Home » Island News


Submitted by on 1, March 26, 2009 – 10:48 amOne Comment

Updated 5:29 p.m.

Developer SunCal has submitted language to the city for a ballot measure on the redevelopment of Alameda Point that would create a specific planning zone for the 1,084-acre Point that would allow the development of housing that does not comply with Measure A.

The measure has been cast as a referendum on the plan, which includes 4,500 homes, a campus for a major employer, retail development, parks, a library, an elementary school and more.

SunCal’s press release comes with a quote from Beverly Johnson in support of the project. Per the release:

“This is a plan that will benefit all of Alameda,” said Mayor Beverly Johnson. “And now is the time for voters to take a close look so that when the time comes to cast their ballots, they can join me in support of this important base reuse effort.”

David Howard, spokesman for Save Our City Alameda – which opposes the non-Measure A plan – said he thinks the measure “is likely to create a precedent to pave the way to undo Measure A across all of Alameda.”

After getting a title and summary for the measure from the city attorney’s office and publishing it in the local paper, SunCal’s folks will be out collecting signatures in an effort to get the measure on the November 3 ballot. They will need 6,000 or so signatures to get it on the ballot (or 15 percent of Alameda voters). The signature deadline is August 7.

SunCal had until April 30 to tell the city whether they thought they’d be putting their plan on the ballot.

I’ve got all 280 pages of the initiative and supporting materials and am reading through it. Stay tuned.

One Comment »

  • Jon Spangler says:

    I hope that truth-telling will not be abandoned in the upcoming campaign to amend Section 26 of the City Charter (AKA "Measure A.") It is extremely frustrating when facts are ignored, distorted, and misused in order to make political hay. We need a reasoned, respectful, and fact-based community conversation on these issues before we vote.

    Amending Sec. 26 for Alameda point only is a reasonable option, IMHO: the SunCal proposal is very "green," seems to be based on sound business planning, adds diversity to our housing stock, and preserves the maximum number of historic buildings possible, given economic constraints. It may be ambitious, but it seems far more appropriate for Alameda than Alameda Point Community Partner's Measure A-compliant plan (yuck!) and far more likely to be economically self-sustaining than the SOCA proposals.

Leave a comment!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.