What do you think needs to be done with Alameda Point – and what steps would you take to make that happen?

Alameda Naval Air Station is not a typical open space that can be easily transformed into an economically viable neighborhood. As opposed to the relatively painless and quick process that resulted in the beautiful expansion of Alameda known as Harbor Bay Isle, Alameda Point development is held hostage to a variety of competing and often inefficient processes. Any development must first address the lengthy and confusing federal disposition, the need to clean up the toxins, the lack of building code standards in existing facilities and a crumbling infrastructure – to name just a few.

A city managed non-profit development corporation may be one of the best ideas to address the opportunities at Alameda Point. One advantage would be that if the City were to manage the project we could move more slowly because it would not be necessary to comply with a master developer’s investor–driven timelines for production.

The City could take advantage of federal and state incentives for usage – for example (thinking outside the box) if Proposition 21 is passed the City might have the opportunity to receive funding to establish shoreline access and or establish a new State park at Alameda Point. (Note: If passed Prop 21 will provide funding to “Develop… state park units and
Protect.. coastal waters, and marine resources.”)

There are corresponding disadvantages to a city-run project. If the City were in charge of the project there would be immediate fiscal burdens, including payment to the Navy, infrastructure improvement and a great degree of toxic remediation that would be necessary before development could begin. A master developer and private investors would have the means to take on those costs more quickly that the City.

A master developer works best for the developer and the developer’s investors when the developer makes all of the decisions. It works for the developer but not for the city. By allowing SunCal to put Measure B on the ballot the City Council basically offered Alameda Point to a Master Developer without ensuring that the developer would meet the needs of Alameda residents. As the San Francisco Chronicle said when they opposed Measure B, the City Council bowed to political pressure and quote balked at putting a Measure A exemption on the ballot.” Rather, the Council allowed the developer to give voters a development agreement which would have, if passed, left the City and the School District and all Alameda residents paying long after the Master Developer were gone.

Of course that is not to say that a Master developer model can work, as demonstrated at Harbor Bay Isle. The difference between SunCal and Doric Development is that Doric is still her more than 30 years later. The Harbor Bay Isle Developer continues to have a stake in the community and to provide a venue for resolving any issues that may arise with their project. I opposed Measure B because there was no incentive for the Master Developer to stay around after the parcels at Alameda Point were sold to other contractors. In fact, in my opinion SunCal had the opposite incentive – they would have made more money for investors if they
passed Measure B, done the minimum required remediation and infrastructure, and departed. That is why I opposed Measure B.

The ideal solution, in my opinion, would be to have a public-private partnership similar to the Treasure Island Community Development LLC. While Alameda Point does not intend and would not be appropriate for some of the more intensive social service aspects of the Treasure Island development, I think that a public-private partnership would more effectively support a slow growing mix of small business, retail, residential and light industrial at Alameda Point.