Lots to talk about regarding the Planning Board meeting on Monday night, but I’m going to put a pin in that one for now because I wanted to write about the newest name dropped for Alameda Landing given that we had spitballed a few names a few posts ago of what we thought would accompany the Target at Alameda Landing based on this leasing map:
According to documents in next Tuesday’s City Council packet, those of you who guessed that Safeway was going into that largish blue area on the right of the map were correct. And, from what the narrative says about
a related fuel center at another nearby site owned by Catellus.
It looks like that weird little drive-thru parcel labelled the “Entry Site” will be where the gas station will be located along with a yet-to-be-named fast food joint because, let’s face it, what else is going to need that super long drive-thru queue.
The Safeway, according to the documents, is going to be around 45,000 square feet. To compare, the Safeway at South Shore is 59,500 square feet so it won’t be nearly as large as that one. The Safeway interest is contingent on being able to build their gas station and, of course, City Council approval because right now, a grocery store is not in the plans for Alameda Landing and has not been approved. If the Safeway goes in, it is supposed to be a “Lifestyle” version, which just means that the produce section will have wood floors and darker colors and while the Safeway will be on the ground floor, there will be a second story for office space.
So, Target, Safeway, and Safeway gas. That’s your tenant list so far. While I’m not thrilled by Safeway, at least now — if approved — West Enders will have a shopping alternative to Lucky’s.
Blogging Bayport Alameda 
Demographically, Safeway makes sense. The majority of potential patrons for something like Whole Foods are on the East End and Harbor Bay and they ultimately would not make the trip to Alameda Landing: East Enders because it’s a little too far, and Harbor Baysters because, let’s face it, most of them aren’t even sure where Park Street is, let alone anything in the West End. By the time they figured it out, Whole Foods would have had to shut its doors.
Comment by Denise Shelton — April 10, 2013 @ 6:14 am
And yes, I know there are lots of people in the West End who would have shopped at Whole Foods, but “lots” does not a bottom line make. Trader Joe’s is a much more economical choice for the health conscious, IMHO.
Comment by Denise Shelton — April 10, 2013 @ 6:15 am
I very much appreciate the developer being upfront with us about the Safeway letter of intention. One of the issues raised by the City Council and the public was the concern that there might be a bait and switch – using the upscale retail study to get their desired zoning change for a grocery store, and then giving us a Safeway. I think what the council said was that “we’ve been burned before” which was part of their hesitancy to embrace the Alameda Landing retail study. The Economic Development Commission raised the same concerns.
I think this is the model we should use going forward before approving any new retail developments in Alameda – a requirement that we see the letters of intention of proposed retailers so we know what we’re getting before any approvals are issued.
That said, Safeway is a good choice for Alameda Landing and a very welcome addition to the West End. I hope it gets council approval. Regarding Whole Foods — they most likely felt a store on the West End was too close to their Oakland store — but I strongly believe it has nothing to do with the fact that there are not enough shoppers on the West End to shop at Whole Foods or that “folks on the East End or Harbor Bay will not ultimately make the trip to Alameda Landing”.
As more new developments on the West End move through the pipeline (like Alameda Landing, Encinal Terminals, Marina Cove 11, the Del Monte Building, Alameda Point, and the Sports Complex) just to name a few, the West End will become more and more a very popular place to live, work, and shop.
Comment by Karen Bey — April 10, 2013 @ 7:41 am
Hopefully, Karen is right. In the meantime, a general purpose grocery store like Safeway makes more sense. When the base development builds steam, it’s more likely an upscale market will follow. Not everybody is willing or able to make multiple stops for groceries. My family does but I think many don’t have the time. It’s nice to be able to get both gluten free flour and Coca cola in one place.
Comment by Denise Shelton — April 10, 2013 @ 8:08 am
Karen, my only problem with your comments in the last paragraph of your post #3, is at 70 I might not be around to see it all happen. But happen it will, and our beautiful West End will be the place to live in Alameda.
Comment by John P.(L) — April 10, 2013 @ 8:18 am
I am glad a grocery store is coming into the area, although I would have much preferred it being something like a Ranch 99. That would have been awesome. It wouldn’t have directly competed with the Lucky’s, and would have drawn customers from Chinatown and Bay Farm. I do hope they do a better design on the gas station here than they did at Southshore. To have to go in after the fact and put up temporary barriers that will be there permanently to control traffic shows that someone was asleep when it came to design review on that one.
Comment by notadave — April 10, 2013 @ 9:14 am
”
Moderate Leakage Categories: There are two retail categories with retail leakage totaling between $20.0 and $60.0 million in retail sales leakage in 2010. These categories are Gasoline Stations with $57.1 million in lost sales potential, comprising 54.2% sales leakage, and Restaurants & Drinking Places with $29.0 million in lost sales potential, comprising 24.1% sales leakage.
”
Am I reading this correctly? We could increase the revenue from gas stations by 50%+ if we had more of them? I thought we had plenty, but looks like that might not be enough.
Comment by alameda — April 10, 2013 @ 9:44 am
@6, what temporary barriers? Clearly, I haven’t been there recently
Comment by alameda — April 10, 2013 @ 9:45 am
John, it’s already happening. Home prices on the West End are getting multiple offers and some are going for way over asking – it’s wonderful to see! And I would imagine they can afford to shop at Whole Foods (you think)?
Also I attended the Planning Board meeting on Monday; the developer said their goal is to have the Alameda Landing retail center built out by the end of 2014 (that’s just a year or so away). And the design review for the Alameda Landing condos and apartments that are getting built by Tri Pointe Homes is sometime in May. They’ll want to get their approvals as soon as they can so they can be one of the first developers in Alameda to take advantage of the current upswing in real estate activity.
Lots of good things happening at Alameda Landing!
Comment by Karen Bey — April 10, 2013 @ 9:58 am
Good, looks like I’ll make it.
Comment by John P.(L) — April 10, 2013 @ 10:22 am
My next prediction is not only will Safeway be a big success, it just signed the death warrant for creepy Lucky’s at Marina Village. And after that? Poor Marina Village shopping center will be reduced to CVS and sandwich shops that serve the business park Monday through Friday.
Comment by Sideline — April 10, 2013 @ 11:59 am
#11 – I am concerned about that too, but what Marina Village has that Alameda Landing does not have is a business park. If they can re-brand the center with new marketing and signage, etc. maybe they can survive.
Comment by Karen Bey — April 10, 2013 @ 2:58 pm
Lucky’s probably won’t survive…but it is their own fault. They have not put money into fixing up that store in years and their prices are not any better then Safeway. I like the current Safeway and Nob Hill foods…but usually shop at Lucky’s because it is closer…but something in there always “pisses” me off in some way…to put it politely.
Karen, what sports complex are you talking about? Are you talking about Bladium…when we first moved here we went there for our free week…the place sucked…but maybe it has changed…Mariner Square Athletic Club is moving the kids out to the pool they are building next door…but they need better empoyee’s…I was going to join there 9 months ago but walked out after the kid behind the desk…who I think was talking to his girlfriend on his cell phone while I waited for 10 minutes and “pissed” me off…Adolfo goes there and I will probably join there just because it is close…and if something “pisses” me off I can walk home. Sorry about the langage…I don’t think it is a bad word, and I think it is okay to say on here…I have said it in church and in front of my parents.
The West End is coming along. I think on Zillow…our house was down a couple hundred thousand over what we paid for it a few years ago and I think it is now up a hundred thousand, but I think some people who bought after us are still underwater…but prices seem to be quickly coming back in California.
Comment by joelsf — April 10, 2013 @ 5:29 pm
The funny thing is Catellus takes credit for Bayport but none of the people who worked on the Bayport project are still there…They laid most of their people off in a merger and became Prologis…They brought the Catellus name back because people didn’t like Prologis and then Prologis spun them off and now they are a separate company again…but not responsible for building Bayport…it was a company with the same name. Bayport was built by a former company named Catellus…but not by the company Catellus is now…if that makes any sense.
Comment by joelsf — April 10, 2013 @ 6:07 pm
At a Democratic Club meeting last night a City official hinted very strongly that a burger chain would becoming to Alameda Landing that features a long line of cars in its drive thru.
Comment by Mike McMahon (@MikeMcMahonAUSD) — April 11, 2013 @ 7:27 am
I would feel better if the planners better understood which street Constitution Way is.
Comment by Tom Schweich — April 11, 2013 @ 7:34 am
#8 Sorry -posted and then wandered off. They have made it one way through the gas station, and put up a wire rope to shut off part of the entrance. Clearly this was not part of the original design or intended traffic flow. It is like putting duct tape on your bumper. It may do the job but it looks ugly. The planning board should relook at this and make safeway come up with a better looking solution.
Comment by notadave — April 11, 2013 @ 7:49 am
Could it be In ‘N Out Burger? Be still my beating heart!
Comment by Denise Shelton — April 11, 2013 @ 9:07 am
@Karen : That’s assuming those homes are being snapped up by homeowners and not those foreign investors with the briefcases full of cash we’ve been hearing about.
Comment by Denise Shelton — April 11, 2013 @ 9:10 am
Denise — I imagine some are, but not all of them are.
Comment by Karen Bey — April 11, 2013 @ 9:19 am
Why does nationality of purchaser matter?
Comment by dave — April 11, 2013 @ 9:45 am
Dave, it doesn’t. What Denise was wondering is if the properties are being purchased by investors and not homeowners.
Comment by Karen Bey — April 11, 2013 @ 9:55 am
And why would that matter?
Comment by dave — April 11, 2013 @ 10:01 am
The matter is one of upkeep.
Comment by Jack Richard — April 11, 2013 @ 10:51 am
Oh, that explains why all the “For Sale” signs I see around town specify that buyers must live in fulltime & maintain home to Denise’s standards.
Comment by dave — April 11, 2013 @ 11:28 am
That’d be a start.
Comment by Jack Richard — April 11, 2013 @ 11:59 am
They just finished building Grand Marina…and it appears mostly owner owned…but they are all full of families…who either own or rent.
Comment by Joe — April 11, 2013 @ 1:31 pm
I should probably stop, but have you noticed that “For Sale” signs in Alameda are becoming sparce…I believe at Bayport there currently is only 1 out of 470 house for sale…and in the Alameda Sun today they have 3 houses which 2 are pending sales and 1 is sold…If interested the house for sale at Bayport is 3 Pickrell Square for $938,000…it will be interesting to see how long it will last.
Comment by Joe — April 11, 2013 @ 1:40 pm