Oakland’s Howard Terminal A plan faces environmental review lawsuit – Times-Herald

OAKLAND — Oakland A’s proposed plan to build a massive baseball stadium and mixed-use housing development at the Port of Oakland’s Howard Terminal is facing litigation following the city’s approval of its report of environmental impact.

The group that sued is a coalition of shipping companies, truckers and workers who have adamantly opposed the proposed port development. They say the development’s impact on logistics at the port will be too heavy, leading to challenges for businesses transporting goods in and out of the port as well as their workers.

The lawsuit — which is being filed in Alameda County Superior Court by the East Oakland Stadium Alliance, Schnitzer Steel, Pacific Merchant Shipping Association, Harbor Trucking Association, California Trucking Association and International Longshore and Warehouse Union — argues that the city council has approved an environmental impact study of the project.

The council certified the report about a month ago, declaring that the proposed project meets state law requirements for environmental impact assessments and mitigation measures.

The lawsuit argues that the council-approved report failed to properly disclose or mitigate all of the project’s potential impacts.

“A’s proposal to build a stadium and luxury condominiums, offices and retail will cause major disruption and impact to both the surrounding community and Port operations, but the EIR did not not fully address these concerns or alleviate these well-known problems. said Mike Jacob, vice president of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association which leads the coalition against the Howard Terminal project, in an emailed statement.

“He also failed to accurately compare the Oakland Coliseum site as an alternative that would have far fewer negative effects,” Jacob continued. “It is simply not appropriate to ignore or defer analysis or mitigation of so many of the significant impacts identified in the more than 400 comments submitted by community and chain actors. supply, and therefore our only alternative is to pursue a legal remedy.”

Monday marks the last day of the window in which legal challenges regarding the environmental lawsuit must be filed.

A President Dave Kaval said in an interview Friday that the lawsuit presents yet another “hurdle” for the team to face in developing this project. He pointed to the different regulatory environment in California for large real estate projects in Nevada, where the team threatens to head if the Howard Terminal project fails.

Building a new stadium at the Colosseum, Kaval has insisted over the past year, is not in the team’s plans. It’s “Howard Terminal or bust,” he said.

The lawsuit — or any others filed over the environmental review — shouldn’t slow the project down for years. The state legislature passed a law — AB 734 — several years ago that requires any environmental or other complaints about the waterfront site to be resolved within 270 days of final project approval.

The A’s and some city leaders are hoping to get the Howard Terminal development deal approved this summer.

But there are other roadblocks.

Recently, an advisory board recommended that the 55-acre Howard Terminal property be used solely for Port of Oakland operations, and not as the site of A’s planned 35,000-seat baseball stadium surrounded by a planned village. of 3,000 homes, offices, retail, hotel rooms and public parks.

It will be up to the San Francisco Bay Area Conservation and Development Commission to accept or reject this recommendation, which is expected to take place in June.

Leave a Comment