The Oakland As plan for a mixed use development and ballpark at Howard Terminal is getting closer to becoming reality late Thursday. After a lengthy 8-hour hearing the Oakland City Council voted 2 to 2 to approve the project’s environmental impact report.
The 3,500-page environmental report has been certified, which will allow the huge waterfront project to move forward. The approval process is still far from complete, as The Oaklandside explained to its readers Thursday. Before the plan is returned to the council, it must be approved by multiple government agencies.
Carroll Fife (Councilmember) and Noel Gallo (Councilmember) voted against certifying EIR. Nikki Fortunato Bas and Rebecca Kaplan, Dan Kalb and Treva Reid, Loren Taylor, Sheng Thao, and Treva Reid voted yes. However, no one was doing a victory lap. Even councilmembers who voted for the environmental impact report expressed concern about how the $12 billion proposal might alter West Oakland and Chinatown, which are the closest neighborhoods to the site.
Mayor Libby Schaaf was a consistent supporter of a Howard Terminal stadium for baseball and called the council’s decision a historic moment in Oakland’s future.
Tonight’s action is more that a milestone. It is a huge step forward in our shared mission of creating a regional destination that gives back the waterfront to the public, connects to our downtown and provides tens to thousands of good union jobs for our residents. And it does all while keeping our beloved As rooted here in Oakland, Schaaf stated in a statement after the vote.
Fife’s council district includes West Oakland and Howard Terminal. She called on her colleagues to halt any plans to make a decision. Fife said that members from West Oakland and Chinatown are telling her they haven’t been heard.
Fife stated that it feels like we are moving in the direction that will negate any power these organizations may have. The As created this timeline.
The East Oakland Stadium Alliance, a group representing many Port of Oakland labor unions, issued a statement Friday morning. It stated that while we applaud Councilmembers Fife and Gallo’s rejection of the insufficient Final EIR for As Howard Terminal, we are disappointed that the majority of councilmembers voted to certify the report that puts our community and port at serious risk.
Many community members, business leaders, labor leaders, government agencies, and others have pointed out that the EIR fails significantly to address important issues such as traffic, health, safety, and toxic remediation. The City Council failed to meet its obligation to protect the community by allowing this project to move forward without committing meaningful mitigation measures.
Friday morning’s president Dave Kaval stated that the EIR has been approved and that the team and city can now focus on a development contract, which is a legally binding agreement between the As-city that would detail the teams commitments and provide community benefits. Kaval explained to The Oaklandside that it was crucial that we get through this step. We have a way to go to the city for a final economic deal.
The As are still exploring stadium options in Las Vegas. Kaval stated that they have only a few sites available to purchase or enter into joint ventures with landowners. Kaval stated that there is a lot positive momentum in Nevada. This will continue until there is a clear path and a definite home for As. The Coliseum is running out of time. The East Oakland facility’s As lease runs through 2024.
It is possible to challenge the certification of an environmental impact report. The state law allows opponents to a development project, as well as large projects, to challenge an EIR in court. This can lead to legal challenges that can last for years.
However, a 2018 state law by Rob Bonta simplifies the process. BelowAB 734Any lawsuits would need to be disposed of within 270 days from certification.
Howard Terminal: Labor advocates and union reps are divided
The City Council’s action follows the recommendation from the Planning Commission, who last month asked for approval by the council of the environmental impact report, also known as an EIR.
John Fisher and Kaval, the owners of the company, stated that they want to work with the county and city to build a 35,000-seat baseball park, 3,000 housing units, 1.5 million square footage of offices, 270,000 sq feet of retail space and 400 hotel rooms. They also hope to partner with the city to fund and construct a 35,000-seat stadium, a 35,000-seat arena, and a 18-acre park and open area along the Oakland Estuary.
The Zoom hearing was attended by more than 300 people. After the vote, many speakers pleaded with council members to delay the vote to allow more time for analysis of how traffic, rail safety and noise impacts would be addressed.
Oakland’s labor advocates are divided on the issue. Several labor unions that would work to construct the Howard Terminal developmentpipefitters, ironworkers, and apprentices for the building tradessaid they saw value in the jobs the project would create, which the city estimates to be more than 7,000. Others who worked at Coliseums concession stands claimed that they have been assured by the As that the jobs they hold would be relocated to the waterfront. The income is essential for our families, a concession worker said to the council.
The opposition is fiercely supported by the longshore union as well as other port workers. They argue that taking Howard Terminal out of the port and making it a commercial asset will harm operations at the port. Howard Terminal is located within the inner harbor, next to a turning basin. After dropping off containers, ships up to the size of skyscrapers must make a U turn.
Aaron Wright, a business agent for the ILWU 10 longshore workers union, stated that the As have not kept their promises about building a project that is compatible with this reality. How do you deal effectively with these people and their manipulations? Wright asked. Wright asked.
Melvin Mackay, a long-time longshoreman, stated, “You cannot continue pulling the wool over residents’ eyes.” The voters of Oakland will soon see you again, so you guys need to make a conscious decision and stop being puppets.
Others see no reason why Oakland Coliseum should not be able to build a new baseball park. East Oakland is considered a great location for the team because it is close to BART, Interstate 880 and the Oakland International Airport. The 120-acre site was annexed by the Oakland International Airport. 2015 environmental impact report approved and completedWhen Coliseum City was being developed, there was a plan to create a new stadium for Raiders and As, as well as housing, retail, and high-rise office buildings.
Concerns regarding affordability and neighborhood impacts
Sheryl Walton, an East Oakland resident for many years, stated that the As must provide community benefits to East Oakland in exchange for the As deciding to divest from the area in order to build a luxury waterfront real estate development.
Reisa Jaffe said, “I understand people want jobs.” The Coliseum could have offered those same jobs. The As chose to draw a line in sand. We must not allow that to push us into making mistakes. Let’s take it slow and be careful.
After the Warriors and Raiders left for San Francisco in 2019, the Coliseum’s last anchor tenant is the As. A group of Black business leaders who have connections to the community are currently negotiating to build housing, entertainment centers, and retail at this site and to lure a WNBA player.
Gallo, who represents District 5 in Fruitvale, said that I still believe the Coliseum is the best area for development. Gallo stated that a Coliseum development that includes the As would allow Oakland to grow, not just in one area but throughout.
Some residents and organizations in Chinatown and West Oakland requested that the environmental impact report be delayed in its certification. Alvina Wong from the Asian Pacific Environment Network said that the EIR fails the to assess the impact on Chinatown. We were informed that an additional analysis is underway.
A city consultant said that the report would not be published until April.
Wiggi, a West Oakland resident who identified themselves only as Wiggi on Zoom called, suggested that the As move from east Oakland to West Oakland might help people find jobs in Acorn (the neighborhood where Wiggi resides). What will a ballpark do for my neighbors? Wiggi asked. It would.
Residents expressed concern about how much affordable housing would become available at the Howard Terminal site, as well as in nearby developments. Officials from the city have asked the As for at least 15% of the proposed residences to be designated as affordable and for $50 million to create affordable housing elsewhere in the city.
The entire report is a shrug emoticon, according to Emily Wheeler, a resident of Oakland. It is reasonable for the community not to accept the answers we have been given. That report is offensive, to be honest.
According to a representative of the Sierra Club, the EIR did in fact not account for the Sierra Club. Projections of sea-level rise by 2050. The As proposed to cap the site and leave hazardous materials in place, instead of removing them. This has raised concerns about who will pay for the cleanup or who will monitor the toxic substances left behind. Pete Vollmann, a planner for Oakland, stated that the permit fees the As pay will cover these costs.
Jon Loebl is a supporter for the ballpark plan and asked the council not to be narrow-minded. He said that Howard Terminal’s proposed ballpark, homes, parks, open space, and a ballpark would cause less environmental damage than the existing structures. Loebl asked that you put the community first.
Fernando Gallo is an As fan but he doesn’t live in Oakland. He said that he would love to spend money in the city while attending As games. It’s similar to the restaurants and bars that he visits after he attends Sacramento Kings games. He doesn’t have the opportunity to do so because of the Coliseum’s current setup. Gallo stated that there is no reason for me to travel to Oakland. Spending money in the local community isn’t what you want.
Rail crossing safety and the gondola
The issue of how potentially 35,000 people can safely cross the train tracks that divide Howard Terminal from Jack London Square without disrupting rail service is a major concern. Union Pacific Railroad’s Adrian Guerrero stated that there are approximately 100 train movements per day on the rails. Guerrero claims UPRs concerns are being ignored. He said that the As dismissed this claim and claimed it was a preexisting problem.
Staff informed councilmembers that the California Public Utilities Commission is responsible for evaluating rail crossings. They also stated that the adopted plan should comply with CPUC regulations.
Last night’s vote didn’t include As’s proposal to have an aerial tramway transport fans from the Marriott to the ballpark. It’s just talk at the moment. No plans have been filed. Moving people on an air track would require more research, as Washington Street is located near historic buildings in Old Oakland. The path would need to cross Interstate 880 from the air above a state road.
In early renderings, another bold idea was to allow watercraft in Oakland Inner Harbor (think kayaks across the bay in McCovey Cove). Danny Wan, the Port of Oakland Executive Director, stated to the City Council that they do not have access to water and no boats in the water.
For As fans who have been waiting for the moment, the vote is now. Fisher-owned As had previously threatened to move to San Jose or Fremont. The As hired Kaval, the team president and point person for the stadium search, to ease their worries. But the As are now looking elsewhere.
The City Council also voted to ensure that any project-related community benefits or freight compatibility are considered before or concurrently a development agreement between the city of As.
This resolution was written by Bas, Kalb and Kaplan to give city staff, who will be negotiating the terms, a clear understanding of the priorities the council wants. The As will make onsite affordable housing commitments, there are opportunities for small businesses around the ballpark, and there will be a study of the traffic and parking impacts in Chinatown, West Oakland, as well as transparency regarding any toxic cleanup.
Council voted 7-1 with Gallo abstention to adopt the resolution.