For those following the saga of the big development for JLS, here's a new article for you.
http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82~1865~2505729,00.html
"OAKLAND -- While developers of the proposed $300 million makeover of Jack London Square fought last summer to win City Council approval for their project, a little-known but powerful state agency was fighting for the opposite." ...
Click to read the whole article.
From the Oakland Tribune website dated 11/1/04
J. London Sq. changes may be illegal
State Lands panel: Oakland ignored us in waterfront makeover
By Paul T. Rosynsky, STAFF WRITER
OAKLAND -- While developers of the proposed $300 million makeover of Jack London Square fought last summer to win City Council approval for their project, a little-known but powerful state agency was fighting for the opposite.
The State Lands Commission, an agency that regulates development of property along state waterways, pleaded with the city to delay approval until the commission could find a solution for the problems it found.
Since the project will be built on state tidelands trust land, some of the proposed uses of buildings violated state law, the commission said.
Office space proposed in buildings should not be allowed on waterfront land, the commission said. A movie theater should not be built on that land and neither should a parking garage, a letter written by the commission's executive director stated.
But city officials ignored the warnings and gave unanimous approval to what could be one of the largest redevelopment projects in the city.
Advertisement
Now a dispute has evolved over what will be built in a project that is supposed to be the entertainment anchor of a revived downtown.
While the project's developer, Ellis Partners of San Francisco, vowed nothing will change, State Lands Commission Executive Director Paul Thayer said otherwise.
"We are confident that we are going to get to the end with a favorable result," said Jim Falaschi, a partner with Ellis Partners. "The deal isn't being changed, it is right in line."
That deal calls for Ellis Partners to construct nine buildings that include a 250-room hotel, a five-story centerpiece market hall and a six-screen movie theater.
It would include a mix of both office space and retail stores where restaurants, brew pubs and mom-and-pop shops would operate.
The only problem, according to the state lands commission, is that the office space, parking and a proposed grocery store are not allowed on trust lands.
"Some of the uses planned within this project are not consistent with the public trust," Thayer wrote in a June 9 letter. "The purpose of our comments is to address problems concerning the primary proposed use of each site."
In the letter, Thayer pinpointed concerns and possible solutions.
Office space would be allowed, he said, if businesses renting the space promote, foster or enhance the public's use of the waterfront. Therefore, offices rented to doctors, lawyers or as corporate headquarters could not be built.
Parking garages would be approved but only if the spaces are for people visiting the waterfront and not for office workers.
Retail spaces are allowed but only if they service "patrons of the waterfront" not neighborhood residents.
And the movie theater could only be built if Ellis Partners bought the land on which it is proposed.
Although the letter was ignored as the city moved to approve the project, it quickly caught the attention of Ellis Partners and the Port of Oakland which immediately began negotiating with Thayer and the commission.
"There has been a lot of discussion," said Omar Benjamin, director of the port's real estate division. "I am not nervous about where we are right now."
Since Ellis Partners must still make a proposal to the port regarding the terms of its lease of Jack London Square property, Benjamin said many of the state's concerns could be addressed.
"All this is going to come into play when they submit their proposal," he said.
Thayer also tried to downplay the state's concerns saying, during an interview last week, that both sides are working well together.
"The agreement provides that generally, they have to find pubic trust uses for the office space," he said. "I think we were able to work it out."
But just to make sure, both sides signed an agreement last month which allows either to file objections regardless of certain time limits placed on when someone can dispute a project's approval.
Falaschi declined to give details of the discussions saying, "we agreed to a process."
"This is a continuation of a process... it is nothing unusual, it is nothing that other developers haven't faced up and down the state dealing with state lands," he said.
"Until we enter into these lease agreements (with the port), there is nothing for the state lands to worry about."
