The provisions of this Chapter shall be known as the General Regulations. The purpose of these provisions is to set forth certain regulations that may or shall, depending on the situation, apply to all provisions of procedures and administration (Chapters 17.130 through 17.148).

(Ord. No. 13357, § 3(Exh. A), 2-16-2016; prior planning code § 9000)

A.

Number of Owners and Occupants Greater than One Thousand (1,000). If the number of owners and occupants of real property to whom notice would be mailed or delivered pursuant to any provision of procedures and administration (Chapters 17.130 through 17.148) were to exceed one thousand (1,000), the Director of City Planning may, at his or her discretion, use or specify other alternative notification procedures deemed appropriate. Such decision may be appealed pursuant to the administration appeal procedure in Chapter 17.132.

B.

Notification Requirements Not in the Public Interest. If the Director of City Planning finds that, due to the special circumstances of a specific application, there will be no negative impact on surrounding properties, and that the purposes of the zoning regulations and the public interest of the citizens of Oakland will not be served by rigidly following the notification requirements set forth in any provision of procedures and administration (Chapters 17.130 through 17.148), the Director may, at his or her discretion, vary the requirements set forth or may use other alternative notification procedures deemed appropriate. Such decision may be appealed pursuant to the administrative appeal procedure in Chapter 17.132.

C.

Notification of Adjoining Jurisdictions. Whenever a provision of procedures and administration (Chapters 17.130 through 17.148) results in an adjoining jurisdiction falling within an area in which notices are to be mailed or delivered to Oakland property owners and occupants, such notice shall also be mailed or delivered to the Director of City or County Planning, whichever the case may be, in said jurisdiction.

(Ord. No. 13763, § 5, 10-3-2023; Prior planning code § 9001)

Notice by mail is deemed given on the date the notice is placed into the U.S. Mail system.

(Prior planning code § 9002)

A.

Planning Commission is Final Decision-making Body. If, in a matter that is appealable to the Planning Commission or to the Commission's Residential Appeals Committee and in which the Commission or Committee is the final decision making body, and is unable to reach an affirmative decision to approve or deny an application, the initial decision by the Planning Director stands as a final decision if the Commission or Committee is unable to reach a decision the second time the matter appears on the Commission's or Committee's agenda and votes are taken.

B.

City Council is Final Decision-making Body. If, in the matter that is appealable to the City Council, the Planning Commission or the Commission's Residential Appeals Committee is unable to reach an affirmative decision to approve or deny an application, the Chair of the Commission, in his or her discretion, shall either:

1.

Forward the matter to the City Council if the Chair determines that the Commission or Committee is deadlocked or if the application would otherwise be automatically Deemed Approved and the applicant has not agreed to waive the state or local Deemed Approved provisions; or

2.

Request further votes on the matter at this meeting or at subsequent meetings, provided however that the Commission or Committee may not continue the matter if it would result in the application being Deemed Approved.

A tie vote that is forwarded to the City Council, for the Council's decision, shall be considered a decision for purposes of any state or local Deemed Approved provisions, such that the application shall not be automatically Deemed Approved and any agreement between the Planning Director, Commission or Committee and the applicant extending the time of such automatic Deemed Approved shall include a statement to this effect.

(Ord. No. 13357, § 3(Exh. A), 2-16-2016; Ord. 12376 § 3 (part), 2001: Ord. 11741 § 2, 1994: prior planning code § 9003)

A.

Whenever, pursuant to the Oakland Planning Code, a matter of original jurisdiction, for which a hearing is required, is pending before the City Council or City Planning Commission, any interested party, while the hearing is open, may submit any issues and/or oral, written and/or documentary evidence to the City Council or the Commission, whichever is applicable, for its consideration.

B.

Whenever, pursuant to the Oakland Planning Code, an appeal for which a hearing is required is pending before the City Council, City Planning Commission, or the Commission's Residential Appeals Committee, the appellant may not submit any issues and/or oral, written and/or documentary evidence not previously submitted in the appeal form itself and presented: (a) prior to the close of the written public comment period for the underlying decision being appealed, in the case of appeals based on a decision by the Zoning Administrator or other administrative decisions, or (b) prior to the close of the City Planning Commission's public hearing for the underlying decision being appealed, in the case of appeals based on decisions made by the City Planning Commission, as applicable. Unless otherwise expressly stated in the Oakland Municipal Code and/or Oakland Planning Code, appeals are not de novo.

(Ord. No. 13270, § 3(Exh. A), 11-18-2014; Ord. No. 13172, § 3(Exh. A), 7-2-2013; Ord. 12776 § 3, Exh. A (part), 2006: Ord. 12376 § 3 (part), 2001: Ord. 11828 § 1, 1995: prior planning code § 9004)

Editor's note— Ord. No. 13270, § 3(Exh. A), adopted November 18, 2014, changed the title of Section 17.130.050 from "Presentation of written and documentary evidence" to "Presentation and submittal of issues and/or evidence." The historical notation has been preserved for reference purposes.

A.

To the maximum extent permitted by law, the applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Oakland, the Oakland City Council, the City of Oakland Redevelopment Agency, the City of Oakland Redevelopment Successor Agency, the Oakland City Planning Commission and its respective agents, officers, volunteers, and employees (hereafter collectively called City) from any liability, damages, claim, judgment, loss (direct or indirect), action, causes of action or proceeding (including legal costs, attorneys' fees, expert witness or consultant fees, City Attorney or staff time, expenses or costs) (collectively called "Action") against the City to attack, set aside, void or annul, any land-use related approvals and actions including but not limited to: (1) amendments to the Planning Code, rezonings, and/or General Plan amendments; (2) an approval by the City relating to a development-related application or subdivision and/or a (Lease) Disposition and Development Agreement; or (3) implementation of such. The City may elect, in its sole discretion, to participate in the defense of said Action and the applicant shall reimburse the City for its reasonable legal costs and attorneys' fees.

B.

Within ten (10) calendar days of the filing of any Action as specified in Subsection A. above, the applicant shall execute a Letter of Agreement with the City, acceptable to the Office of the City Attorney, which memorializes the above obligations. These obligations and the Letter of Agreement shall survive termination, extinguishment or invalidation of the approval. Failure to timely execute the Letter of Agreement does not relieve the applicant of any of the obligations contained in this Section or any other requirements or conditions of approval that may be imposed by the City.

(Ord. No. 13357, § 3(Exh. A), 2-16-2016; Ord. No. 13172, § 3(Exh. A), 7-2-2013; Ord. 12899 § 4, Exh. A (part), 2008; Ord. 12776 § 3, Exh. A (part), 2006)

A development application must comply with all current and applicable City of Oakland uniformly applied development standards, typically imposed as Standard Conditions of Approval, including those development applications "deemed approved" under the State Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code section 65920 et. seq., as it may be amended).

(Ord. 12899 § 4, Exh. A (part), 2008)

When a development application requires both legislative and adjudicatory actions, the entire application shall be considered by the City Council for final action. The City Council has the authority to consider and revise as appropriate (accept, reject, or modify) the adjudicatory land use decisions of the Planning Commission, regardless of whether an appeal to the City Council is filed challenging such adjudicatory land use decisions.

(Ord. 12899 § 4, Exh. A (part), 2008)

A.

Any Minor land use-related permit and/or approval that is related to a development application that also includes any Major land use-related permit and/or approval shall be considered concurrently with the Major land use-related permit and/or approval, and shall follow all procedural requirements associated with City Planning Commission decisions. In this case, the entire application shall initially be considered by the City Planning Commission and may be appealed to the City Council, in accordance with the requirements for Major land use-related permit and/or approval or discretionary actions.

B.

Any Minor land use-related permit referred to the City Planning Commission for initial decision in order to be considered concurrently with any Major land use-related permit and/or approval shall still be considered a Minor land use-related permit and/or approval, and the required findings for said Minor land use-related permit and/or approval shall apply.

(Ord. No. 13357, § 3(Exh. A), 2-16-2016; Ord. No. 13172, § 3(Exh. A), 7-2-2013)