Planning board hears concerns and conditions as Oakland Roots proposes interim Harbor Bay venue

The Alameda Planning Board on June 22 heard a public workshop on a proposal by the Oakland Roots to host professional soccer matches at their Harbor Bay Parkway training facility, a site the team occupies at 1150 and 1220 Harbor Bay Parkway.

Planner Brian Magcguire told the board the Roots propose modular grandstands, a press box and temporary game‑day facilities, with seating configurations the applicant says would accommodate up to 7,600–8,000 spectators for as many as 24 matches per year plus about 10 smaller events of 500–2,500 attendees. Magcguire said the project sits in the city's commercial manufacturing zone and would require a conditional‑use permit and design review; staff is preliminarily relying on the city's 2021 General Plan EIR and anticipates the project could be eligible for streamlining under CEQA Guidelines section 15183. He emphasized outstanding deliverables the board will need before any approval: a completed traffic impact analysis with a trip‑distribution model, a traffic‑control plan approved by the city engineer and public‑works director, and safety/operations plans approved by police and fire. He also said the project will require FAA review and airport‑land‑use commission review for tall lighting and must comply with the city's noise and dark‑skies ordinances. Magcguire recommended annual review of the permit once in place to allow the board and public to monitor compliance.

Lydia Tan, the Roots' chief real estate officer, said the club seeks an interim multi‑year home while permanent stadium options are pursued. Tan said the club's plan includes incentivizing transit and high‑occupancy trips, a BART shuttle, a secure bike valet for about 400 riders, and shared parking agreements under negotiation with property owners in the business park. "We are a professional organization but very much steeped in mission and purpose and everything we do has essentially a triple bottom line," Tan said, noting the club's recent experience hosting national teams and community events was used to test logistics.

Residents and stakeholders who spoke at public comment split along familiar lines. Bay Farm Island resident Marie Kaine argued the site is too close to residential areas and said the prospect of 8,000‑person events could obstruct evacuation routes and cause unsafe traffic congestion; "Please consider that lives could be lost due to your decisions," Kaine said. Other Bay Farm commenters raised similar concerns about late‑night noise, impacts on seniors, and potential spillover onto neighborhood streets. In contrast, local resident Melissa D'vor and the Alameda Chamber's Meline Sadic urged the board to consider economic benefits, saying match days would bring customers to Island restaurants and hotels and provide community programming. D'vor said the influx "represents visitors coming to Alameda, spending money at our restaurants, filling up our hotel rooms," and urged the board to allow the proposal to proceed through the permit process so mitigations can be refined.

Board questions focused on specifics staff and the applicant still need to deliver. Members asked when the draft trip‑distribution model would be available (staff said a draft was expected the week following the meeting), how many shuttles would be required and where shuttle pick‑up and drop‑off points would be located, where the bike‑valet would be sited, whether police staffing would be needed on game days, and whether fireworks would be allowed (the applicant said fireworks would not be proposed and the fire department would not approve them). Several board members urged strong, enforceable conditions on parking, traffic routing to keep event traffic off residential streets, lighting shields to meet dark‑sky rules, and specific decibel modeling to show compliance with the city's noise ordinance. One member suggested exploring the ferry or existing Harbor Bay shuttle connections as part of a multimodal response.

No formal action was taken; the workshop is advisory. Chair President Cisneros and other board members instructed staff and the Roots to return with a completed traffic impact analysis and specific, enforceable operations plans — including shuttle schedules and capacity commitments, parking agreements, traffic‑control staffing, and detailed noise and lighting plans — before any use permit is set for decision. Staff also noted that FAA and airport‑land‑use commission reviews will be required for the proposed field lighting.

If the Roots move forward with a formal conditional‑use permit application, the board and staff said they expect the application packet to include a finalized traffic impact analysis and traffic control plan, a safety and operations plan cleared by police and fire, executed parking agreements or a concrete alternative plan for unmet parking demand, and noise and lighting modeling showing compliance with city standards. The board also recommended an annual permit review if the use is approved.

The planning board will not vote on a permit at a study session; the workshop record will inform a future, formal application hearing if and when the Roots file for a conditional use permit and design review.

The planning board closed the item after providing direction and moved on to other agenda business.