A’s ballpark plan clears crucial hurdle

OAKLAND — The Oakland A’s cleared an important hurdle on Thursday in their pursuit of a new waterfront ballpark and luxury housing at the Howard Terminal, where a Bay Area commission determined there’s enough space for the pricy development to be built.

The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, in a 23-2 vote, decided not to stand in the way of the team’s $12 billion proposal to build a 35,000-seat stadium and a surrounding village of 3,000 housing units, office space, retail, hotel rooms and public parks.

Although some labor workers insisted they may need the terminal land to accommodate future cargo shipments, most commissioners agreed that setting aside 56 acres for the A’s development won’t take away from any maritime activities at the port.

“We don’t have any guarantees in life; we can never be sure how things are going to work out,” Commissioner Pat Showalter, a Mountain View City Councilwoman. “But this seems to me like a reasonable bet.”

While the BCDC’s approval was a major milestone for the development, the project is far from a done deal. A’s team officials are on a tight self-imposed deadline to finish negotiating with city officials by the November election, with the team’s current lease at the Oakland Coliseum set to expire in 2024.

“We believe you can have a thriving port that serves the needs of the California economy as well as a thriving ballpark — both those things can exist at the same time “A’s team President Dave Kaval said in an interview ahead of Thursday’s hearing.

Port of Oakland workers handle large volumes of cargo shipped to the Bay Area each day — an amount that’s steadily growing by the year — but Howard Terminal itself hasn’t seen a shipment in nearly a decade. Instead, the parcel of land is used as a parking lot for large trucks, a storage area for shipping containers and a training ground for stevedores and dock workers.

By voting in favor of the A’s ballpark plan, the commission will exempt Howard Terminal from state policies that restrict harbor space for port activities.

“I’m satisfied the staff has shown us there is adequate capacity at the harbor under a moderate-growth scenario,” said Commissioner Stephanie Moulton-Peters, a Marin County supervisor.

Much of the public comment session at Thursday’s hearing was dominated by unions in favor of the new ballpark. Most were either construction workers excited at the promise of jobs at Howard Terminal or Coliseum employees who don’t want the team to ditch Oakland for Las Vegas.

“Some of our people have been at the Coliseum for as many as 50 years,” said Jim Brown, a member of a janitors, ushers and security workers union. “They’ve been loyal, and they want you to protect our union jobs.”

On the other hand, some residents on Thursday expressed disgust at billionaire team owner John Fisher’s proposal to create a tax district to fund $850 million in community improvements, including street upgrades and public parks, rather than pay for it himself. (Construction of the ballpark and housing would be funded by the A’s and not taxpayers.)

“Let’s face it, we are not here because Howard Terminal is not a viable terminal anymore,” said Oakland resident Millie Cleveland. “We’re here because we have a billionaire who wants to build a baseball park.”

In March, the Seaport Planning Advisory Committee, a body of appointed Bay Area representatives that advises the commission, voted 5-4 to recommend Howard Terminal be used only for port activities and not the ballpark plan, predicting that the land will one day be needed to meet growing cargo demands.

But in an agenda report, the staff’s analysis now favors the project, finding the new ballpark and village “would not detract from the region’s capability to meet the projected growth in cargo, and (the team) has demonstrated that the cargo forecast can be met with existing terminals” at the port.

The A’s will need to continue negotiating with the Oakland City Council, which has not set a date for making a final decision on the project.

Kaval said that the team wants a deal inked with the council before the November election, because Mayor Libby Schaaf, a supporter of the new ballpark, is being termed out of office and a change in city leadership could delay the project.

In a statement, Schaaf thanked the commissioners for not halting a project that she hopes will create more affordable housing and public access to the waterfront.

“Our city has historically been overlooked for major economic development, but today that story about Oakland changes,” Schaaf said.