existing community space, and connect it physically and programmatically to the project.

Promote Physical Activity, Promote Public Facilities
WOCAP
10 The City of Oakland creates a comprehensive, area-wide urban canopy and vegetation plan that identifies locations that trees can be added and maintained, such as parks and along Caltrans' rights-of-way and develops a plan to protect existing trees that reduce exposure to air pollution emissions in West Oakland. This includes partnering with local nonprofit groups, encouraging trees on private property, and working with the community on tree maintenance and (as needed) removal. The development of the Oakland Urban Forest Master Plan will inform this work.

Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality, Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities WOCAP
16 The City of Oakland, in partnership with the Steering Committee, CARB and the Air District, studies the exposure reduction benefit of requiring solid or vegetative barriers to be incorporated into site design between buildings and sources of air pollution (for example, a freeway).

Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality WOCAP
76 The City of Oakland works with local and agency partners to implement regional and local adoption of the State Department of Public Health's "Health In All Policies" program.

Promoting community engagement in the public decision-making process WOCAP
79 The City of Oakland works with agency and community partners to undertake participatory budgeting with West Oakland community members to allocate local health improvement grants that reduce emissions or exposure to emissions.

Promoting community engagement in the public decision-making process Increase access to local healthy food
EJ/Healthy Living-Related Plans/Policies
Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy EJ Category
EJ/Healthy Living-Related Plans/Policies
WOCAP
82 The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, in partnership with the Steering Committee, the City of Oakland, CARB, and the Air District, studies setting a limit on West Oakland's cumulative exposure to TACs.

WOCAP
84 The Alameda County Public Health Department expands its Asthma Management programs.

WOCAP
86 The Alameda County Public Health Department works with agency and local partners to investigate the use of green building approaches in housing construction and renovation that will reduce emissions and exposure to air pollution emissions. This work examines weatherization/energy efficiency and renewable energy services. This work draws from the Contra Costa County Health Department's pilot effort in cooperation with the Regional Asthma Management Program.

WOCAP
22 The City of Oakland adopts more stringent air quality construction and operations requirements. Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
WOCAP
25 To address potential changes in local pollution exposure, the City of Oakland works with local community groups to address gentrification and the pricing out of long-term residents caused by gentrification. This effort includes meetings with local community groups and incentives and loans targeted to existing businesses and residents. Funding for this effort is identified as needed.

Promoting community engagement in the public decision-making process WOCAP
27 The City of Oakland and other appropriate local agencies limit fugitive dust from construction activity through better enforcement of existing regulations and permit requirements.

Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality WOCAP
78 Consistent with the State's Building Energy Efficiency Standards for air filtration in effect as of January 1, 2020, the City of Oakland requires newly constructed buildings of four or more habitable floors to include air filtration systems equal to or greater than MERV 13 (ASHRAE Standard 52.2), or a particle size efficiency rating equal to or greater than 50 percent in the 0.3-1.0 μm range and equal to or greater than 85 percent in the 1.0-3.0 μm range (AHRI Standard 680).

Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality WOCAP
83 The City of Oakland works with community partners to implement the Healthy Development Guidelines for new building projects.

Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality West Oakland Specific Plan
Make necessary investments in public transportation and infrastructure systems to support and sustain new development.

Improve lighting and street appearance so as to deter dumping and blight.

Promote Public Facilities
West Oakland Specific Plan
Create a safe, physically attractive and environmentally sustainable community.

Ensure that new development employs sustainable ‘‘green’’ building practices, facilitates access to pedestrian and transit networks, and enhances streetscapes and open spaces; Promote Public Facilities ECAP Plan for All Existing Buildings to be Efficient and All-Electric by 2040
B2
By 2022, develop a policy roadmap to achieve decarbonization of the existing building stock by 2040, without additional cost burden or displacement risk to frontline communities. The roadmap must address:• Equitable process and outcomes, including avoiding bill increases, ensuring benefits flow torenters, and local green jobs;• Incentives and requirements;• Regulatory obstacles;• Phasing of implementation;• Financial assistance for low-income residents and businesses, including on-bill financing;• Opportunities for integration of distributed renewable energy generation and energy storage;and• Opportunities and needs for energy efficiency and building envelop upgrades, taking intoaccount local, state, and regional energy efficiency incentive programs and focusing particularly on renters, low income populations, and populations with a disproportionate risk of housing and business displacement.

Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities Outside of City of Oakland Jurisdiction
Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy EJ Category
EJ/Healthy Living-Related Plans/Policies
ECAP Strengthen Infrastructure and Partnerships for Edible Food Recovery
MCW-2
Support existing capacity, and develop new capacity, to recover edible food that is otherwise wasted, and distribute that food for human consumption. Engage with stakeholders including local food donation, recovery, and collection organizations to build robust collection and food storage capacity, and reliable distribution systems to the neediest populations. Engage with food generators such as supermarkets, wholesale distributors, large hotels, and institutions, to donate surplus edible food that food recovery partners want or will accept, and to ensure food generators comply with the Edible Food Recovery requirements of SB 1383. Inform edible surplus food generators about strategies and best practices for preventing wasting surplus food.

Promote Healthy Food Access
ECAP Eliminate Single-Use Plastics and Prioritize Reuse in Food Preparation, Distribution, and Sale
MCW-3
By 2023, work with StopWaste and regional partners to pass an ordinance to reduce the prevalence of single-use plastic in Oakland and to ensure that reusable food service ware is the default in dining.

Specifically:• Require reusable food service ware for all dine-in establishments.• Mandate that any single-use food service ware (plates, bowls, cups) and accessories (straws, utensils, condiment cups) are BPI certified compostable fiber, except where certain materials may be deemed medically necessary or necessary to ensure equal access for persons with disabilities.• Require that any single-use accessories (straws, utensils, condiment cups) are only available on demandBy 2025, in coordination with StopWaste and regional partners, the City shall expand on its ban of expanded polystyrene food containers to other categories of single-use plastic and disposable food service ware as needed to meet the City’s Zero Waste goals, and to ensure that all materials going to compost facilities within Alameda County are truly compostable.

Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality ECAP Expand Community Repair Resources
MCW5
Expand the City's existing tool lending library services to at least 5 other Oakland Public Library branches, recreation facilities, community centers, or other community sites by 2030, prioritizing East and West Oakland and low income neighborhoods. Ensure tool lending facilities support repairable household items and active mobility modes, including bicycles. Explore potential for onsite community partnership programming to teach repair skills and promote local repair businesses Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities ECAP Support the Reuse, Repair, Recovery, and
Refurbishment Economy
MCW4
By 2025, create a community reuse and repair program to increase waste diversion, reduce material consumption, and create green jobs. As part of creating this program, the City will also explore creating or designating live/work or other spaces dedicated to material repair and upcycling, and selling of repaired and upcycled goods. Specifically:• Explore creating or designating live/work or other spaces dedicated to material repair and upcycling, and selling of repaired and upcycled goods• Remove land use and other barriers to developing businesses that reuse or repair consumergoods, where doing so will not adversely impact the surrounding residential neighborhood.• Develop resources to support direct donation to charitable organizations.• Increase public awareness of and access to opportunities for reuse, product rentals, repair, and donation.• Support, regulate, and expand the citywide reuse infrastructure.• Establish a methodology to assess benefit of reuse and repair programs to goals for wastediversion, GHG emissions, and economic development.• Partner with local vocational programs and/or OUSD to launch at least one high school or community college-level Repair Arts Academy.• Develop a grant, recognition, or incentive program to celebrate and encourage local repairbusinesses or leaders.

Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy EJ Category
EJ/Healthy Living-Related Plans/Policies
ECAP Fund Creation and Operation of Resilience Hubs
A1
Increase community resilience by (1) supporting community engagement and community-led disaster preparedness training, prioritizing frontline communities first; and (2) developing protocols and enhancing building systems to enable trusted community-serving facilities – including libraries, recreation and community centers, and parks – to reliably serve their communities as places of refuge during smoke days, extreme heat, and power outages. By 2022, identify and prioritize specific resilience needs and gaps in frontline communities, and assess feasibility of establishing Resilience Hubs at both municipal and community facilities in areas with prioritized gaps. By 2025, partner with established community resilience groups to co-develop and pilot three Resilience Hubs: community-serving facilities that support residents year-round and support resource distribution and onsite services before, during, or after a natural hazard event. Identify ways that the City can support decentralized community facilities to serve residents who are unable to travel to centralized resilience hubs during disasters and emergencies.

Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities ECAP Enhance Community Energy Resilience
A2
Work with EBCE to develop a program and timeline for increasing resilience to power losses, including Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS), and climate-driven extreme weather events for low income, medically dependent, and elderly populations through installation of renewable energy and onsite energy storage with islanding capabilities. Include energy efficiency building upgrades in any program, everaging local and regional incentives. This program may include grants, incentives, rebates, and/or integration with other energy programs.

Promote Safe & Sanitary Homes
ECAP Develop a Local Carbon Investment Program
CR-1
By 2023, Establish a program for both voluntary and compliance GHG mitigation fees to be invested locally. Prioritize projects in frontline communities, such as tree planting and urban greening, including in parks; building electrification; creek restoration; and neighborhood EV car share. Partner with Oakland businesses to establish a “Carbon Neutral Oakland Business” designation, with any offset or “Polluter Pays” fees invested locally, with priority benefit to frontline communities.

Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities ECAP Expand and Protect Tree Canopy Coverage
CR2
By 2022, create a fifty-year Urban Forest Master Plan that:• Prioritizes strategies to address inequities among neighborhoods in tree canopy coverage; • Ensures that carbon sequestration is a major factor in tree planting targets, selection of tree species, and tree management practices;• Establishes a clear and sustainable funding mechanism for ongoing tree maintenance; and• Establishes a protocol and goals for community partnerships for tree planting and maintenance Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities ECAP Explore Carbon Farming
CR4
Explore potential for carbon farming on vacant public or private land, and in coordination with other public landowners in Oakland. Consider requirements and incentives and prioritize investments in frontline communities where feasible. By 2025, establish a pilot carbon farming project to evaluate carbon removal opportunities.

Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities ECAP Rehabilitate Riparian Areas and Open Space
CR3
Identify funding to continue and expand programs to restore creeks and provide ecosystem services in coordination with stormwater management planning, prioritizing investment that reduces climate risks in frontline communities. Include funding for ongoing maintenance and public access.

Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality ECAP Assess Feasibility for Sequestration Incubator
CR-5
By 2025, evaluate the potential for a Carbon Sequestration Incubator in Oakland to incubate and develop green jobs in urban agriculture, urban forestry, aquatic and riparian restoration, engineering technology, and/or other forms of carbon removal. Assess market opportunities, policy drivers, potential locations, and existing businesses and nonprofits that may benefit from collaborating in such a space Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy EJ Category
EJ/Healthy Living-Related Plans/Policies
ECAP Align All Planning Policies & Regulations with
ECAP Goals & Priorities
TLU1
In the course of scheduled revisions, amend the General Plan, Specific Plans, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, and appropriate planning policies or regulations to be consistent with the GHG reduction, adaptation, resilience, and equity goals in this ECAP. Specifically:• Remove parking minimums and establish parking maximums where feasible, ensuring publicsafety and accessibility.• Require transit passes bundled with all new major developments.• Revise zoning such that 90% of residents are within 1/2-mile of the most essentialdestinations of everyday life.• Provide density bonuses and other incentives for developments near transit that provide less than half of the maximum allowable parking.• Update the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Guidelines to further prioritizedevelopment of housing near transit, including housing for low, very low, and extremely low-income levels.• Require structured parking be designed for future adaptation to other uses.• Institute graduated density zoning.• Remove barriers to and incentivize development of affordable housing near transit.• Incorporate policies addressing sea level rise, heat mitigation, and other climate risks intozoning standards and all long-range planning documents. Revise these policies every fiveyears based on current science and risk projections.• Identify and remove barriers to strategies that support carbon reduction, adaptation,resilience, and equity goals, including community solar and energy storage.

Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities ECAP Abundant and Accessible Public Transit
TLU2
The City will work with public transit agencies to replace autos with public transit as a primary transportation mode for trips beyond walking distance, ensuring convenient, safe, and affordable public transit access within Oakland and to neighboring cities for all Oaklanders. Specifically:• By 2023, the City shall work with public transit agencies to develop short- and long-termstrategies to increase public transit ridership by at least 3% per year each year through 2050. Strategies will be based on modifying existing routes and creating new routes for increased reliability, frequency, speed, and efficiency; improving safety at bus stops, prioritizing Deep East and West Oakland; reducing travel times; and ensuring robust, quality service on routes that serve Deep East Oakland and West Oakland.• To facilitate route efficiency, the City shall work with AC Transit to evaluate the need for new or changed routes in Oakland on an ongoing basis. AC Transit and the City will work as partners, with the City committing to improving travel time and passenger experience along major public transit corridors, and to implementing national and international best practices for prioritizing public transit on Oakland streets while accommodating other modes. The City shall work with public transit providers to ensure that economic disruptions of any roadway reconfigurations are minimized.• The City shall work with public transit agencies, community organizations, and communityinstitutions to ensure that all Oakland residents, regardless of location and disability status, can access the public transit network. To ensure accessibility and adequate service in hard to reach areas, the City and public transit agencies will consider supplementing the central transit network with zero-emission, shortdistance, neighborhood-level transportation services such as shuttles, prioritizing areas with high percentages of zero-car or low-car households, persons with disabilities, low-income households, and senior citizens.

Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy EJ Category
EJ/Healthy Living-Related Plans/Policies
ECAP Take Action to Reduce and Prevent Displacement
of Residents and Businesses
TLU3
Leverage City resources and partnerships to prevent residential and business displacement, and preserve and expand existing affordable housing. Specifically:• Expand support of Community Land Trusts, Community Development Corporations, and limited equity cooperatives to prevent displacement of residents and businesses, prioritizing tenants at highest risk for displacement.• Leverage new State funding, as well as identify ways to generate additional local funds, toprovide ongoing capital financing for housing acquisitions and rehabilitation to preserve existing affordable housing and convert market rate housing to affordable housing.• Ensure that all programs funding housing preservation align with climate goals, such aselectrifying and weatherizing buildings.• Develop business anti-displacement programs that align with climate goals, such as increasing neighborhood-serving retail and electrifying and weatherizing buildings.• Develop resources and incentives to support local entrepreneurs whose businesses are helping Oakland meet its climate goals, with an emphasis on entrepreneurs from frontline communities.• Prioritize City support for community wealth building projects in Opportunity Zones, particularly where those projects align with ECAP goals.• Prioritize workforce training dollars and business support for businesses that help meet ECAP goals, especially locally-owned and minority-owned businesses, and businesses primarily employing or creating wealth for frontline community members.

Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities ECAP Expand and Protect Green Infrastructure &
Biodiversity
A-6
Fund and implement a green infrastructure program for the installation and maintenance of projects and existing civic resources such as the parks system and public spaces, to improve stormwater management, support biodiversity, reduce air pollution exposure, and increase access to natural spaces, including trees.

Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities ECAP Evaluate and Reduce Climate Impacts of City
Expenditures and Operation
CL-1
By 2022, develop a GHG Impact Analysis for incorporation into budget, capital, and work plans at the departmental level. By 2023, adopt the Good Food Purchasing Policy or similar climate-friendly food policy for all food purchased by the City for City business/events, as part of City contracts for events and activities, and at food service establishments operating on land under the jurisdiction of the City, to ensure that all such food has minimal carbon impacts and maximum health, equity, and local economic benefits. By 2024, track annual embodied GHG emissions related to City expenditures for construction, building maintenance, travel, and food. By 2025, establish maximum GHG performance thresholds for these and other appropriate City purchases.

Promote Food Access
ECAP Phase Out Fossil Fuel Dependency in All City
Agreements and Contracts
CL-2
Explore ways to eliminate fossil fuel reliance in all agreements and contracts entered into by the City of Oakland, including utility and contractor franchise agreements, facility and infrastructure design and construction contracts, and other agreements in which fossil fuels will be directly or indirectly utilized to conduct the City’s business.

Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality Plan Overarching Goal Strategy # Strategy EJ Category
EJ/Healthy Living-Related Plans/Policies
ECAP Establish the Oakland Climate Action Network to
Support Inclusive Community Engagement on ECAP Implementation CL-5
Launch a long-term, inclusive community engagement structure for ECAP implementation. Partner with local community organizations for ongoing collaboration, communication, and mutual accountability in alignment with the City’s climate and resilience goals. Specifically:• Enhance internal City processes and build grassroots organizational capacity for collaboratively leading and executing equitable climate action, responsive to the evolving needs of frontline communities.• Ensure that the most impacted frontline communities are appropriately identified and resources for climate action and resilience are equitably distributed based on data and through a continuous climate equity analysis.• Develop and implement strategies for broad, inclusive engagement on climate and resilience action, ensuring that frontline community members are engaged through outreach methods and partnerships that are accessible, multi-lingual, appropriate for multiple ages and abilities, and geographically dispersed.• Partner with local grassroots organizations to develop leadership within their communities on climate and resilience issues Promoting community engagement in the public decision-making process East Oakland Mobility Action Plan (EOMAP)
Freedom of Movement - East Oaklanders will travel whenever and wherever they want comfortably, efficiently, safely, and affordably 3.1 Work with the Safe Oakland Streets team to identify programming opportunities for traffic safety in East Oakland.

Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities East Oakland Mobility Action Plan (EOMAP)
""

3.5 Prioritize future bus shelters at stops on high frequency routes in East Oakland. Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities
East Oakland Mobility Action Plan (EOMAP)
Just Planning - City planners and engineers will center racial justice in the planning process and uplift historically underserved East Oaklanders, especially Black residents. 1.4 Consider groundwater inundation and sea level rise when implementing new infrastructure, by incorporating drainage improvements and green stormwater infrastructure. Reduce Pollution Exposure, including improving Air Quality
East Oakland Mobility Action Plan (EOMAP)
""

1.8 City planners and engineers will center racial justice in the planning process and uplift historically underserved East Oaklanders, especially Black residents.

Prioritizing improvements and programs for addressing the needs of EJ Communities, Promoting community engagement in the public decision-making process East Oakland Mobility Action Plan (EOMAP)
Self-Determination and Transformative Partnerships - Community members will be partners in the planning process and will be codesigners in shaping their neighborhoods. 2.2 Community members will be partners in the planning process and will be codesigners in shaping their neighborhoods. Promoting community engagement in the public decision-making process
East Oakland Mobility Action Plan (EOMAP)
""

Oakland City CouncilSeptember 26, 2023

Oakland City Council
September 26, 2023