Oakland, CA · 5727 College Ave · APN 014‑1266‑047 City Record ZW2600913 · Working Brief v1.1 · June 2026

Two Terrible Towerswhat the project is actually allowed to do

A plain-language look at the plan to demolish the Rockridge Trader Joe's and build two towers, up to 31 stories, assembled entirely from the developer's own filings with the City of Oakland.

The developer's rendering of the two proposed towers rising far above the low-rise Rockridge neighborhood, the BART and freeway corridor, and San Francisco Bay.
Cover. The developer's own rendering of the two proposed towers above Rockridge, looking toward the BART line and the bay. Shown in grayscale; the full-color original is in the plan set. Source: City Record ZW2600913.
A community research briefPublic records onlyNot legal advice
Abstract

A developer has applied to tear down the Rockridge Trader Joe's at 5727 College Avenue and replace it with two residential towers of 31 and 25 stories, 352 and 294 feet tall, holding 415 apartments. The site's height limit is 95 feet. None of the 415 homes would be affordable, and no grocery store would replace the one being demolished. This brief lays out what is proposed, what the neighborhood stands to lose, and the narrow grounds on which the City still has lawful power to act, including a public-safety risk the law does not let it ignore, each tied to a document anyone can read.

§1The proposal, by the numbers

Filed April 2026 by Rockridge Property Owner, LLC. Developer: Align Real Estate. Landowner: Albertsons, the parent company of Safeway. Every figure below is taken from the application.

MeasureProposedFor reference
352 ftTallest tower (31 stories); second tower 294 ft (25 stories)Zoning height limit on this block: 95 ft (~9 stories)
415Apartments, marketed as senior housing371 independent + 18 assisted-living + 26 memory-care
0Affordable homesAll 415 units are market-rate
0 sq ftNew grocery, shops, or restaurantsThe ~20,000 sq ft Trader Joe's is demolished, not replaced
~120Union jobs at the store todayFirst Trader Joe's in California to unionize (2023)
782,000Square feet of building on a 1.5-acre lot≈ 12× the lot's area in floor space
Table 1. Key figures. Source: developer's SB 330 application and architectural plan set, City Record ZW2600913.

§2How tall is 352 feet here?

The number after "Height Area" is a limit in feet, not a number of units. Density (how many homes) is a separate rule based on lot size. This block's height limit is 95 feet. The developer is asking to roughly quadruple it.

0 95 200 294 352 FEET within the 95 ft limit height requiring a waiver 95 ft 294 ft 352 ft ZONING LIMIT 95 FT AS-OF-RIGHT~9 stories TOWER B294 ft · 25 fl TOWER A352 ft · 31 fl
Figure 1. Proposed tower heights vs. the 95-foot zoning limit, drawn to scale. The hatched portion of each tower is the height the developer asks the City to waive under the State Density Bonus Law. The same number of homes could fit in a far shorter, wider building; the extra height comes largely from the project's own design: slim towers, three levels of parking, and unusually large floor areas. Source: SB 330 application and plan set.

§3What the neighborhood loses

The Trader Joe's at 5727 College is the first Trader Joe's in California to unionize. Its workers voted to form a union in 2023. The developer has said the store would not return once construction begins. So the plan removes one of Rockridge's few walkable full-service groceries, ends the roughly 120 jobs there, and does so on a site marketed to seniors, the people who most depend on walking to food. In its place: two towers nearly four times the height the zoning allows, over a neighborhood of two- and three-story storefronts.

Two things about the unit mix are worth naming, even though current law permits them. First, all 415 homes are market-rate: the project uses the State Density Bonus Law, an affordable-housing law, through a senior-housing provision that requires no affordable units at all, so a law meant to produce affordable homes produces none here. Second, 44 of the 415 "units" are staffed care rooms, 18 assisted-living and 26 memory-care, which a recent amendment to the Density Bonus Law now lets the developer count as residential units to size the building. These are not legal flaws to challenge; they are reasons this is the wrong project for the block, and exactly the kind of thing to put in front of your elected officials.

This is not an argument against housing. Rockridge needs more homes, including real senior housing and real affordable housing. The objection is to this project: losing the grocery and the jobs, a tower nearly four times the height limit, zero affordable homes, and a fast-track process built to limit the public's say.

§4Where the project is open to challenge

Under SB 330 and the State Density Bonus Law, approval is close to automatic and the City's power to say no is deliberately narrow. Many of the things neighbors dislike are simply what those laws allow. The opening that matters most: the City can still act on a genuine, unavoidable threat to public health or safety. The points below are questions the City has lawful power to raise, not settled violations. Not legal advice.

1

A 31-story senior tower with no earthquake evacuation plan

This is the project's strongest legal pressure point, because SB 330 still lets the City act where a development would have a specific, unavoidable impact on public health or safety. After a significant earthquake, building elevators are required by code to shut down, and cannot return to service until a qualified inspector clears them, which can take days or weeks. In a 352-foot tower marketed to seniors, including assisted-living and memory-care residents, that strands the people least able to use stairs high above the street, some injured or incapacitated, with no evacuation plan shown. Oakland sits beside the Hayward Fault. The City can require the developer to prove, in writing, how limited-mobility residents would be evacuated and cared for while the elevators are out of service.

Basis: California building and elevator code requires seismic shutdown of elevators until inspection; the Housing Accountability Act (Gov. Code § 65589.5) lets a city deny or condition housing that would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety. The plan set shows no seismic evacuation plan for assisted-living and memory-care residents.
2

Tribal consultation is still required, and the Sacred Lands search came back positive

AB 130 exempts qualifying infill housing from the usual CEQA environmental study, so arguing the developer must complete a standard CEQA review is, by itself, a losing fight: the exemption is written into the statute. What AB 130 does not waive is government-to-government tribal consultation. The State's Sacred Lands File search for this site came back positive, and the City's own notice confirms it. That consultation is a live, document-backed requirement the City cannot simply be talked out of, and a fair basis to insist the process is not yet complete.

Basis: AB 130 (Public Resources Code § 21080.66) exempts qualifying infill housing from CEQA but preserves tribal consultation; the City's AB 130 Tribal Consultation Notice confirms a positive NAHC Sacred Lands File result for this site.
3

The height waiver should reach only as far as the homes actually require

The 95-foot limit is not being changed through a public rezoning. It is being waived under a state provision, on the argument that the height is needed to fit the units. But much of that height comes from the developer's own choices: slim towers instead of a wider building, three levels of parking, and an unusually space-heavy design. A waiver is only meant to go as far as is actually necessary, so the City can demand proof that 31 stories is the minimum required to build the same number of homes.

Basis: the cover letter requests a waiver of the 95-foot limit under Gov. Code § 65915(e); the plans show 782,000 sq ft, far more floor area per home than a normal apartment building.
4

The ground floor may not meet the CN-2 storefront standards

This block is zoned CN-2, a neighborhood commercial zone built for active storefronts: it calls for ground-floor commercial space along College Avenue, mostly clear-window frontage, parking set back from the sidewalk, and no new ground-floor apartments. If the plans propose no commercial space and parking at the base, that conflicts with the zone's objective standards, which the streamlining laws are meant to protect. The City may be able to permit ground-floor housing through a use permit, so this is a question to pin down rather than a certain violation, but it is a fair one to put on the record.

Basis: Oakland Planning Code Ch. 17.33 (CN-2 standards) vs. the plan set; confirm whether any ground-floor commercial frontage is proposed.

§5Built to move fast and quiet

The developer is stacking several state streamlining laws (a vesting application that freezes the rules in their favor, a density bonus, and a CEQA exemption) to limit hearings, limit changes, and limit the public's say. That is exactly why early scrutiny matters. The more neighbors who put specific, factual concerns on the record now, the harder this is to wave through. The project is in Oakland's permit system as record ZW2600913 (also referenced as planning record ZP260014). The two things these laws do not sweep aside, a genuine public-safety impact and tribal consultation, are exactly where scrutiny counts most.

§6What you can do in one click

Decision-makers weigh specific, local, factual comments far more than form letters. These buttons open a pre-written email in your mail app. Add one sentence in your own words, fill in your name, and send.

Sign the petitionchange.org → takes about 30 seconds Email the City, Councilmember & AssemblymemberOpens a ready-to-send draft → just add your name Write the Rockridge VoiceA short letter to the editor to keep this public
  1. Sign the petition first, then send the email. Together they take a couple of minutes.
  2. Change a line or two of the email so it sounds like you. Name the concern you care about most.
  3. Ask the City to make the developer prove it in writing: a real post-earthquake evacuation plan for limited-mobility seniors, that tribal consultation is complete, and that 352 feet is the minimum height truly required.
  4. Talk to the store's workers and your neighbors. Show up when the project reaches a public meeting, and bring two neighbors.
Councilmember Zac Unger (District 1): zunger@oaklandca.gov
Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (District 14): assemblymember.wicks@assembly.ca.gov · co-author of AB 130, reportedly weighing amendments
Oakland Planning & Building: oakplancounter@oaklandca.gov · subject "5727 College"
Rockridge Community Planning Council: landuse@rockridge.org
Rockridge Voice (letters): editor@RockridgeVoice.com

§7Materials & sources

The developer's actual filings with the City, all public records. Download and read them yourself.

SB 330 Vesting Preliminary Application The core filing: unit counts, floor area, height, parking, density-bonus request · 636 KB Cover Letter & AB 130 Consistency Analysis The legal theory: senior density bonus, the 95 ft height waiver, the CEQA exemption · 328 KB Architectural Plan Set Drawings, zoning summary, the developer's own density and height-waiver math · ~14 MB (compressed for web; full-resolution copy at the City record, ref. 5) AB 130 Tribal Consultation Notice The City's notice confirming the positive Sacred Lands File result · 812 KB

Rules, laws, and the record: