Blogging Bayport Alameda

April 18, 2013

One more try

Filed under: Alameda, City Council, Development — Tags: , — Lauren Do @ 6:08 am

All right, quick Alameda Landing update.   At Tuesday night’s meeting, City Manager John Russo pretty much spilled the beans on the proposed burger joint for the entry parcel at Alameda Landing.   He mentioned that if the business comes in then his spouse will no longer need to drive to the Oakland Airport weekly to pick up burgers for their teenage boys.   The only chain burger restaurant that can’t be found anywhere but at the Oakland Airport is In N Out.  Oh wait, I guess it could be Wendy’s too, but few people get excited about a weekly trip to Wendy’s.

As I mentioned yesterday one of the big new items to come out of the meeting was an announcement by Harbor Bay Isle Associates aka Ron Cowan and friends to move the existing Harbor Bay Club to North Loop Road which sits in the middle of a flight path and a bunch of commercial buildings.  Most recently was offered up as part of a land swap deal for the Mif Albright parcel.  Previously was the site where Ron Cowan wanted to build a bunch of housing units under a flight path.

After the Harbor Bay Club is fully moved to the North Loop site, which is going to be “state-of-the-art” and “sustainable”, key buzz words if you are going to do anything these days, HBIA will be building 80 units on the old Harbor Bay Club site.

After their announcement at Tuesday’s meeting they immediately sent out a mass email with a link to their construction blog.

So, while this is obviously a better plan than the whole Mif swap thing, as usual HBIA overplayed their hand, again, and insisted in their letter to the City Council that:

The courts have determined that Harbor Bay Isle Associates has the indisputable right to  build an additional 227 units. Harbor Bay Isle Associates is agreeing to develop only 80 of the remaining 227 units as its final residential development for Harbor Bay Isle, which represents a 65% reduction and ceding 147 homes to which it’s entitled.

Which is sort of true that they have the right to build the additional 227 but that doesn’t mean that the City has to bend over backward to make that happen.   JKW wrote about this issue a while back with reference to the lawsuit:

What the court said is that the Settlement Agreement between the City and HBIA was valid. This settlement, approved 3 to 2 by the City Council, reaffirmed HBIA’s right to build the original number of houses (up to 3200) that they were entitled to build through a Development Agreement signed in the late 80s. It in no way addresses the issue of where these houses can be built, and in no way it covers the City with having to approve additional housing.

Here’s the problem with the position HBIA is coming into this whole business.   The City can still say “no way” given that Harbor Bay Club site is not zoned residential.   So, HBIA still needs to come, hat in hand, to get the land rezoned to actually build the 80 units.    To pretend like they are doing us all a favor by only asking for 80 units instead of 227 is rather laughable.    At this point Ron Cowan better make sure that new club is so fricken awesome that it placates the traffic adverse Bay Farm residents so that they don’t come out en masse to oppose the residential project.


  1. It’s nothing a few lunchboxes can’t fix.

    Comment by dave — April 18, 2013 @ 7:08 am

  2. I wonder if the club moving will have any impact on the property values of homes like those at Brittany Landing. I’m sure the close proximity to the club was a factor for some people buying there. In any case, their little oasis is about to get a lot more urban with 80 new homes going in, not to mention the traffic.

    Comment by Denise Shelton — April 18, 2013 @ 7:45 am

  3. Moving the club to the North Loop makes a lot of sense since that property is too close to the airport for houses.

    Comment by Kevis Brownson — April 18, 2013 @ 7:49 am

  4. 80 homes will probably mean less traffic than the club brings to that “little oasis.”

    Comment by dave — April 18, 2013 @ 7:55 am

  5. 4. Hard to say. A lot of people walk or bike to the present location. In any case, I’m sure a new facility will draw a lot more members. I had a few temporary memberships but it didn’t seem worth the high fees to become a regular member. The spa areas leave a lot to be desired and the outdoor pool is in a very windy area for part of the year. Overall, the facility has been showing its age. I do feel sorry for people who can just walk there now though. There will be more arriving in cars at the new spot.

    Comment by Denise Shelton — April 18, 2013 @ 8:10 am

  6. One of the main issues to be discussed is the difference in traffic flow from a change of the land use from the club to that of residential. The morning traffic generated from a residential development will be much greater than that of the club. Coupled with school drop off occuring at the same time in the morning, this additional traffic could be a significant impact.

    Comment by fergus jones — April 18, 2013 @ 8:13 am

  7. As a condition of approval for moving the Harbor Bay Club, there needs to be a new pedestrian/bicycle access cut through the fence along Catalina Avenue, giving direct pedestrian/bicycle access to the new club from the vicinity of Island Drive and Catalina Avenue.

    Comment by Tom Schweich — April 18, 2013 @ 8:20 am

  8. Perhaps I’m the only one … but I fail to see all the hysteria behind the wink-wink, nudge-nudge hints about the new burger place. It’s not like the second coming of Christ, just another place that sells slaughtered cows.

    *puts on flame suit* 🙂

    Comment by alameda — April 19, 2013 @ 8:43 am

  9. 3. There happen to be houses just behind where the proposed Club plans to be. Also, there are homes just down the street by the ferry.

    4. Not with 200+ cars cramming into the already gnarly traffic. The folks in the little oasis bought with the Club as it is part of the Community. The Clubs owner need to comply with city zoning and keep the Club as is or perhaps sell the Club? Cowan can go build where all the development is taking place at the former Navy base. The residential part of Harbor Bay is a completed development.

    Comment by Kerry Kohler — October 7, 2013 @ 5:09 pm

  10. 9. not calling you a NIMBY, but you realize how some might hear your last comment? I know you qualified your remark by saying the Point is where all the development is taking place and said Harbor Bay is complete, but that’s actually doesn’t really matter.

    Comment by MI — October 8, 2013 @ 7:14 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: