Willie Stargell (Tinker) Avenue Low and Very Low Income Units
Sorry for the flood folks, I have a lot to say today and the bulk of this has been sitting in my “drafts” box for a few days today with minor additions this morning.
I would have just said ”affordable housing,” but we all know how that discussion turned out.
A lot of Bayport homeowners were curious about the 39 unit multi-family housing slated to be built off Tinker Avenue now Willie Stargell. This is the plot of land we all received paperwork on regarding environmental controls and which was incorrectly identified as the Alameda Landing project. Since the multifamily housing will have no common areas in which the residents will be able to dig holes to wherever, there is not the concern about someone hitting contaminated groundwater. As for the possible Benzene fumes, the developer will be putting in environmental controls to ensure that if (that’s IF) any contaminates do escape, that they will not get into the enclosed living areas. For a better and more thorough explanation of what is being done around this, watch the video, Debbie Potter explains it and that explanation starts at around 41 minutes into the meeting. Oh and she mentioned that the meeting that they held about this, only one (1) person showed up.
And before someone goes, “a-ha! multi-family housing is being built.” Well this multi-family housing is specifically exempted from Measure A as it is for low and very low income families as part of the Guyton exemption. What makes this development special is that it is service enriched housing, providing recreation services, life skills workshops, counselling, etc… for the residents there.
For more information, you can access the Planning Commission staff report from their meeting the other night and if you watch the streaming video (it starts at around 10 minutes into the meeting) you can get the details of the project from the architect himself. I would love to get my hands on the powerpoint presentation with details and more complete renderings about the development, but it doesn’t seem to be posted anywhere on-line.
Also, you can see renderings of what the project will look like from the architect’s website. The center courtyard looks wonderful, hopefully we can all catch little peeks of it from the road. I think it will be a great addition to the community. The architects mentioned that the inspiration for the project was a mixture of Japanese and a more modern Craftmans style. Additionally, according to the website information:
The project is being developed with input from Santa Monica-based Global Green to incorporate sustainable materials and design strategies.
Which includes, solar panels and the minimum use of non-porous materials as possible. And there will be a bus stop planned for the main entrance to the complex, now if only we could get some relatively consistent bus service out to the Landing and Point in order to serve this community.
The Sun wrote an okay article about the project, but I think in order to make the headline a little more “sexy,” it has provided some fodder for a lot of the pro-Measure A clinging on to the “the land is toxic” argument in order to stop all development on the Point. For example, a recent letter to Don Roberts:
Possibly from our old friend Bill D., sourcing figures from the same incorrect site. Again, I talk about the HUD income limits under this discussion about affordable housing vs. housing that is affordable.
Edited to add:
Dave K. Just plain Dave (too many Daves here, I think this blog has reached its quota of Daves) had this to say under another post:
Reagrding the new affordable housing that was in yesterday’s Sun:
Now that Bayport will be nearly surrounded by low income rentals, have any anti-A folks started to come around to the Measure?
I’m not sure if Dave K. just plain Dave is implying that living in a mixed income community is a bad thing because I know that I welcome people of all socio-economic classes to live around me. The 39- unit housing being built will only be a benefit to the Bayport community, not a negative and to imply that people who wish for an exemption to Measure A are for affordable housing except in their own backyards rubs me a little wrong. The development of both the Breakers at Bayport (very-low to low income rentals and homeownership opportunities) and the 39-unit housing (very-low to low income service-enriched housing) was disclosed prior to anyone purchasing in Bayport. Perhaps Dave would prefer to not live in a neighborhood as ethnically and socio-economically diverse as Bayport and its evirons, but the Bayport residents who purchased and rent here do.
Nobody shows up at the meetings because they are not well-noticed. Posting a paper notice on the door of Room 241 City Hall West isn’t much help, as development staff told me “nobody comes out here.”
Also, getting information on these sites is a Kafka-esque experience. I myself went to City Hall West to development services to find out about planned developments and nearby contaminants, and was told I had to speak to the Navy, because they’re cleaning it up, it’s their land. They led me to two big rooms constituting the libary that is said to contain a copy of all the Navy documentation on the clean-up and left me alone, offering no assistance.
The documents are in typical government bureaucratese “Contaminated Soil at IR02 (Installation Restoration Site 02)” or “Former NAS Alameda Operable Unit 1 IR Sites 6, 7, 8, and 16″ and interested citizens are left to their own devices to try to match up the Navy site designators with City planning documents (EIR, etc.) Again, with no assistance from the City. Making a genuine, knowledge-based contribution at any of the meetings would require a time commitment equivalent to a full-time job, just to decipher the code.
It’s very odd that there should be so much planning activity within City staff going on, and so much debate going on among residents, yet City staff take a decidely hands off approach when a citizen wanders in to ask questions. Perhaps _all_ plans for Alameda Point should be put to a halt until the Navy cleans up the land.
It’s also interesting that despite what some HOMES representatives have said, there is indeed housing planned for contamination sites on Alameda Point, this development being an example.
The toxins are in the ground and groundwater, and a gas barrier membrane (read: plastic sheet) is being installed as part of the construction to try to keep them there.
But just in case they don’t stay in the ground, there are vents being installed to route the gases up into the air over top of the building.
Again, I think it would be interesting to study the residents 20 years from now to see if this area forms a cluster of afflicted people.
Comment by keepmeasurea — September 29, 2006 @ 1:19 pm
Clarification: The comment referenced above was mine, but I’m not Dave K — just plain Dave.
Comment by dave — September 29, 2006 @ 1:46 pm
Much has been said about the contimination of the former military base, which in my research shows was primarily used as a repair facility for aircraft. Oil, gasoline, additives, certain solvents for cleaning parts ( benzine) , and so on are all present there. Indeed… nasty sounding stuff.
But what about what’s in your house? Most homes in Alameda were built before 1978… so most are filled with lead paint, asbestos insulation, and certain wiring coated with PCBs. Indeed.. by themselves potentially dangerous things that could hurt you if you ate, licked, or otherwise ingested them. What about the streets? Over 100 years of cars leaking all various kinds of fluid have likely soaked them forever, with runoff finding it’s way in your yards and basements. Oh ya- the basement- itself filled with whatever zliion cans of garage things, like poison, oil, gas, grease, etc etc… a verifiable brew of nastiness.
What I’m trying to get at is that while I don’t want to undermine the importance of careful polution asessment prior to building, perhaps the public needs a comparision of exactly how dangerous the pollution is on the base versus our very homes.
Comment by Willy — September 29, 2006 @ 4:43 pm
As for my house, it has been renovated in modern times (i.e. post-2000) and I will welcome the soil contaminant test unit to my backyard the same day they commence current spot tests at Alameda Point.
Comment by keepmeasurea — September 29, 2006 @ 10:29 pm
To be honest, I never heard of Measure A until I lived here for over 1 year. I would have not believed it as there are so many apartment buildings in Alameda. After a year, I went on a tour of Alameda Landing and that was the first time I heard of Measure A and I didn’t really believe it. I at first thought it was okay, then changed my mind and thought it should be overturned.
Recently, I have noticed all the apartments on the West end and Shoreline have changed my mind once again. One of the things which brought me to this conclusion was the old Coast Guard housing which they will be renting to some facility and they are building a new project Shinsei Gardens for mostly low income veteran when they could use the money for the new building to remodel a project the Navy already owns. Also the are putting Alameda Point Collaborative, the old Coast Guard Housing, and The Breakers all in the same area. Why put all the low income housing in one area and not across the City? Consequently mostly because of Shinsei Gardens project has made me look at the West end of Alameda and a supporter of Measure A once again.
So I look at the options and change my mind now and then, maybe one day I will be back on the other side.
Comment by Joel — May 9, 2008 @ 4:42 pm