Look, we need to talk about Oakland. Specifically, we need to talk about the future that’s being mapped out for us right now in City Hall.
In March 2026, the City of Oakland released its Draft Land Use Framework. On the surface, it reads like a manifesto for progress. It’s filled with the right vocabulary: equity, environmental justice, anti-displacement, historic disinvestment. If you just skimmed the executive summary, you’d think the city finally figured out how to grow without breaking its soul.
But if you look closer: inspired by the concerns raised in a recent formal letter to the Oakland Planning Commission: there is a massive, disturbing gap between what the city says it wants and what its plan will actually do.
We are at a crossroads. And honestly? The path being paved right now looks a lot like the same one that pushed so many of our neighbors out over the last twenty years.
The Words vs. The Map
Here’s the thing: you can’t say you’re a priority for "anti-displacement" while simultaneously targeting the most vulnerable neighborhoods for the most aggressive, market-driven growth.
The framework points to transit-rich corridors and neighborhood centers: Downtown, Fruitvale, San Antonio, the Coliseum area, and West Oakland: as the primary engines for future investment. These are the "flatland" neighborhoods. They are the heart of Oakland’s Black and Latino communities. They are also the places where the rent is already rising faster than paychecks.
When you align high-density zoning with public transit investment and then tell the market "go for it," land values spike. Instantly. That pressure doesn't hit everyone the same. It hits the family in a rent-controlled apartment in Fruitvale. It hits the small business in West Oakland that’s been there for thirty years.
The city’s plan uses "anti-displacement" as a policy direction. But a policy direction is just a vibe. It isn't a law. It isn't a fence. It’s a suggestion. Without enforceable protections, that "direction" will be run over by the sheer momentum of capital.
Capacity is Not Delivery
There is a technical trap in urban planning that we need to get real about: the difference between housing capacity and housing delivery.
The Draft Land Use Framework creates a lot of capacity. It redraws the maps so developers can build more units in more places. On paper, that looks like a win for the housing crisis. We need more housing: everyone at McFadden Finch Holdings Company agrees on that. Growth is essential for a city to breathe.
But capacity is just permission. It doesn't mean a single unit of "deeply affordable" housing will actually get built.
If the city opens the floodgates for density without ironclad requirements for low-income units, what we’re going to get is a wave of market-rate towers. We’ll get "luxury" apartments with a gym and a roof deck that 80% of current residents can’t afford to walk past, let alone live in.
If we don't have the financing, the land strategies, and the preservation tools ready before the zoning changes, we aren't building a more inclusive Oakland. We’re just building a more expensive one. We’ve seen this movie before. We know how it ends.
The Ghost of Redlining
Oakland’s history is a heavy one. The draft plan acknowledges this: it mentions redlining, environmental burdens, and the decades of disinvestment that targeted specific zip codes. It promises cleaner air, more trees, and better jobs for the East and West.
That sounds great. But there’s a hard lesson in Oakland’s history that this framework seems to be ignoring: Investment without protection is just gentrification by another name.
In minority communities, displacement isn't a theoretical risk you discuss in a seminar. It’s a lived experience. It’s your cousin moving to Stockton. It’s your church closing because the congregation can’t afford the commute.
By concentrating growth in the flatlands while leaving the lower-density, wealthier "hill" neighborhoods relatively untouched, the city is effectively saying that the burden of change: and the risk of displacement: belongs to the people who have already borne the heaviest burdens for generations.
Growth Without Durable Protection is Not Equity
We want to be clear: growth is good. Smarter land use is necessary. We need visionary leadership to solve the housing shortage. But if that growth moves faster than our ability to protect the people already here, it’s a failure.
What does "durable protection" actually look like? It looks like:
- Enforceable Guardrails: Not just "encouraging" affordable housing, but requiring it as a condition of development in high-pressure zones.
- Tenant Protections: Strengthening the rights of renters before the land values skyrocket.
- Community Wealth-Building: Creating paths for current residents to own the land and the businesses in their neighborhoods, so they benefit from the rising value instead of being victims of it.
- Preservation: Investing as much energy into keeping current affordable units as we do into building new ones.
At McFadden Finch Holdings Company, we believe in building businesses and infrastructure that last. But "lasting" means more than just steel and concrete. It means community continuity. It means making sure that the people who sustained Oakland through its toughest years are still here to enjoy its best years.
The Choice We Face
The Planning Commission has a choice. They can approve a framework that expresses all the right values while setting the stage for a massive demographic shift. Or, they can do the hard work of tying growth to accountability.
Oakland shouldn't force its residents to choose between neighborhood improvement and neighborhood belonging. You shouldn't have to worry that a new park or a new transit line is a signal that your time in your own neighborhood is running out.
We need a plan that doesn't just recognize past harm, but actively prevents future harm. We need a land use framework that grows the city without hollowing out its heart.
The city needs to do more than just talk about equity. It needs to build it into the code.
Built to grow strong businesses, meaningful partnerships, and lasting community impact.
Connect with McFadden Finch Holdings Company today.
McFadden Finch Holdings Company
Vision. Leadership. Lasting Impact.
Lake Merritt Plaza
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 1872-73
Oakland, CA 94612
(510) 973-2677
www.m-fhc.com
info@m-fhc.com
McFadden Finch Holdings Company (MFHC) is a premier holdings and investment management firm dedicated to driving sustainable growth and long-term value. Our mission is to bridge the gap between visionary capital and community-centric development, ensuring tomorrow's infrastructure meets today's needs. Through strategic project management and rigorous market analysis, we empower our partners to navigate the complexities of the California economic landscape with confidence and clarity.
For more information on how MFHC can support your industrial or real estate investment strategy, contact us at (510) 973-2677 or visit www.m-fhc.com.
Sources:
- Based on the formal letter submitted to the Oakland Planning Commission regarding the Draft Land Use Framework, March 2026.
- Referenced from the City of Oakland Draft Land Use Framework documents.
Disclaimer: This content is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, tax, investment, real estate, business, or other professional advice. Reading this content does not create an advisory, client, fiduciary, or contractual relationship with McFadden Finch Holdings Company. Because every business, investment, property, and strategic situation is different, you should consult qualified professionals regarding your specific circumstances. McFadden Finch Holdings Company makes no warranties regarding the accuracy or completeness of this information and is not responsible for third-party content, links, products, services, or organizations referenced. Testimonials, examples, case studies, and projected outcomes are illustrative only and do not guarantee similar results.
