Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.
The online Comment window has expired
Agenda Item
3 26-0762 Subject: Costco Exclusive Negotiation Agreement
From: Economic And Workforce Development Department
Recommendation: Adopt A Resolution (1) Authorizing The City Administrator To Negotiate And Execute An Exclusive Negotiation Agreement With Costco Wholesale Corporation For Development Of A Costco Store On City Property Located At 101 Admiral Robert Toney Way And 2308 Wake Avenue, For A 24 Month Term, Conditioned On A $300,000 Exclusive Negotiation Payment, With Two Additional Six-Month Administrative Extensions, Each Conditioned On Payment Of An Additional $25,000; (2) Waiving Competitive Bidding Under Oakland Municipal Code Chapter 2.42; And (3) Adopting California Environmental Quality Act Findings
My husband and I are very much in favor of bringing the Costco. West Oakland most definitely is a food desert - the once a week overpriced Farmers' Market - No actual grocery stores. I am very concerned that whenever someone tries to bring something nice to this community all sorts of opposition comes in making the perfect is the enemy of the good. All it does is keep our community from thriving. And to speak of environmental concerns when we breath the Port of Oakland and step over refuse in our streets daily, well that seems pretty misguided.
Please push this measure forward. I'm not a politician, a lobbyist, an activist, nor do I work for a non-profit. I'm a librarian, a tax payer, and a homeowner in the community and I will use my vote (and talk to my neighbors) in the next election cycle to support members who get behind bringing Costco here.
Because the Council committee performs the heavy lifting and public vetting before this item advances, I respectfully request focused review of the CEQA pathway for the proposed Costco ENA and any future project approval. The 2002 Oakland Army Base Reuse Plan EIR and 2012 Addendum may be a valid starting point, but they should not be treated as an automatic substitute for project-specific analysis of a Costco warehouse store and gas station.
The key question is whether the City can legally support a future addendum by showing, with substantial evidence, that Costco’s impacts fall within the environmental “envelope” already studied in the 2002 EIR and 2012 Addendum. If Costco creates new or substantially more severe impacts, the City should determine whether supplemental or subsequent CEQA review is required before final land disposition, ground lease, LDDA, entitlements, or construction approvals.
At minimum, I ask the Committee to require a project-specific CEQA comparison addressing traffic, parking, truck deliveries, air quality, VMT, freeway/local access, contamination/remediation, utilities, stormwater, and consistency with North Gateway land-use assumptions. This review should explain how a public-facing Costco compares with prior industrial, maritime, logistics, and recycling assumptions.
Support for negotiations should not weaken the City’s duty to preserve discretion, protect residents, and complete environmental review before final project decision is made.
It's wrong that that probable negative externalities of Costco at the Army Base are not discussed in the proposal.
1) Costco INCREASINGLY deploys AI for operational and labor cost efficiencies, causing a disappearance of many if not most of Costco's promised jobs.
2) Costco will generate an additional 100K car trips per month. Mounting research shows exhaust particulate is:
- ESPECIALLY harmful to black senior population's cognitive health - accelerating brain aging, dementia risk and semantic memory,
- harmful to W. Oakland's children, who suffer the highest pediatric pulmonary disease rates in Alameda Cty. and among highest in CA
- Tire particulate is the highest source of urban microplastic pollution
- Costco will NOT be able to mitigate the foregoing. (e.g. a proposed bus line is ludicrous; people leave Costco with many bags.
3) Oakland's projected $3million gain is a pitiful 0.3505% of Oakland's current general fund ($856,000,000) - much less relative to the city's full budget.
4) Oakland's planned amortization plan for CASS does NOT guarantee a CASS move, ESPECIALLY if the Army Base is occupied by Costco. West Oakland will suffer from CASS pollution for at LEAST another 5 years, or longer.
5) Costco prices are NOT much cheaper, and often more expensive than local stores (Costco member here).
6) Calling W. Oakland a 'food desert' flies in the face of reality.
This contrived deal raises serious questions, Costco's promised dog-and-pony show notwithstanding
My husband and I are very much in favor of bringing the Costco. West Oakland most definitely is a food desert - the once a week overpriced Farmers' Market - No actual grocery stores. I am very concerned that whenever someone tries to bring something nice to this community all sorts of opposition comes in making the perfect is the enemy of the good. All it does is keep our community from thriving. And to speak of environmental concerns when we breath the Port of Oakland and step over refuse in our streets daily, well that seems pretty misguided.
Please push this measure forward. I'm not a politician, a lobbyist, an activist, nor do I work for a non-profit. I'm a librarian, a tax payer, and a homeowner in the community and I will use my vote (and talk to my neighbors) in the next election cycle to support members who get behind bringing Costco here.
Because the Council committee performs the heavy lifting and public vetting before this item advances, I respectfully request focused review of the CEQA pathway for the proposed Costco ENA and any future project approval. The 2002 Oakland Army Base Reuse Plan EIR and 2012 Addendum may be a valid starting point, but they should not be treated as an automatic substitute for project-specific analysis of a Costco warehouse store and gas station.
The key question is whether the City can legally support a future addendum by showing, with substantial evidence, that Costco’s impacts fall within the environmental “envelope” already studied in the 2002 EIR and 2012 Addendum. If Costco creates new or substantially more severe impacts, the City should determine whether supplemental or subsequent CEQA review is required before final land disposition, ground lease, LDDA, entitlements, or construction approvals.
At minimum, I ask the Committee to require a project-specific CEQA comparison addressing traffic, parking, truck deliveries, air quality, VMT, freeway/local access, contamination/remediation, utilities, stormwater, and consistency with North Gateway land-use assumptions. This review should explain how a public-facing Costco compares with prior industrial, maritime, logistics, and recycling assumptions.
Support for negotiations should not weaken the City’s duty to preserve discretion, protect residents, and complete environmental review before final project decision is made.
It's wrong that that probable negative externalities of Costco at the Army Base are not discussed in the proposal.
1) Costco INCREASINGLY deploys AI for operational and labor cost efficiencies, causing a disappearance of many if not most of Costco's promised jobs.
2) Costco will generate an additional 100K car trips per month. Mounting research shows exhaust particulate is:
- ESPECIALLY harmful to black senior population's cognitive health - accelerating brain aging, dementia risk and semantic memory,
- harmful to W. Oakland's children, who suffer the highest pediatric pulmonary disease rates in Alameda Cty. and among highest in CA
- Tire particulate is the highest source of urban microplastic pollution
- Costco will NOT be able to mitigate the foregoing. (e.g. a proposed bus line is ludicrous; people leave Costco with many bags.
3) Oakland's projected $3million gain is a pitiful 0.3505% of Oakland's current general fund ($856,000,000) - much less relative to the city's full budget.
4) Oakland's planned amortization plan for CASS does NOT guarantee a CASS move, ESPECIALLY if the Army Base is occupied by Costco. West Oakland will suffer from CASS pollution for at LEAST another 5 years, or longer.
5) Costco prices are NOT much cheaper, and often more expensive than local stores (Costco member here).
6) Calling W. Oakland a 'food desert' flies in the face of reality.
This contrived deal raises serious questions, Costco's promised dog-and-pony show notwithstanding