From: Shelby S
To: City Clerk
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comment for City Council meeting 7B. FACT CHECK: Alameda Point Full Buildout Table Date: Tuesday, September 3, 2024 1:03:23 PM
Attachments: image.png
Apparently no one who works for the City (who really are supposed to be working for the PUBLIC) remembers anything about the Alameda Point EIR. You know--the regulatory document that governs the development at Alameda Point? The same one that is mentioned in AMC Zoning Code Section 30-4.24...? Anyone? ...Anyone? YEAH THAT ONE.
Psssst: The legal limit set by the AP EIR is 1425 TOTAL units. The Navy Cap is irrelevant from a legal perspective.
"The City’s vision for Alameda Point is a transit-oriented, sustainable mixed-use waterfront community, which includes 1,425 housing units, 5.5 million square feet of commercial development, and over 250 acres of parks and open space, including over 10 miles of waterfront trails"
For the record, the "full build-out" Table from the AP EIR is below. (Because this item is about putting MORE housing at Alameda Point, only "residential" is highlighted, but please feel free to take note of the other elements, like open space. ) MAXIMUM NEW UNITS=1157
The Table shows the maximum number of residential units allowed by law (including CEQA) at Alameda Point = 1425 residential units.
The residential development limit includes the existing units as well as new units.
Of the existing units, 200 are the "supportive housing" units; 19 are the Historic Big Whites, and 42 are the rest of the City-owned market-rate units in and around the "Beehive" residential neighborhood.
In 2014, the total number of "existing" units was 268 "residential units", so that means that the limit for additional units = 1157 new units.
Note also the residential population is restricted to a maximum of 3240 total residents.
As of 2024, the current development projects at Site A and South of West Midway are already in violation of the AP EIR, with 1300+ new units planned at Site A and with 618+ new units planned for the South of West Midway area.
With the 268 existing units, that total =2186, exceeding the allowed number of units at Alameda Point by 761
units.
So how could the City consider adding even MORE UNITS?
Now lets take a closer look:
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
A 200-unit set aside for "Supportive housing" is required at Alameda Point for the City's "fair share" of the County's homeless allotment as part of the 1996 Base Closure Agreement (Tony Daysog was on ARRA during that time). Pursuant to those agreements, the required supportive housing units are limited to 200 units and 500 residents; these are scheduled to be rebuilt as the RESHAP Project.
As of 2018, the RESHAP acreage had already been reduced from 17 acres to 10.3 acres but still was well-designed with grant money by David Baker Assoc.
RESHAP THEN:
The 2018 RESHAP DDA included:
on 10.3 acres of well-designed and "optimally located"
267 total units
3 stories
ample parking
20,000 SF of open space
40,000 SF for exclusive use of the supportive housing clients such as: case management counseling, peer to peer support groups, trauma informed and recovery-oriented services, job training, community center, daycare program etc
RESHAP NOW
: The 2024 RESHAP Project includes:
on 7.5 acres (relocated without any public input in violation of the grants received)
340+(!) (= 40+ units/acre)
4 story towers designed like "Projects" (next to 1 story historic residential so can never be built.)
50% less and disjointed open space
majority of parking transferred to M-R site
Zero exclusive use space (unilaterally changed by the City taken from the residents' private commercial and office space commercial to be used for the benefit of the public as a whole (e.g., retail, public library)) Q. So how did the ever-shrinking RESHAP parcel go from 200 units to 340+? A. Its because the City illegally added units to the supportive housing that is not really "supportive housing" -- it is the developers "affordable housing".
So anytime City Officials say what a great example this project is, they are full of it. It WAS a great project--it isn't anymore. It is a massive exploitation of a vulnerable population. Typical Alameda stunt.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING "REDLINING"
As part of a later settlement agreement, the City is required to have 25% of the housing at Alameda Point as "affordable housing". As of the today, the new development agreements make 40% of the housing at Alameda Point is considered "Affordable". That is a redline if I ever did see one, and exceeds the "fair share" that the Point should be allotted in comparison to the rest of the City...hmmmm.
(ps. that same agreement also prohibits emergency shelters at the Point, but the City is ignoring that restriction as well).
NEW DEVELOPMENT
Two "mixed-use" (meaning they should have a bodega on every corner) developments are in process at Alameda Point--Site A and "South of West Midway" (SWM). Through 2018, Site A and the SWM development projects were substantially in compliance with the Zoning Code, the Main Street Plan, and The Waterfront Plan--(i.e., mixed use)... Until someone wanted Alameda to be the first City to have a certified Housing Element. That's when things really went off the rails.
Site A
As of 2018, Site A was substantially in compliance with the AP EIR.
As recorded on "Jennifer Ott Day" on 09/04/2018: "Jennifer Ott led the City effort for the first phase of the redevelopment, known a Site A, with an excellent public benefit package for the citizens of Alameda that includes: 15 acres of public open space, 600,000 SF of commercial space, 200 deed-restricted affordable housing units, $10 million for the Seaplane Lagoon Ferry Terminal, and $5 million for a new Sports Center, which was unanimously approved by City and with overwhelming support from the Alameda Community. "
By the end of 2022, the development was completely different from the original that the community overwhelmingly supported.
These substantial and illegal changes have not undergone environmental nor adequate OR meaningful public review.
SITE A THEN
: In summary, in 2018 Site A included:
800 new units
15 acres open space
600,000 SF commercial space
SITE A NOW: As of 2022, Site A now includes:
1300+ new units (all by itself violating the AP EIR limits), replacing the commercial space on block 10 and 17 as well as open space.
Open Space has been reduced to 10 acres instead of 15 (!).
Commercial use is reduced by half, to 300,000SF. Where is it though? The answer to the question "Why is Site A a commercial desert?" is: because Joe Ernst and pals got the majority of Councilmembers to change the phasing deadlines and remove 50% of planned commercial space--commercial space that was promised as a value for those suckers who bought a condo there (can someone say lawsuit?).
South of West Midway Market Rate Parcel
It is important to note that the Main Street Specific Plan has a particular requirement to limit the maximum market rate units to the extent that the developer could also pay for the RESHAP infrastructure.
The SWM financial analysis correctly limited the market rate units to 291 new units.
Somehow, as a consideration for building the RESHAP infrastructure, the City allowed the required 67 affordable units to be added to the RESHAP parcel for a total of 267-- an "iffy" consideration that likely is a violation of the Main St Plan even at that level. (Tony--remember how you were concerned about the misuse of the density bonus? It is only supposed to be used ONCE
, to increase the units only
after the first proposal, not then to re-propose even more units again to allow new units each time they add to the ones they already got. But thats exactly what they did here and at Site A--four times.)
WM M-R THEN
: In 2018, the M-R parcel included:
land area = 22 acres
291 new units
5 acres open space
300,000 SF commercial space
WM M-R NOW: The Market Rate parcel--which stole over 4 acres from the RESHAP parcel as well as all their commercial and all the parking space, is now:
land area = 26 acres
480+ new residential units (added almost 200 more than before!) "maximum" 1/3 acre of open space (!)
7500 SF of commercial space (WTF?!<-- now you know why they stole the RESHAP space)
---How could anyone call this "mixed use" without laughing? DONT FORGET ABOUT JOBS!
The 1996 Community Reuse Plan and the previous and current land use regulations also include other requirements--like jobs
--the 5 million SF of commercial space is supposed to
provide 8900 jobs in a "mixed use" development. Another (ignored) requirement is 100% employment of eligible supportive housing clients at Alameda Point, and a 15% employee requirement for businesses at the Point of supportive housing clients.
Now then, is anyone going to remember any of this tonight?