DOCSLIB.ORG

3.1 Land Use & Housing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

3.1 Land Use and Housing

This section presents the environmental setting and impact analysis on land use in the Emeryville General Plan.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

PHYSICAL SETTING

Land Use Evolution

Before the colonization of the area by Spain in 1776, the Emeryville area was the site of extensive Native American settlements. Mudflats rich with clams and rocky areas with oysters, plus fishing, hunting, and acorns from the local oak trees, provided a rich and easily exploited food source for the residents. They would dispose of their clam and oyster shells in a single place, over time creating a huge mound—the Emeryville Shellmound.

After settlement by Europeans, Emeryville became a city in its own right, largely through the efforts of businessman Joseph S. Emery who started a stonework contracting business in San Francisco. In 1859, Emery purchased a 185-acre tract of land north of Oakland and began to develop projects in the area. A community began to develop around the Emery Tract, and the town of Emeryville was officially incorporated in 1896, taking the name of its founder.

In 1871 Emery financed the construction of the San Pablo Avenue Horse Cart Railroad, which connected Oakland to Emeryville. He was also one of the primary builders of the CaliforniaNevada Railroad, which began in Oakland, crossed the burgeoning Emery Tract, and terminated in Orinda. Emeryville soon became a city of big industrial enterprises and rail terminals.

Successive years saw further consolidation of industry, including the paint factory of SherwinWilliams and Shell Development, the research arm of Shell Oil Company. Residential areas remained confined to small portions at the city’s eastern edge, bordering Oakland. As the city built out, bay fill was considered viable for creating new land. The Emeryville Peninsula was created in the 1960s by filling shallow water areas.

In the 1970s Emeryville’s landscape began to change once again as some of the city’s older industries had already begun to move to the suburbs or close up shop altogether. The city’s first major residential development—the 1,249-unit Watergate Apartments—was completed in 1971. In the mid 1970s, parks and a 500-berth marina were created by filling in 12 additional acres of the San Francisco Bay to create a small boat harbor. Multi-story office buildings rose between the Eastshore Freeway and San Francisco Bay.

With vacant warehouse and industrial space becoming available, Emeryville began to see the development of a community of artists who converted several of the buildings into live/work space. In 1984, the city’s second major housing development—the high-rise Pacific Park Plaza—

3.1-1

Emeryville General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report

was completed. Between them, Watergate and Pacific Park Plaza more than doubled the city’s population, from 2,681 in 1970 to 5,740 in 1990.

As large tracts of industrial land—originally built at low intensities and supporting many fewer workers per acre of land than contemporary businesses—have continued to be redeveloped, Emeryville’s transformation over the past two decades has been dramatic, with substantial increases in employment and population. The city’s evolution continues to this day. The sections below evaluate Emeryville’s recent and current development trends.

Existing Land Use

Emeryville’s land use transformation over the past 20 years has been extensive. Formerly dominated by manufacturing and distribution, the city is now marked by ever increasing development of office, regional retail, and high-density residential land uses, as well as mixed-use developments. Almost entirely built out, with little to no vacant land, Emeryville’s growth has primarily been through redevelopment of existing land uses and rehabilitation of older buildings.

Existing land use data is provided as of 2005, the most recent data available when the Notice of Preparation for the project was issued. Previously an industrial town, the city is no longer dominated by a single land use. Around half of the developable land in the City—that is, excluding roads, highways, and other rights-of-way—is in Commercial (36 percent) or Industrial (14 percent) use, and just under a quarter (21 percent) is used for housing. Much of the land identified as commercial, however, is devoted to surface parking lots. The remainder of the city is in Public use (seven percent), Parks and Open Space (seven percent), or a mix of uses (seven percent). Only around 40 acres, or seven percent of the land, is vacant. Specific acreages for each land use are shown in Table 3.1-1. (Land attributed to roads and rights-of-ways are not included in the table.)

Table 3.1-1: Existing Land Use Distribution (2005)

Acres

222.0 126.2
87.5

Percent

Commercial Residential
36 21 14
8
Industrial

  • Mixed Use
  • 48.0

  • Public
  • 45.7
  • 7

Parks and Open Space Vacant/ Unassigned Total

  • 44.7
  • 7

  • 40.8
  • 7

  • 615.1
  • 100

Source: Dyett & Bhatia, 2008; Metroscan; City of Emeryville, 2005.

Almost all of the Bayfront and freeway edge area west of the railroad tracks has been redeveloped in the past 30 years. Much of this space is devoted to retail and office uses in large-scale

3.1-2

Chapter 3:   Settings, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

developments, such as Bay Street, IKEA, the Public Marketplace, and Powell Street Plaza, which serve a regional clientele. Almost no industrial uses remain in this area. Residential developments in this area are few in number, but large in size and high in density. In total, they comprise about 2,750 housing units—half of the housing in the city.

Development to the east of the railroad is more diverse in use, scale, and age. Industrial, office, and residential uses are geographically closer to one another. Parcel and building sizes generally diminish towards the east, where pre-war structures are supplemented with new residential and commercial construction. Two large corporate campuses—Novartis and Pixar—dominate the area south of Powell Street while the southern edge of the city is marked by “big box” retail. Emeryville’s public schools and much of its locally-oriented retail businesses lie along or near San Pablo Avenue, a major boulevard and state route which connects Emeryville with Oakland and Berkeley. In the eastern residential neighborhoods, east of Doyle Street and San Pablo Avenue, the Triangle and Doyle Street neighborhoods are composed of lower density homes.

Because Emeryville is largely flat, topography does not play a factor in the city’s land use pattern. Transportation corridors, however, do split the city into several sub-districts. The main divisions are I-80 and the railroad, and to a smaller extent, Powell Street. I-580 separates Emeryville from Oakland along the southern city limits, although a portion of the area north of I-580 is in Oakland.

3.1-3

EMER
BERKELEY

YVILLE

  • O
  • E M E R

A K L A N D

Y V I L L E

S H E L L M O U N D

I

E

  • W
  • A

A

Y

V

E

INTERST ATE 580

Chapter 3:   Settings, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

Residential

As of 2008, Emeryville had an estimated population of 9,727 living in approximately 5,988housing units, according to the Department of Finance. An overwhelming proportion—88 percent—of the housing units in the city are multifamily. Multifamily residential developments range from the 320-foot tall Pacific Park Plaza development to just over 500 units in small (2-4 unit) structures. The city’s housing stock also includes over 600 single-family units, consisting of both detached and attached housing units. Half of the housing units in Emeryville are located west of the railroad tracks, almost entirely in large-scale multifamily developments. All of the housing on the Peninsula is located in the Watergate Condominium complex. The remainder of Emeryville’s housing is distributed evenly throughout the eastern part of the city, with the Doyle and Triangle neighborhoods predominantly residential in nature.

Office and Research & Development

Office is the dominant non-residential use in Emeryville, followed closely by industrial, retail, and mixed-use space. Around one-third of the 3.3 million square feet of office space in Emeryville is located on the Peninsula in the four Watergate office towers. The rest of the city’s office space is distributed throughout North and South Hollis, with notable concentrations along Christie Avenue and Park Avenue.

Most of the research and development space in Emeryville—750,000 out of 970,000 square feet— is provided by Novartis. Pixar’s campus is classified as office space.

Industrial

Industrial uses once dominated Emeryville and they still constitute the most non-residential built square feet in the city, although that position has been slipping as manufacturing and warehouses are converted into other uses. Ninety-two percent of this industrial space is located between the railroad and the eastern residential neighborhoods, concentrated either along Hollis Street or at the western end of Park Avenue. The city’s industrial businesses concentrate on light manufacturing, such as a coffee roaster, and warehousing. One of the largest pieces of industrial land in Emeryville, the Sherwin-Williams complex located east of the railroad and north of Park Avenue, is expected to be redeveloped within the life of the new General Plan.

Retail and Hotel

The retail category includes any commercial use where purchases of goods or services can be made, including stores, gas stations, and restaurants. The 1.5 million square feet of retail in Emeryville is mostly regionally-oriented and located on Shellmound and 40th streets, visible and accessible from I-580 and I-80. These large-scale regional shopping centers include Bay Street, Powell Street Plaza, the Public Marketplace, IKEA, and the East Bay Bridge center. The only significant concentration of retail uses away from Shellmound Street and 40th Street is along San Pablo Avenue, which hosts service businesses like banks and cafes. Almost no purely retail uses (just 6,000 square feet) are located north of Powell Street and east of the railroad tracks, although some retail is available within mixed-use structures.

3.1-5

Emeryville General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report

Three of Emeryville’s hotels are located in the Bayfront area, with a fourth on the Peninsula. These national chain hotels are laid out similarly: high-rises, between seven and 13 stories in height, with on-site surface parking. The city’s four hotels have a total of 930 rooms between them.

Mixed-Use Developments

Mixed-use developments, for the purposes of discussion here, are those with more than one type of use on the same parcel. In Emeryville, mixed-use configurations include multifamily residences above retail, industrial uses with live/work space for artists, and office space mixed with retail or industrial uses. Together, they make up seven percent of the city’s land area and, excluding residential portions of the developments, 12 percent of its non-residential building space.

Public and Institutional

Public land, as well as privately-owned educational facilities such as Ex’pression College, makes up around eight percent of Emeryville’s land. Civic uses—City Hall, police and fire stations, public services, and other City-owned land—take up just four percent of Emeryville’s land. Educational uses, which include the land owned by Emery Unified School District and several private institutions, take up less than 15 acres. With the exception of Ex’pression College and public safety facilities, all of the active civic and educational land uses in the city are located in its southeastern quarter.

Major Development Projects and Trends

In recent years, a large portion of Emeryville has been redeveloped, with new land uses replacing vacant lots or low-valuation sites. This process continues today, with around 10 approved projects in progress as of February 2009, and an additional seven projects proposed.

Recent Development

Since the adoption of the last General Plan, new construction has occurred throughout the city. New development has also been concentrated in the area south of 40th Street and on large parcels along Hollis Street. Some other notable centers of development are in northeastern Emeryville along the Greenway—a linear park in development that follows a former railroad right-of-way diagonally through the city—and on San Pablo Avenue between Park Avenue and 47th Street.

Residential Trends Since 2000, approximately 1,700 new housing units have been developed in Emeryville, representing nearly 30 percent of the total housing stock. These residential developments come in several forms: large high-density structures—such as EmeryBay Club & Apartments Phase II and Bridgecourt Apartments; residences within small and large mixed-use developments—such as Bay Street and Glaushaus; industrial rehabilitations and loft-style housing units along the future route of the Greenway—such as 1401 Park Avenue and Oliver Lofts, respectively.

3.1-6

Chapter 3:   Settings, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

In contrast, virtually no new single-family detached homes are being constructed, although single-family attached homes have been built as part of some new developments. The reasons for this are likely the high price of available land—enhanced by the relatively large amount of land that single-family homes require relative to other residential uses—and the overall lack of vacant land in Emeryville.

Non-Residential Trends Recent non-residential developments have transformed 115 acres of land, or 22 percent of the citywide non-residential total, and added 3.86 million square feet of commercial and industrial building space, or 38 percent of the city’s current supply. Office and retail have dominated recent projects, together accounting for just over half of new non-residential building floor space. Office and lab development has included the expansion of Novartis and the development of Emery Station, both phased campus-style developments. Retail development has come in several forms: big box stores on large sites—such as IKEA and the East Bay Bridge Center (partially in Oakland); walkable retail—such as Bay Street’s retail component and the Promenade on San Pablo Avenue; and, increasingly, smaller neighborhood-serving retail establishments as part of residential mixed-use projects—including in Andante and the Courtyards at 65th Street.

Approved and Under Construction Development

Approved and under construction development projects, as of November 2007, are included in the buildout analysis. At that time, just over 900 housing units were in development in Emeryville, which would increase the city’s existing supply by 18 percent. These projects are mostly sited along the edges of the city, with three of them located in both Emeryville and Oakland. In terms of non-residential development, 1.3 million square feet of office development was approved or under construction, as of November 2007, and 34,000 square feet of retail development.

Since November 2007, several new projects have entered and moved through the development pipeline. Several mixed-use with residential developments have been approved or proposed, including Papermill and 39th and Adeline projects, which together would add 169 units, eight live/work/flex units, and 1,000 sq ft of retail. Potential major office, lab, retail, and other mixeduse projects include the redevelopment of Marketplace, the construction of the Transit Center, and Emery Station Greenway, which could add nearly 250,000 sq ft of lab space, residential, retail, and public parking. Finally, the Emeryville Center for Community Life and Emeryville Arts Center represent a potential expansion of public education, community, and arts facilities, and the Doyle Hollis Park is under construction.

Existing Densities and Intensities

Much of Emeryville is developed at a low-to-moderate level of intensity, with a scattering of commercial buildings that have an FAR above 2.0 and residential structures that exceed 60 units per acre. Very generally, the highest intensity properties in the city are located on the Peninsula and north of Powell Street.

3.1-7

Emeryville General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report

There are very few low density residential uses in the city, with most of the housing to the west of Doyle Street built at moderate densities. 90 percent of housing in Emeryville is built at or above 20 units per acre. Even some single-family homes—which are typically built at five to seven units per acre in many suburbs—are at or above 20 units per acre due to their small parcel sizes.

The city’s highest density housing is largely within a few developments. Pacific Park Plaza has 99 dwelling units per acre, Emeryville senior housing has 84 units per acre, and Emery Bay Club & Apartments has 70 units per acre.

Trends in Density and Intensity of Development

Based on recent and approved projects, non-residential intensities in Emeryville are on the increase. Recent hotel, office, and retail developments have all been built at higher than average FARs. Furthermore, the continued addition of buildings to the Novartis and Pixar campuses will greatly increase the overall intensity of the city.

Meanwhile, the residential density of the city will be increasing somewhat in the near future. Purely residential developments are becoming denser, with approved projects averaging more than 60 units per acre. Even so, while Emeryville has several mid-rise and one high-rise residential structure, the highest attained residential densities are actually quite low given the heights of these buildings.

REGULATORY SETTING

Current Land Use Plans

Land use in Emeryville is affected by several City plans as well as the master plan for the Eastshore State Park. The jurisdictions of these plans can be seen in Figure 3.1-2.

3.1-8

V

L

C

V

Y

A

W

N

S

H

E

N

L

H

O

U

D

N

NU

Y

O

L

  • W
  • A

H

S

YVILLE AKLAND
EMER
O

Y V I L L E B E R K E L E Y
E M E R

Emeryville General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report

1987 General Plan (updated 1993)

The current General Plan was adopted in 1987. An update in 1993 changed the plan from an information-based document into a series of objectives and recommended policies. These objectives are broken down into subgroups that reflect six of the seven elements required by the State—land use, circulation, open space, noise, conservation, and safety. The Housing Element is separate. State law requires all elements to be consistent with one another.

The citywide goals laid out in the 1993 Plan update are to:

• Provide services and facilities for Emeryville’s citizens. • Encourage a land use pattern in which a variety of uses are intermingled in a compatible fashion.

• Establish a circulation system allowing for the free movement of persons and goods to, from, and within the city while avoiding an over-accommodation to vehicles at the expense of land use and pedestrian movement.

• Improve the quality and livability of the city by seeking development [that is] visually sympathetic to its surroundings and urban character.

• Encourage land uses which strengthen the tax base while respecting the natural, scenic, and historic resources of the city.

The 1993 Plan’s specific land use objectives are to:

• Create a major activity center in the Bay Area with new office, commercial and high-tech industries and new housing of all types, replacing obsolete, incompatible, and low-intensity prior uses.

• Create a living and working environment which protects and enhances existing development, while providing new amenities and facilities for an expanded workforce and residential population.

Emeryville Zoning Ordinance

Emeryville’s Zoning Ordinance contains nine base land use districts. The City maintains a mapbased system of building intensity (FAR) and building height regulations. The Zoning Ordinance contains only two residential districts—Medium Density Residential and High Density Residential. While the residential densities available by right are moderately high (reaching 20 units per acre for Medium and 45 units per acre for High), none of the districts permit multifamily housing type by right, but rather require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for this. Similarly, much higher development densities are available in both districts (35 and 108 units per acre for Medium and High Density respectively) under the CUP system. The maximum permitted building height on the zoning map is 95 feet, which may be increased to 175’ with a CUP. This limit has been exceeded numerous times, including by such developments as Pacific

3.1-10

Chapter 3:   Settings, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

Park Plaza (320 feet) and the Watergate office and hotel development to the west of I-80, as well as approved plans for Novartis. The proposed General Plan includes height limits so height variances will not be possible and any deviation will require a General Plan amendment.

North Hollis Area Urban Design Program

This plan was implemented through the North Hollis Overlay Zone. It covers the northeast corner of the city—north of Powell Street and east of the railroad, also including the block south of Powell between Hollis and Peladeau. This plan calls for infill residential uses that complement the existing neighborhood and stimulate use of the Greenway; the discouragement of throughtraffic; a balance of automobile access with other transportation modes; sufficient public parking; and private development that enhances the character and pedestrian improvements of the area.

Recommended publications
  • Beyond Political Will: a City-School Partnership and a Landscape of Redevelopment and Gentrification Hayin Kim, Ph.D

    Beyond Political Will: a City-School Partnership and a Landscape of Redevelopment and Gentrification Hayin Kim, Ph.D

    BEYOND POLITICAL WILL: A CITY-SCHOOL PARTNERSHIP AND A LANDSCAPE OF REDEVELOPMENT AND GENTRIFICATION A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION AND THE COMMITTEE ON GRADUATE STUDIES OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Hayin Kim June 2010 © 2010 by Hayin Kim. All Rights Reserved. Re-distributed by Stanford University under license with the author. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial 3.0 United States License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/ This dissertation is online at: http://purl.stanford.edu/wf208kj8404 ii I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Milbrey McLaughlin, Primary Adviser I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Prudence Carter I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Debra Meyerson Approved for the Stanford University Committee on Graduate Studies. Patricia J. Gumport, Vice Provost Graduate Education This signature page was generated electronically upon submission of this dissertation in electronic format. An original signed hard copy of the signature page is on file in University Archives. iii Abstract Beyond political will: A city-school partnership and a landscape of redevelopment and gentrification Hayin Kim, Ph.D.
  • E a St Shor E Pa R K Proj Ec T Gen Er a L Pl

    E a St Shor E Pa R K Proj Ec T Gen Er a L Pl

    PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT EASTSHORE PARK PROJECT GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT STATE CLEARINGHOUSE # 2002022051 July 2002 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT EASTSHORE PARK PROJECT GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT STATE CLEARINGHOUSE # 2002022051 Gray Davis Governor Mary D. Nichols Secretary for Resources Ruth Coleman Acting Director of Parks and Recreation P.O.Box 942896 Sacramento, CA 94296-0001 July 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT SUMMARY ............................................................................ 1 A. PURPOSE OF THE EIR........................................................................................................ 1 B. PROPOSED PROJECT ......................................................................................................... 2 C. PLANNING PROCESS......................................................................................................... 4 D. EIR SCOPE............................................................................................................................ 5 E. SUMMARY........................................................................................................................... 5 F. REPORT ORGANIZATION................................................................................................. 7 II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................... 9 A. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................9
  • Housing Element of the General Plan (GPA 10-01)

    Housing Element of the General Plan (GPA 10-01)

    EMERYVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Date: June 24, 2010 Report Date: June 18, 2010 TO: Emeryville Planning Commission FROM: Planning and Building Department SUBJECT: Housing Element of the General Plan (GPA 10-01) PROJECT LOCATION: Citywide PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Consideration of revised Housing Element. Revisions include updated data and added information in response to the State Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) review comments. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: A Negative Declaration for the Housing Element was approved by the City Council on June 16, 2009; an Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan was certified by the City Council on October 13, 2009. APPLICABLE ZONING ORDINANCE PROVISION: Section 9-4.81 General Plan Amendment Procedure COMMISSION PROCEDURE: After taking public testimony, the Planning Commission may recommend or not recommend adoption of the Housing Element (a General Plan Amendment). If more information is required, the Planning Commission may continue the hearing. RECOMMENDED COMMISSION ACTION: 1. Open public hearing and take testimony regarding the 2009-2014 Housing Element 2. Close public hearing and consider the 2009-2014 Housing Element and Staff Report. 3. Adopt Resolution CPC No. GPA10-01 approving the 2006-2014 Housing Element and forwarding it to the City Council for adoption. Planning Commission Meeting Staff Report GPA 10-01 Housing Element June 24, 2010 Page 2 of 4 BACKGROUND: State law requires cities to revise the housing elements of their General Plans periodically to assess the needs and meet the demands for future housing. The Emeryville City Council adopted the City’s 2009-2014 Housing Element in June 2009 and submitted it to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (State HCD) for certification prior to the June 30, 2009 deadline for submittal.
  • City of Emeryville Memorandum

    City of Emeryville Memorandum

    CITY OF EMERYVILLE MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council (lr) FROM: Patrick D. O'Keeffe, City Manag~ SUBJECT: Progress Report -September 2008 The following provides the City Council and staff with a summary ofthe activities of each department for the prior month. CITY MANAGER • Staff is still working with the City of Oakland to develop a new library services agreement. Staff submitted a second proposal to Oakland in late September and expects a response sometime in October. • Staff has been working with the cities of Berkeley and Oakland to finalize the Community Choice Aggregation of Electrical Power (CCA) Phase II Report and develop a joint staff recommendation on whether the three cities should move ahead and establish a CCA program. Staff expects that the Phase II Report and staff recommendation will be released in October. The report and staff recommendations are scheduled to be reviewed and discussed at a special Utility Committee meeting on October 27. nd • The AC Transit/Emeryville Liaison Committee met on September 22 • At the meeting, AC Transit presented a proposal to establish a hydrogen fueling station at the AC Transit Bus Yard along 45th Street (below San Pablo Avenue). The Planning Commission will be reviewing the proposal in October, followed by a presentation to the full City Council in November. In addition, the Committee received an update on the City's Public Art Bus Shelter. Due to staff turnover at AC Transit, many of the other committee agenda item were tabled for later discussion. • The "2nd/4th Friday E-Bulletin, the City's new electronic newsletter was distributed on September 12 and 26.
  • Growth and Urban Redevelopment in Emeryville

    Growth and Urban Redevelopment in Emeryville

    Growth and Urban Redevelopment in Emeryville East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy Center for Labor Research and Education University of California, Berkeley A Publication of the California Partnership for Working Families May 2003 Growth and Urban Redevelopment in Emeryville East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy Center for Labor Research and Education University of California, Berkeley Howard Greenwich Elizabeth Hinckle May 2003 A Publication of the California Partnership for Working Families East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy, Oakland, CA Center on Policy Initiatives, San Diego, CA Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy, CA Working Partnerships USA, San Jose, CA BEHIND THE BOOMTOWN ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND CREDITS This report was prepared by EBASE with the generous support of many individuals and organizations. We are indebted to the community members, workers, city representatives, and businesses of Emeryville for their time and insights into the transfor- mation of their city. We would like to thank: community members Angel Norris, Gladys Vance, Jim Martin, Barbara MacQuiddy, Gisele Wolf, Mary McGruder, Russell Moran, Bridget Burch, and Deloris Prince; store managers Al Kruger, Renee Conse, Sam Combs, Carlos Torres, and Chuck Pacioni; developers Pat Cashman, Shi-Tso Chen, Eric Hohmann, Glenn Isaacson, and Steven Meckfessel; businesspersons Bob Cantor and Jay Grover; current and former city staff members Ignacio Dayrit, Ron Gerber, Ellen Whitton, Pauline Marx, Karan Reid, Autumn Buss, Patrick O’Keeffe, Jeannie Wong, Wendy Silvani and Rebecca Atkinson; former City Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners Stu Flashman, Andy Getz and Greg Harper; current City Councilmembers Ruth Atkin and Nora Davis; and from the Emery Unified School District, State Administrator Henry Der and Advisory Board President Forrest Gee.
  • City of Emeryville Local Hazard Mitigation Plan June 2009

    City of Emeryville Local Hazard Mitigation Plan June 2009

    CITY OF EMERYVILLE LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN JUNE 2009 i City of Emeryville Local Hazard Mitigation Plan June 2009 (SAMPLE) RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE ADOPTING A LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN WHEREAS, the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires all jurisdictions to be covered by a Pre-Disaster All Hazards Mitigation Plan to be eligible for Federal Emergency Management Agency pre- and post-disaster mitigation funds; and WHEREAS, the City of Emeryville recognizes that no jurisdiction is immune from natural, technological or domestic security hazards, whether it be earthquake, flood, extreme weather, or wildfire related; and recognizes the importance of enhancing its ability to withstand hazards as well as the importance of reducing human suffering, property damage, interruption of public services and economic losses caused by those hazards; and WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and California Emergency Management Agency have developed a hazards mitigation program that assists jurisdictions in their efforts to become Disaster-Resistant entities that focus, not just on disaster response and recovery, but also on preparedness and hazard mitigation, which enhances economic sustainability, environmental stability and social well-being; and WHEREAS, the City of Emeryville fully participated in the Federal Emergency Management Agency prescribed mitigation-planning process to prepare this Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Emeryville City Council adopts the “City of Emeryville Local Hazard Mitigation Plan” as an official Plan; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City of Emeryville, through the Economic Development and Housing Department, will submit this Adoption Resolution to the California Emergency Management Agency and Federal Emergency Management Agency officials to enable the Plan’s final approval.
  • Existing Conditions 6 CHAPTER 2 • EXISTING CONDITIONS CHAPTER 2

    Existing Conditions 6 CHAPTER 2 • EXISTING CONDITIONS CHAPTER 2

    Chapter 2 Existing Conditions 6 CHAPTER 2 • EXISTING CONDITIONS CHAPTER 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS This chapter summarizes important background elements that are essen- tial information for the development of the Emeryville Sustainable Trans- portation Plan. This information includes Emeryville’s demographic com- position, existing land use conditions and planned land uses in Emeryville and their relationship to transportation. It also discusses existing elements of the city’s circulation network, transit connections, and transportation demand programs that are currently in place. The information found in this chapter serves as the basis for understanding the existing environ- ment within Emeryville. Demographics and Land Use Population, Housing, and Employment Emeryville has experienced dramatic growth in population, housing and jobs over the past several decades, as industrial uses gave way to retail, employment, and housing development. Demographics such as age distribution, auto ownership, and the travel behavior of residents, em- As of 2010, the City of Emeryville is estimated to have a population of ployees, and visitors is important information to support the design of 10,100, a 47% increase since 2000. Employment declined slightly dur- a transportation system that best ing the same time period, from 19,860 jobs in 2000 to 18,610 jobs in Emeryville has one of the meets the needs of residents, em- 2010.1 This decline may be attributed to the recent economic slowdown highest jobs to employed ployees and visitors, especially one in the nation’s economy. Population, housing and jobs are all expected to resident ratios in the Bay that enables and encourages use of continue to grow steadily throughout the General Plan buildout period as Area, with 4.2 jobs per alternative modes.
  • Carolyn Lehr, City Manager SUBJECT: Progress Report for May 2016

    Carolyn Lehr, City Manager SUBJECT: Progress Report for May 2016

    CALIFORNIA MEMORANDUM DATE: May 31, 2016 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Carolyn Lehr, City Manager SUBJECT: Progress Report for May 2016 The following provides the Mayor, City Council, staff and the public with a summary of the activities in the City Manager and City Clerk offices for the month of May 2016. CITY MANAGER Meetings & Events The City Manager attended City committee meetings, including the Sustainability Committee, Public Safety Committee, Joint Meeting of the Budget & Governance and Budget Advisory Committees, Economic Development Advisory Committee, Joint Meeting of the Public Works and Transportation Committees, City/School Committee, and a Climate Action Plan and Local Hazard Mitigation workshop. The City Manager also attended outside agency meetings, including the Alameda County Mayor’s Conference and League of Cities, East Bay Division. The monthly “Coffee with the City Manager” was hosted by the City Manager’s Office on Thursday, May 12, and was attended by two members of the public. The City Manager held regular meetings with the Mayor, Vice Mayor, Councilmembers and Department Heads to discuss City and staff updates. Concerns expressed by Council and addressed include: o Delays add to construction projects at the senior center, with the project being out of budget and schedule. City Manager relayed concerns to Public Works Director and requested corrective action be taken. o ECDC staffing and budget challenges were addressed by placing a professional consultant at the school site for assessment and management improvements. A letter from State licensing regarding a Class A violation was distributed to all parents as required. o Interest was expressed by a Councilmember during Council meetings regarding Planning Commission issues that may be appealed.
  • 8 Parks, Recreation, and Open Space

    8 Parks, Recreation, and Open Space

    Opportunities & Challenges Emeryville has greatly improved the number, acreage, accessibility, and diversity of its park and recreation assets since the previous General Plan was adopted in 1987. That said, it is still a city dominated by roads and buildings where even small amounts of open space stand out. This chapter reviews the City’s existing parks, recreation, and open space facilities—including non-motorized trails—and assesses them against regional standards in order to identify challenges and opportunities. 8.1 EXISTING FACILITIES The section on parks in Emeryville’s 1987 General Plan was brief. It mentioned that only two facilities were available in 1984—the 61st Street Mini Park and Marina Park—for a total of 7.7 acres. As Table 8-1 shows, the City has added six acres of Parks, public open space since then. As of 2005, Emeryville contains Recreation, & 13.74 acres of public open space in eight City-owned parks and Open Space another 30 acres in the Eastshore State Park. 8- In addition to these parks, city residents also have access to PARKS, RecREATION, AND several recreation options, such as the fields at Emery Secondary School and a trail network, private open space, and regional 8 facilities. OpeN SpAce Parks and open space are essential in any city, but become even Table 8-1: City of Emeryville Parks more important in areas of high population density where City Park Play Basketball Acres homes may not include yard space and in places of intense Equipment Court development where landscaping is scarce. These green spaces 61st Street Mini-Park X 0.14 provide opportunities for relaxation, informal sports, passive recreation like walks and bird watching, and a break from the Marina Park 7.56 stresses of everyday life.
  • January 2018 Progress Reports

    January 2018 Progress Reports

    CALIFORNIA MEMORANDUM DATE: February 20, 2018 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Carolyn Lehr, City Manager SUBJECT: Progress Report for January 2018 The following provides the Mayor, City Council, staff and the public with a summary of the activities in the City Manager office for the month of January 2018. Meetings & Events • The City Manager attended the Public Safety Committee Meeting, and the Budget Advisory Committee Special Meeting, and the Joint Meeting of the Public Works and Transportation Committees. • The City Manager hosted Coffee with the City Manager and several members of the public attended. Topics discussed included Senior Center Flea market donations, Money and Mimosas (a financial education and training business), the Art Center, and fundraising for the Senior Center. The City Manager attended a RULE meeting at the Doyle Street Co-Housing Community Room. • The City Manager held regular meetings with the Mayor, Vice Mayor, Councilmembers and Department Heads regarding high priority issues including the Art Center project, Bay Street ADA matters, bond revenue measures for the June and November 2018 elections, Council goals, and EV chargers and general land use. Projects & Updates • The City Manager met with Nathaniel R. Centeno and John Gooding to receive a check for $1M as regular payment to the City on their Developer’s loan. • The City Manager met with Justin Wilson of Schneider Electric to continue a conversation about the City of Emeryville’s future electricity needs. • The City Manager met with the NBS Consultants to continue discussion of consultant services for a Housing Bond measure. • The City Manager and Economic Development and Housing Manager attended a business visit with Campaign Living, a start-up furniture manufacturer, located at 4052 Watts Street.
  • 07/2009 Progress Report

    07/2009 Progress Report

    CITY OF EMERYVILLE MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council (J).. FROM: Patrick D. O'Keeffe, City Manager fdJJ SUBJECT: Progress Report -July 2008 The following provides the City Council and staff with a summary ofthe activities of each department for the prior month. CITY MANAGER • As feared, the State has begun eyeing local government revenues as a way offilling a portion ofthe $15 billion State budget gap. The Governor and the legislature are proposing a total of$2.9 billion in take- aways from local government including borrowing property tax revenues per Proposition lA, diverting Proposition 42 gas tax revenues for road way improvements and shifting redevelopment revenues (presumably to schools per prior ERAF shifts). Attached is a table from the League of California Cities estimating the loss to each city per the combined proposals being discussed. The total estimated loss for Emeryville is approximately $2.5 million. The majority ofthis projected loss is from the Redevelopment Agency. It is not yet clear ifthis is a one year shift or permanent. Ifthe latter, the reduction would reduce our bonding capacity for the next Capital Improvement Program bond issue by approximately $18 million (this is less than I reported at the last Council meeting since this table shows a lower redevelopment shift than previously reported by the League). Although the property tax shift of$870,000 is lower than the redevelopment shift, it is more devastating to us since it would affect the General fund and our ability to fund existing operating services such as recreation and public safety (as opposed to capital projects).
  • Sustainable Transportation Plan

    Sustainable Transportation Plan

    EMERYVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Date: March 24, 2011 Report Date: March 17, 2011 TO: Emeryville Planning Commission FROM: Diana Keena, Associate Planner Planning and Building Department SUBJECT: Draft Sustainable Transportation Plan LOCATION: Citywide PROJECT Study session to review a draft Sustainable Transportation Plan to DESCRIPTION: implement General Plan Transportation policies RELEVANT Goals T-G-3 multi-modal transportation, T-G-4 walkable city, T-G-5 GENERAL PLAN bicycle system, T-G-6 transit system, T-G-8 balanced parking supply, POLICIES: T-G-11 transportation demand management PROPOSAL The draft plan includes strategies to improve transit service, SUMMARY: transportation demand management, parking management, pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, and wayfinding. ENVIRONMENTAL This plan is covered by the Environmental Impact Report for the STATUS: General Plan that was certified by the City Council on October 13, 2009. BACKGROUND In 2007 the City Council approved a contract with Nelson\Nygaard for a comprehensive analysis of public transit improvements and incentives for non-vehicle forms of transportation and to develop an Alternative Transportation Plan. In 2008 the Council requested an analysis of traffic mitigation measures for four major development projects and a study of Horton Street and Emery Station West circulation. In 2009 Nelson/Nygaard conducted stakeholder interviews and completed an Existing Conditions Report and Needs Assessment. In 2010 the consultants presented draft strategies at an open house in May of 2010. City staff and the consultants have responded to public comments made at the open house, updated the existing conditions and checked for consistency with the 2009 General Plan to complete the draft plan.