Catellus, Catellus, Catellus…why have you seemingly abandoned us? I suppose that I would be okay with the lack of development at Alameda Landing if I hadn’t read two recent press releases/news reports about Catellus going after more large scale projects even though they have yet to even build so much as a bathroom on the Alameda Landing site. Apparently, Catellus is one of 13 developers who are bidding to redevelop the Oakland Army Base site, according to the East Bay Business Times:
Catellus Development Corp. and Federal Development LLC are among 13 developers who have submitted bids for redevelopment of the former Oakland Army Base.
The city of Oakland announced the bidders Thursday following a two-month solicitation of qualifications that closed March 10.
The companies will compete to redevelop 108 acres of the former base in west Oakland…
That news followed the news that Catellus’ Bay Area office had relocated to a space in Jack London Square and oh look at what was part of the article:
…Catellus, which is working on the mixed-use Alameda Landing development on former Navy land in Alameda, was previously located at 807 Broadway in Oakland…
And then today, this comes up on the news wire as a press release:
Catellus Development Group, a ProLogis (NYSE: PLD) company specializing in mixed-use development, announced today that it has been selected as master developer and finalized the agreement for a 550-acre mixed-used project located near the Stockton Metropolitan Airport…
While it’s nice that Catellus is continuing to get business during this downturn, it would be nicer if Catellus could give some attention to the projects that it has already secured, like Alameda Landing. After all, in their own press release it states:
…Other major projects developed by Catellus in California include Mission Bay in San Francisco, Pacific Commons in Fremont, Alameda Landing, Los Angeles Union Station, Los Angeles Air Force Base, and Santa Fe Place in San Diego…
Note the term “developed,” as in, already completed or at least started. I think Alameda deserves some explanation as to why nothing has been done yet, particularly if the information from Sideline is accurate. As mentioned by Karen Bey, this is simply a cost of doing business, Catellus entered into this agreement to develop this land with eyes wide open. This isn’t your typical greenfield development and so they should have understood that the problems that accompany this kind of development is a business cost they should have accounted for.
Lauren I think you are asking some good questions that need to be answered by Catellus. It’s clear they have the money to go after new deals but do not want to spend money on Alameda Landing. I heard recently that Bruce Knopf was transferred to a Tracy project after Catellus received all of their approvals. Too bad because Bruce was a great collaborator and knew the city inner workings and could get things done. Bruce I heard resigned from Catellus but now it looks like we’re left with the iron core deal makers who are more concerned with the “art of the deal” than working to get this project off the ground. Its a good thing that we didn’t give them Alameda Point!
Comment by Karen Bey — April 16, 2008 @ 9:30 am
Karen,
I need to confirm you are the person I think you are.
Comment by Mark I — April 16, 2008 @ 3:25 pm
Oops! Long time since I made that mistake.
Anyway. During the re-selection of new master developer, did you speak to council in favor SunCal, and also Lennar? You were/are a Lennar employee? That’s you?
The original pre-Prologus Catellus which bid on FISC and started Bayport, had various officers which changed positions. Don Parker from Marina Village was on board long enough for them to get the nod. I’m sorry for Bruce’s sake to hear he was transferred and then resigned.
Comment by Mark I — April 16, 2008 @ 3:30 pm
I worked for Catellus for 9 years as a Senior Project Accountant and worked on their Pacific Commons retail project in Fremont and many of their industrial/distribution projects around the Bay Area. Alameda Bayport was one of my projects as well. I lived on the west end for over 16 years and was excited to see Catellus selected for the Alameda FISC project and had high hopes that Catellus would develop a lifestyle waterfront development at Bayport (which is the projet I supported). That said, I speak as a 30+ year resident of Alameda and a property owner in the West End. I would very much like to see this project be a success, but have some strong concerns about how this project is unfolding.
I currently work for Lennar as an accountant and during the selection process I spoke in favor of Lennar for the developer at Alameda Point. As a 30+ year resident of Alameda and advocate for retail development on the West End, I will continue to speak out on Alameda Landing development issues as well as Alameda Point.
Thats me!
Comment by Karen Bey — April 16, 2008 @ 4:45 pm
Karen,
Your opinion has currency. (Kind of like the political currency Bush thought he had after re-election, except real!)
Thank you for speaking out.
Comment by Mark Irons — April 16, 2008 @ 5:05 pm
#5
Or, judging from the number of unkept promises, the counterfeit political currency the democrats scattered about prior to winning the midterm elections.
Thank you for bringing that up.
Comment by Jack Richard — April 17, 2008 @ 12:23 pm