A’s outline new ballpark plans in EIR
OAKLAND >> The city released a crucial environmental report outlining the potential impacts and specific details of the proposed 35,000-seat waterfront ballpark the Oakland A’s want to build.
In addition to 3,000 residences, up to 1.5 million square feet of commercial office space and 270,000 square feet of retail or dining, the proposed project from the A’s would include an indoor performance venue that could fit 3,500 people, up to 400 hotel rooms and more than 18 acres of open space.
The project would be developed in multiple phases, according to the plans listed in the report. Construction of the first phase would include building the ballpark, up to 540 housing units, small portions of the retail and commercial space, and the hotels rooms. It would also include about 12 of the total acres of outdoor park space.
It would take at least two years
to build the first phase, according to the document, but the timing on the rest of the buildout is even less specific. Building the rest of the proposed project — mostly the additional housing, retail and commercial space, along with some open space acreage — would depend on “market demand” and “financial feasibility,” according to the impact report.
The report outlines how extensively the developers of the project could mitigate impacts on the environment, including on air quality, traffic congestion and noise.
But A’s President Dave Kaval said nothing in the report seemed insurmountable for building the project.
“If you read the content, there are really not any show stoppers in this environmental impact report. Sometimes when you do a report like this it becomes obvious that certain things are just not going to happen,” Kaval said in a phone interview Friday. “That’s not what this is about. There are mitigations necessary, it identifies what they are, and it’s something that creates a framework to get the project approved in a way that is acceptable to all the key stakeholders, so that is really reassuring.”
Among those that could not be mitigated to a “less than significant” level is the noise that would be created by the ballpark operations.
It would also require that pedestrians, cyclists, or those driving into the ballpark area would have to cross over the railroad tracks on Embarcadero, exposing them to some safety risk, though the plans call to upgrade the railroad crossings.
The report also identifies roadways that would become more congested with the ballpark being there. The areas that would see increased traffic would be Interstate-880 in the northbound direction between 23rd Avenue and Embarcadero, Highway 24 eastbound between Broadway and Highway 13, the Posey Tube and the Webster Tube that each connect Oakland and Alameda, and Market Street.
The project would have a total of 8,900 parking spots, according to the report, but about 6,900 would be for the commercial and residential uses of the complex. About 2,000 of the spaces would be shared between the ballpark and the indoor performance venue.
The environmental impact report will be used by the Oakland City Council in determining whether to approve the project, but it’s not the only hurdle the project must clear.
Earlier this month, an Alameda County Superior Court judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association, the Harbor Trucking Association, the California Trucking Association and Schnitzer Steel Industries, Inc. that would have prevented the project from being built under a fast-track process.
It was a win for supporters of the project, but the plaintiffs have filed an appeal. Critics of the proposed ballpark project have said it would affect business and prompt longtime port tenants to leave, costing jobs.
According to the environmental impact report, all the existing buildings and structures at Howard Terminal and some neighboring parcels would be demolished, except for four existing shipping container cranes, the fire station at 47 Clay Street and a historic PG&E facility.
Mike Jacob, vice president and general counsel of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association, said in an emailed statement that members of the East Oakland Stadium Alliance — a coalition of those who want the A’s to stay at the current Coliseum site instead of building at Howard Terminal — would review the impact report in the next few days.
“We anticipate that the Howard Terminal Draft EIR will once again confirm the obvious and what everyone already knows — that the current Coliseum site remains the ideal and most logical location for a new ballpark that will make A’s fans proud to call home,” Jacob said. “This is especially true since the Coliseum site already has an approved Environmental Impact Report.”
Jacob lamented that the draft report was released before the lawsuit appeal has been resolved.
“Because there is still a lawsuit pending on this very question in state appellate court, we are very disappointed that the A’s and the City are moving forward with the release of this Draft EIR prior to the final resolution of this critical issue,” he said.
Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf expressed optimism about the project.
“I’m excited about keeping our A’s rooted in Oakland,” Schaaf said in a press release about the project. “The Howard Terminal ballpark requires the highest environmental standards while giving us an opportunity to expand our entertainment district near Jack London Square, increase housing, provide good jobs, and keep our beloved waterfront working.”
The city will host a workshop to help inform the public about key points in the impact report on Saturday, March 6 at 10 a.m. on Zoom.