Resolution 13284CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. 13 2 8 4
APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, GPA- 99 -04, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENTS TO A) CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION ON THE GENERAL
PLAN DIAGRAM FROM "MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" TO "BUSINESS PARK" FOR
AN APPROXIMATELY 5.6 ACRE PORTION OF THE AREA IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL B ON
THE MARINA VILLAGE PROPERTY; AND B) AMEND THE HOUSING ELEMENT ON
THREE SEPARATE PAGES, BY SUBSTITUTING THE IDENTIFICATION OF MARINA
VILLAGE AS AN AREA WHERE 156 DWELLING UNITS COULD BE DEVELOPED, WITH
IDENTIFICATION OF THE APPROXIMATELY 20.5 -ACRE BUENA VISTA/HIBBARD
STREET INDUSTRIAL AREA.
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting General Plan Amendments to: a) change the land
use designation on the General Plan Diagram from "Medium Density Residential" to "Business
Park" for an approximately 5.6 acre portion of the area identified as Parcel B on the Marina Village
property; and b) amend the Housing Element on three separate pages, by substituting the
identification of Marina Village as an area where 156 dwelling units could be developed, with
identification of the approximately 20.5 -acre Buena Vista/Hibbard Street industrial area; and
WHEREAS, the proposal for a General Plan Amendment is part of an application which also
includes a Master Plan Amendment, MPA- 99 -04, Development Plan, P.D.- 99 -03, and Design
Review, DR -99 -121, to permit the construction of a four-story, 143,000 square foot office building,
provide 1.36 acres of public open space and shoreline access, 702 parking spaces and other
landscaping improvements, and retain the existing Shipway office buildings which contain 55, 600
square feet of office use, on the 12.3 -acre area encompassing Parcel B of the Marina Village Master
Plan (MVMP); and
WHEREAS, the application was accepted as complete on May 5, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is presently designated Medium Density Residential on
the General Plan Diagram; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public hearing on this application on October 10,
2000 and examined pertinent maps, drawings, and documents in connection with the application;
and
WHEREAS, on October 10, 2000, the Planning Board recommended that the City Council
approve General Plan Amendment, GPA- 99 -04; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the
Project WECIP; and
est End Community Improvement
WHEREAS, the City Council has made the following finding:
C: \WPDOCS \DATA \GENERA -1.WPD
1. The City Council has been advised that subject to meeting City standards and requirements,
the proposed General Plan Amendment would substantially confoini to the adopted
Community Improvement Plans (CEP) for the West End Community Improvement Project
(WECIP), as proposed to be amended, and the General`. Plan policies incorporated by
reference within the CIPs; and
WHEREAS, the City Council made the folio
Amendment:
ng findings relative to the General
Plan
1. The site is not suitable for residential development from the standpoint of financial
feasibility. An estimated $9.25 million would be needed in order to provide a seismically and
functionally adequate site for residential use and to complete a costly demolition of a portion
of the Shipways. Structural pile - driving would be required across the entire structure for
housing development, whereas the proposed office use requires structural pile - driving for
only a relatively small portion.
2. The potential development of housing on the Shipways site was not, at any time, expected
to provide housing that would be affordable to households other than in the above- moderate
income category. In 1992, the typical sale price of each housing unit on the Shipways,
conceived as townhomes similar to those previously developed in Marina Village, was
projected to be approximately $455,000, which in year 2000 dollars, adjusted for inflation
and the Bay Area's high housing market demand, would be approximately $750,000.' By
comparison, however, the highest price paid for one of the existing townhomes in Marina
Village within the last six months, was approximately $459,000. The likelihood of the
Shipways project applicant proceeding with residential development is extremely remote.
3. Under redevelopment law, 15% of all housing developed within a redevelopment area must
be affordable. The Marina Village development is within a redevelopment area, the West
End Community Improvement Project. This requirement was met by an in -lieu contribution
which was used to partially fund Independence Plaza. Therefore, there is no outstanding
affordable housing responsibility related to the 15% requirement. Because of the high cost
of enabling housing to be developed on the site, there would be no basis for dedicating any
public resources into reducing the cost of such housing. Such resources, material and
financial, could be more efficiently used elsewhere, where the cost of land would be lower.
4. The City has identified a substitute site for the development of housing which would
contribute to meeting the City's regional fair share housing allocation for the above- moderate
income category, consisting of the Buena Vista/Hibbard Street industrial area.
5. The General Plan Amendment would eliminate blighting influences and correct
environmental deficiencies at the project site, including, but not limited to abandoned
shipways structures, depreciated property values and deteriorated public improvements,
facilities and utilities.
C: \WPDOCS \DATA \GENERA -1.WPD
2
6. The Master Plan pursuant to this General Plan Amendment, incorporates all the mitigation
measures described in the Final EIR, but will have significant adverse effects on: traffic and
circulation (if the City of Oakland does not incorporate mitigation measures); and therefore,
requires a Statement of Overriding Considerations, as established in the draft City Council
Resolutions recommending certification of the Final EIR and adopting findings for the
Environmental Impact Report.
7. The General Plan Amendment would ensure the productive reuse of the abandoned shipways
and fostering orderly growth and quality development in the City.
8. The General Plan Amendment would provide substantially increased property tax and sales
tax revenues to the City.
9. The General Plan Amendment would provide increased employment opportunities for
residents of the City.
10. ; The General Plan Amendment would permit the replanning, redesigning and developing an
underdeveloped site to achieve a balanced mix of land uses and complete the Marina Village
Project.
11. The General Plan Amendment would strengthen the economic base of the Project area and
the community by the addition of approximately 143,000 gross square feet of office use.
12. The General Plan Amendment would seamlessly integrate the Project site into the Marina
Village development by the design of the new building and adjacent open space.
13. The General Plan Amendment would protect and improve the waterfront by providing public
access around the site and providing a new shoreline trail to connect with existing shoreline
trails in Marina Village.
14. The Project will increase tax increment revenues to the City which provide substantial public
contribution to affordable housing.
15. The proposed waterfront walkway and open space would maintain and enhance the General
Plan's objective of providing open space adjacent to the Estuary, and would allow a direct
link to and continuation of the Bay Trail on the project site.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council certifies the Final
Environmental Impact Report and makes findings concerning Impacts and Mitigation Measures,
adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, makes findings regarding Alternatives and
adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act for the Shipways Office Development Project.
C: \WPDOCS \DATA \GENERA -1.WPD
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves General Plan
Amendment, GPA -99 -04 as shown in Exhibits "A" and "B
Exhibit: Exhibit A: General Plan Amendment policy, text
Exhibit B: General Plan Diagram revisions
C: \WPDOCS \DATA \GENERA -1.WPD 4
EXHIBIT A
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
SHIPWAYS OFFICE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
A. Housing Element Revision
The text below is excerpted from the City of Alameda General Plan Housing Element, and illustrates
the text revisions that would be made as part of the General Plan Amendment required for the
proposed Shipways Office Development Project. All text excerpted directly from the Housing
Element is shown in italics. Text that is proposed to be amended is highlighted with redline for
additions, and striltetltrettgh for deletions to the text.
CHAPTER 2
HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS
IMPLEMENTATION, PROGRAMS, PROGRAM OBJECTIVES, AND QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES
C. New Housing Development
Maritta-RIlage Buen' •
15.
proc sz • 'o
,xfAeo
r(,CaMP:kdlt:,gtrseVT' a
fact a 'dr-Chi editi4ira
Ind iron
Devilopnzent P1
11'44}
fOf
1 • i • •
ibba
r
.C7C-7
proxzrnatel -pre o
zirTeuWehlty c
arden T1:ijndell4Vbr—h
0
esz •
0 "f
hw-r
e
Geniml
je°Vii
to 156 units. The Planning Board approved the necessary Master Plan Anzendment on July
23, 1990, and the Development Plan on September 11, 1990.
CHAPTER 7
AVAILABILITY OF LAND AND SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
VACANT RESIDENTLII LAND
In addition to the sites shown on Figures 7-1 and 7-2, there is an estimated potential for 156 units
41A.,„ =V: 71 rmo.„, rea
24-11-of (T)hese units are expected to sell to households in the above-moderate category
tiMr X(reia on te 0 '.7r, 0.7 1:17-Sahe' ed 54v° in e t ar °,1 at at lcast ,
e ' bcajor
„
ble n= a, a
17 0
• 1 •
Gityt
1
Housing Need (1)
Housing Supply
Site
Description
Table 7 -1
PROJECTED HOUSING NEEDS AND SUPPLY
1988 - 1995
#1 Navy Housing (2)
#2 Independence Plaza
#3,4 5, 9.4 total acres (3)
Very
Low Low Moderate Moderate Total
Above
548 382 464 844 2,238
520
92
0
36
0
58
205
0 520
0 186
0 205
Harbor Bay Isle
Grand Harbor
Liveaboards (6)
19
19
655
162
156
38
General Plan Update (7) 0 0 0 380 380
Total Supply 612 55 444 1,191 2,302
Adjustment (8) 0 327 20 (347) n/a
Adjusted Total Supply
Surplus of Supply Over Need
612 382 464 844 2,302
64 0 0 0 64
Note: Footnotes to Table 7 -1 are on the page.
(1) ABAG Housing Needs Numbers, 1988 -1995, from Table 6-3 of the 1989
Housing Element.
(2) This includes 300 units of former Navy housing transferred or leased to the U.S. Coast
Guard, 39 units to be developed on the former FISC site, and 181 units of former Navy housing
City of Alameda
2
to be rehabilitated in the West Housing area of Ala
Station).
(3) These numbers make the conservative assumption that the sites will develop at one unit per
2,000 square feet, in the event that a downzoning initiative passes, and no public assistance is
provided.
eda Point
ormerly`Alameda Naval Air
(4) Only the average annual production of
(5)
ecent past is
(6) The number provided in this chart only inc
present, and does not assume any additional mai
l / .
assumed as available.
R •
udes liveaboards added
ina development.
between 1988 and the
(7) This is the minimum number of new housing units which would be indicated in the General
Plan update for the northern waterfront, in addition to new housing designations needed to meet
the increased employment growth resulting from the General Plan update for the northern
waterfront. The housing would be permitted at a density of up to one unit per 2,000 square feet,
as either attached or detached housing. If the Measure A exemption of units of public
housing is applied to this area, the units could be in constructed with more than two units per
building.
(8) This adjustment reflects the City's commitment to dedicate a variety of revenues for the
purpose of providing Low and Very Low Income housing until the ABAG needs numbers are
achieved. The funds could be used any of the sites identified in this chart, including the
scattered site infill housing category. This commitment is shown as a separate line item in
recognition of the fact that the funds could be used at any location in the City, and at this time no
agreements with specific landowners have been concluded. The entry moves to the Low Income
category some of the units which without public assistance would be constructed as Moderate
and Above Moderate income housing. The Low Income category is identified in this chart since
this is the category which according to the ABAG numbers has the greatest shortfall of need over
supply. The actual decision of whether to use City funds for Very Low or Low Income
households will be made on a case by case basis, based on specific opportunities presented by
the site in question and the most current understanding of housing needs.
B. General Plan Diagram Revisions
The General Plan Diagram, which shows land use designations for the City of Alameda, is shown
on the following page, identifying the area presently designated for Medium Density Residential use
and which is proposed to be changed to the Business Park designation.
`3,, ;70,,,,,, ,, = SEPARATE PROPOSAL FOR GENERAL PLAN CHANGE: CHANGE DESIGNATION FROM
' ,:lit 6` A X I' A H D General Industry to Medium Density Residential
y► y (Indicated by grid pattern) { Mr
... .. "A` y4. W 3
Low Densit Residential fI ^'r~ r 6 >}A',' n `" ...
�.;', ., .0 , ..+."'. • µ13A6 et-A34 OM 'Hess Park rp :', �l0r 7'
knr.,. • N 0 .. .; ....n'' �sen G dHp?tON ttet to Bus '''''N.:,'',: <, iv r ,4 .'vim[ eO'
`( Medium Densit Residential �. r .....• - pROP 5.oest estden rro x� t
�. y �+^ ' pNG nsttY rtd Pette .1";„'':: ; itfr Fs 11• ".
0 " "".. - Medal ` o ated Dv gr . ,.. t K } '1B k-', , v�3 Iw i , 4' . K 1� ,:ll .
N @IPYIt')()rhood Business r J'' ~ r F '� �, F ti T s FZ4`R «s t 4'
'" ^�^ 'fi' ' 3,1 ,- r,,AL s P Y7 1 i 4' .
/� v ♦ 'i� P �i tat r J Syr s �R � ?� 5 qrt d E �. Stl9t r
¢0 G MU-2 . N.
� ti.„,'? . Rr �'� a ��i !`` �^ w r n„ S'h + ♦t� <:` x' �,s s9f ! .. � .is� i l�.'•.
'} .W.,„..4,4:., ,c..l :> t"' .rr , <v' d. i'4: ,i $ ',i . 'A a M C as i? . rts� _ _ ti ti4 4..
eo-4.ei',,� ./A +, f �+''r '#.:,.: t eAT+ osk'��l ! jp�r,�``,i.}pf . " • Ct >r "�j ', xuG y� b'. r ,,' 3 7`, 4, 5+�r�s+� �5rw^'w .... ` ,�, �� 1 i .
} ,. ,.r" YY,4 is 'fTt r z4: � v,.,,, r .,x ~`tiff. :Aov .f- 11:tw''— „,,,,,,...,,,,,,-.4 4 1''v1i� ., vi \' a;
Y (f)infnurl1i }r � C)IT)Illf:rc i iI * p, ::: f 4 9 -� y 13„,t. ,,,,,; eti ..5, rrr, : +. •,ly4 m f.�e, >Q X1,,0 „,+ et'i.:..,?., �v > r
'� +i, r{ Ii >!,+ � 41? n t1�yy•�I.;stilif�}�rp 1. sd (>y� .Q,,r4 e e�;i, .
1 c,. ' .d .r,eiv $? l? AUY �?jlN�+a .;.W�P ,. � � r$�: .Sr . , Tai. �A. ti 1 r'h �`ir t �` r t e .r k 1 t � �� .. *j �
i ,t "rI^?:%;Yss +& r 7 . . -.. `'- F;�"g % x ��”" $” ftp 1`s,yW;�,ry K 3g!:$rfr't �,k°s r`,
e.e "+ S r✓;, f�'- rik�3L'r ^�•3 � ?P'r1 v�;` :r 'r .y � � uS � ,} }` s� • *, ,r *. ,fig' - , `•. j '. r', r r 5 A .:,, x, :re . " k:Yr_.« 43,,' •T,.
»5 44 ,A> ( Ti tv. dtrLL }c�.Xs {a' & ^' rW=, ^'N,(7�1} .`drf: M +L Y< r s , t
Of lice
�r $t a5 k` fi"s4 �bt.' ',c+,',:-.. r< v F �� Ux 'aS E
i �s .' L,�• j(' �'"a s ^ ,�)jG,`gr`T.F�r >z z'"r`F t w • Y# 4
' Y
h
` °$'^ �. '$r 4'r Y 't`6 ;.f. '•h7r' . +2 5, t a :, a i
(-� s,`:z'hv ✓ 't y, r ``r r ^� . `4,q '' > tl P k ..r`:lt'.*^ , zv S. �i
[ S , t Business Park li.rpn tE a `1 4pn 'r?J„4„,- b "n, j< ...,,,..•,`;,.. ,r a*
' v >; 3,f" srf. 1 a N+, ''h //±± J.�.ir,5 v' , ,r'ty c r -`Jy' r
" ,p rh.� r f` // " ., r r 4' L7 G ^ � stir,"' � e r 4' s k vT , " ` d/ ' f $ `' c,� � s •
'± :, A arg ayr Y ^,a r 0 Mtk1 t 4 "' r 5 ,,P.4,:,:-:, 1 r s. :.,. { s• v . 0
G� MU# i ,, fi l m
G specified Mixed use ?'> ry .,:, t ,' I;` I ' ,. j ;for,. < ,rr s, �`" s ? as. ' , &)r . ' ;s
Y 4r s > x s? is of :}�1
,`,' ; . c®LLEGE of " tx "p ..: ri*, , � ...ire :, ,rw., `^>', ' R S' i� t A. ' �. � '4 r`vt.` ALAMEQA � � ,,. .: f��'r^` ,�` ^ �'*f: nr` K3� ri a� �'
' General Industry ' r 1�,• f "" ` _� „,
�... - f �. ‘,....,,,,0,4,,,,,,, ?; r ' R E r Conumerraecreaton Y r ' 'C`€ r r v & 0tt ` Parks and Public Open Space s� ;a3 7:
5
' ' Open Space /Hat)itat %�' , `F z. z,y ./ f .. < ' � ,.:,,� gr' t s ..; �
-- ---' —' Minor Street '" ""' a" vaa a" Proposed Roadway
y,,, s;aw public, /institutional /School (grades)
Major Street ---------
Railroad
- Federal Facilities Freeway # Ferry Terminal
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting
assembled on the 17th day of October , 2000, by the following vote to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson, and
Mayor Appezzato - 4.
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
Councilmernber Kerr - 1.
None.
None.
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this
18th day of October , 2000.
Diane Felsch, City Clerk
City of Alameda