Blogging Bayport Alameda

January 25, 2013

You can’t do that

Filed under: Alameda, Alameda Point, Development — Tags: , — Lauren Do @ 6:05 am

Just in case you aren’t interesting in wading through the Alameda Point EIR documents, I pulled out a few charts to help you understand what the zoning designations actually means when it comes to specific uses.

Here’s the zoning map again:


So this first table is the type of buildings that are allowed in each zone.


This table I posted in the comments of yesterday’s post.  While the Adaptive Reuse Employment area allows for work/live, dwelling units are only allowed on the second floor and must be conditionally permitted as they are not permitted by right.   Additional limitations include that they will only be allowed in the administrative core of the AP-AR zone.


Personally I find the uses allowed and — more particularly — not allowed in the AP-E Employment area to be the most interesting because very little is allowed either by right or by conditional use.   This is particular interesting in light of the Economic Development Report that was performed to the tune of $250,000 that essentially said that businesses don’t want to relocate to Alameda Point because there is no there, there.  And by “there” I mean “stuff for people to do” like go out to eat and pick up dry cleaning.   The only exception is “large format retail” which essentially means that that Employment area would be big business parks and big box stores.







Don’t forget, the Planning Board meeting is Monday, this is a great chance to get your feedback in early.



  1. There are two aspects to this EIR process. There’s the relatively straightforward aspect of combing through the reuse plan – “The Project” – and the uses and zoning identified on the map above and come up with a list of impacts that must be studied. The harder part, it seems to me, is taking all of the alternate suggestions, like putting more “their” in the employment area, and articulating that as an alternative. They aren’t going to study “suggestions.” There will be the “No Action” alternative, “The Project” alternative, and two, maybe three, alternatives, but not six or seven.

    And regarding the flooding and sea level rise issue raised under yesterday’s post, the EIR cannot study the impacts of the environment on a project. It can only study the impacts of the proposed project on the environment. Climate change has to be addressed under the infrastructure planning. For more on climate change as it relates to Alameda Point, see George Humphries excellent commentary in yesterday’s Alameda Sun:

    Comment by Richard Bangert — January 25, 2013 @ 8:50 am

  2. It’s a big farce !
    never mind the up to 2400 houses at the point
    how about the few hundreds at the former plant on clement
    how about the few hundreds at the buen vista storage
    how about the few hundred at the foot of fruitvale
    how about the few hundred at the very much contested buy EB park
    Should we count the few hundreds on bay farm
    I believe there is still a project by the encinal yacht club

    No where never any City administration has been secretive in dealing with devellllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllopppppppppppppppppppppers we sure cannot go up but like tar it spread and certainly not for everyone benefit , one good point we will be able to reopen the Alameda Jail , give a raise to our frirendly out of town firemen , one somple question how will you get all these cars out of the City ……..
    Airship , Bicycle , I have not seen many when the tempature was dipping in the 30 nor with the rain , these so called bike advocates all used they card as the buses were as empty as they are in the sunny day .

    My point and every resident point is how many unit does the City plan to build , this also take in consideration houses they are allowing to be converted in multiples unit ,plain simple no curve ball.
    Not only the very expensive Fire dept will no longer be enough the same for the police station and a new one will need to be buil wether we like it or not .
    I am not a planner and it does not take a space cadet to figure out when you add 3 to 4000 houses you also need th support , this is not a way to get out of financial strain to the contrary .

    Comment by mijoka — January 25, 2013 @ 9:53 am

  3. Meaningless statement from Humphrey’s piece:

    “Scientists have projected a sea level rise of five feet by the end of this century.”

    Gaggles of scientists don’t agree on anything:

    Comment by Jack Richard — January 25, 2013 @ 9:55 am

  4. Monday’s Planning Board meeting ( is perhaps the only public hearing for the upcoming Alameda Point Project EIR during the scoping process.

    The short public comment period for the scope of the EIR closes on February 15.

    If issues are not raised and included during the short scoping period (January 10-February 15) they will not be included in the scope of the EIR and therefore will not be studied and evaluated for potential impact on the environment, traffic, etc.

    Please attend the Planning Board meeting Monday, January 28, at 7:00 PM to make sure every necessary issue is included in the scope of this EIR.
    Read the staff report and attachments for Item 7A at for more details.

    Comment by Jon Spangler — January 25, 2013 @ 10:38 am

  5. Now if only George Humphreys read blogs like these, he could access this link: [But he doesn’t even have email!]
    [What’s up with an engineer who refuses to use email?]

    The thing about the 1862 flood: it doesn’t seem to have affected coastal communities like Alameda much. In fact, this flood caused the State Capitol to be moved from Sac TO San Francisco:

    As the guide says at every Central California historical landmark: “Hundreds of millions of years ago, this area was covered by a vast inland sea”. But not Alameda.

    Comment by vigi [NDGW] — January 25, 2013 @ 11:51 am

  6. According to Jan 23 Patch, the AlPo EIR comment period has been extended to March 1, 2013

    Comment by vigi — January 25, 2013 @ 12:24 pm

  7. 3. Maybe if scientists stopped talking about what might happen in 100 years, and focus on what’s happening right now, we would be able to have a meaningful impact on how much loss of life and property occurs when the next 100-year event happens 50 years ahead of schedule.

    Comment by Richard Bangert — January 25, 2013 @ 12:40 pm

  8. I’d rather politicians focus on what’s going to happen in the next four years.

    Comment by Jack Richard — January 25, 2013 @ 7:45 pm

  9. How much did the Target 10.2 acre parcel sell for?

    How much is Target Contributing to Our New Parks and or sports fields and new Aquatic Center.I Don’t see any plans above for the Point.

    Was anything like this proposed in the sale of that property?

    Like Lauren Said ” This is particular interesting in light of the Economic Development Report that was performed to the tune of $250,000 that essentially said that businesses don’t want to relocate to Alameda Point because there is no there, there. ”

    Target Corp. Confirms Deal to Build New Store in San Clemente

    As we’ve discussed in previous blogs (found here and here), the plan for building a Target in San Clemente came about when the City of San Clemente was looking for ways to fund the construction of the La Pata/Vista Hermosa Community Park, a 45-acre park with various sport’s fields and an aquatics center. With the purchase of the left-over land in the La Pata/Vista Hermosa area, Target is contributing $13.8 million towards the necessary $23 million to build the park. Therefore, not only is there a brand new community park and aquatics center coming to San Clemente, but now residents get to enjoy a 142,000 square foot Target store. The Community Park and Target are both expected to be completed by the end of 2011, so San Clemente residents have some exciting new pieces of infrastructure to look forward to in the near future

    San Clemente clears way for Target, sports park

    By the end of next year, San Clemente civic leaders are expecting to hear children playing in a 47-acre sports park and cash registers ringing in the city’s own Target store.
    On a series of 5-0 votes Tuesday night, the City Council set the wheels in motion for construction of a $23 million sports facility at 989 Avenida Vista Hermosa and a 142,000-square-foot Target store across the street at 990 Vista Hermosa.

    Target’s purchase of 14 city-owned acres for $13.8 million will help fund the park, which will include:
    •Three lighted baseball fields
    •Two lighted soccer fields with synthetic turf
    •A lighted football field with synthetic turf
    •A large multipurpose field
    •An aquatics center featuring two pools and support facilities
    •A universally accessible playground called Courtney’s SandCastle
    •Two restrooms to serve the athletic fields and a third restroom specially equipped to serve the playground
    •Landscaping, irrigation, parking-lot lights and a traffic signal at the park entrance. Grading, utilities, drainage and paved surfaces already are in place.
    As an added attraction, local entrepreneur Scott Melcher is preparing a 36-hole miniature golf course in the park under a lease with the city.

    Great Vision and they seem to have Priorities Right

    Sports park comes alive to the sound of kids

    San Clemente has opened the 45-acre, $31.5 million Vista Hermosa Sports Park, featuring an aquatics center, universal-access playground, three baseball fields, two soccer fields, a football field and a multipurpose field.

    After eight years of planning, putting together funding and three phases of construction, it is play time at San Clemente’s new 45-acre Vista Hermosa Sports Park.
    The city opened the gates Saturday and families poured into the $31.5 million facility to try out its 50-meter competition pool, its 25-yard fun pool, its Courtney’s SandCastle universal-access playground, its three baseball fields, two soccer fields, football field and multipurpose field.

    Comment by John — January 25, 2013 @ 9:47 pm

  10. “…businesses don’t want to relocate to Alameda Point because there is no there, there. ”

    Our slogan right now is: “We’re getting there!”

    The deal making will start when the map and EIR and infrastructure plans are approved…we hope. With the infrastructure costs weighing heavily on the viability of any construction plans at the Point, we will need a sort of “Pipes and Parks” approach so the sports complex does not sit in limbo forever.

    Comment by Richard Bangert — January 26, 2013 @ 10:36 am

  11. Once the brewery starts pouring you’ll be got-there and there’ll be a me-there.

    Comment by Jack Richard — January 26, 2013 @ 12:38 pm

  12. Richard, the Base is a fabulous piece of property. You need to give potential business’s,potential investors, developers, and present residents some real Value unless you want to basically just Give the property away.Look at what San Clemente did to leverage the Value and Quality of their community. They care about the residents and the people who live there and show it. We have deferred anything of any Value to the residents like gutting the Park Programs letting our streets and Assets crumble and fall into disrepair.

    Anything of any Value to the residents sits in Limbo…

    The Deal Making Started with the Selling of the Property to Target or maybe I’m missing something. Wouldn’t that be the time to leverage.

    Slogans are Great…Like Clear Cutting Park Street and replacing trees with signs that say

    ” Tree City USA”
    Arbor Day Foundation

    You just can’t make this stuff up.

    Jack, I will buy your First Round.

    Comment by John — January 26, 2013 @ 3:56 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Create a free website or blog at