Margaret Stanzione, Project
250 Frank Ogawa Plaza,
Re: NOP for Oak to Ninth Mixed Use Development
Dear Ms. Stanzione:
Waterfront Action is pleased to respond to the request for
comments on the NOP for this project, and those
comments are presented later in this letter.
First, we wish to present the position that preparation of an
The Estuary Policy Plan, which
the City Council unanimously incorporated into
OAK-4.4: promote development of
commercial-recreational uses in the vicinity of the
OAK -5 clearly stated that
A Specific Plan should be prepared prior to development. Planning should be based on a strategy which analyzes the area comprehensively…Development feasibilities should be analyzed, phasing of improvements should be identified, and a funding strategy to finance and implement recommended open space should be addressed. These require that a realistic development program and site plan be developed.
We believe that a Specific Plan, or some large publicly open planning policy be used for this large parcel. Let it be noted that the submittal by Oakland Harbor Partners included as their proposal an 11 month specific planning process with 5 public workshops. This has not happened, and proceeding without it raises questions:
· Does the absence of a Specific Plan mean that city must amend the General Plan to NOT require Specific Plan?
· To our knowledge the decision not to do the Specific Plan was made by city and port staff. Did City Council have the opportunity to review that decision?
We understand that City staff in the Planning and Economic Development Department is working on a Planned Development Zoning District (PDZD) that may provide a lengthy opportunity for public involvement. This process may meet the intent of the General Plan requirement for a Specific Plan if it requires a charrette modeled after the Charrette Institute of Portland,
To address the issue, Waterfront Action recommends either:
· development and adoption of a Specific Plan, or
· initiation of a charrette process modeled after the Charrette
Institute of Portland,
Following are questions that Waterfront Action would like to see answered in the Environmental Impact Report for the Oak to Ninth Mixed Use Project. Note that the programmatic
EIRdone for the Estuary Policy Plan did not consider housing on this site so it would not have evaluated impacts on people living there.
What will be the cumulative traffic impacts on
What alternatives will be available for emergency services particularly with
the possible closure of the Fire Station at
a. Air: How will the air quality for this development be affected by increased use of I-880 once the new overpass is completed?
b. Noise: what will be the sound issues for the residents with increased freeway truck traffic and train traffic?
Public Open Space
1. Can the Ninth Avenue Terminal: be used as a community resource?
2. Where will there be designated public access parking?
3. What alternatives are being considered for transportation to the site?
4. Will the public access have clear signage to indicate routes to the shoreline?
5. Will protection be needed for the wetland restoration area? Can it be a viewing area?
there be an area feasible for public events that will impact the housing?
(OAK-2.4: …establish a location for large civic events and cultural activities…large enough to accommodate large numbers of people associated with special evens,, cultural activities, city festivals, etc…)
7. Can construction of a pedestrian overpass be considered a requirement of the project?
Thank you for this opportunity to respond. We look forward to a discussion of the PDZD issues as they will relate to the Oak to Ninth Mixed Use Project.
Claudia Cappio, CEDA
Kerry Jo Ricketts Ferris, CEDA
Janet McBride, ABAG, Bay Trail
Brian Wiese, East Bay Regional Park District
Brad McCrea, BCDC