pages: Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf, 9
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce | EconomicRecoveryTaskForce | 9 | https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2781417&GUID=16211D8D-2D63- 4E9A-8531-6366B3DB8COD&Options=&Search= Panel member Grunt asked about the ferry terminal. Ms. Ott said that the new Seaplane Lagoon terminal will be right in the heart of the development in the Enterprise District. This is the number one issue for developers: when is the ferry terminal coming? It will operate as a joint consolidated service with the Main Street Terminal. Most likely, the Seaplane Terminal will be the commute ferry with Main Street/Oakland supplying mid-day and weekend service. We did look at the relocating the Main Street Terminal, but it would undermine the Oakland service. The Oakland line cannot sustain itself and depends on Alameda ridership. Panel member Mik commented that Main Street is the most popular ferry terminal and is at capacity. They are selling out their boats. They are really adding capacity with the new terminal. Ms. Ott added that ferry ridership has grown 60 percent since 2012, which is unheard of for public transit. Panel member Chubb asked about the maker space cluster. Ms. Ott said that the buildings are being redeveloped by master developers. They will subdivide them into smaller spaces for specialty manufacturing, artist spaces and some office. One floor will most likely become work/live, with tight restrictions on the residential component. Panel member Monteko asked who pays for the infrastructure in Site B. Ms. Ott said the developer or end user through a negotiated land deal with the City. Alameda Point's infrastructure costs are approximately $600 million, or $1 million per acre. Panel member Elsesser asked about the square footage of entitled space and height limits. Ms. Ott answered that there is approximately 5.5 million square feet for all of Alameda Point, which is a lot of entitlement. We do not want low intensity development; we want jobs or catalyst benefit. The height limit is 100 feet. It is a very permissive, a big envelope to create a lot of flexibility. We do not know who the end user(s) will be. We want to create an opportunistic envelope to take advantage of each businesses' vision. Ideally, we want a diversified base and not just one end user. Panel member Monteko asked how is Cushman Wakefield advising on the commercial market for companies being pushed out of San Francisco and moving to Oakland. On the one hand, it is someone who wants the flexibility to expand quickly but they want it yesterday. How are you going to address that? Draft Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 9 July 20, 2016 | Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce/2016-07-20.pdf |