DOCSLIB.ORG

Meeting #4 June 19, 2018 San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) 4911 Central Ave, Richmond, CA 94804

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Meeting #4 June 19, 2018 San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) 4911 Central Ave, Richmond, CA 94804 Adapting to Rising Tides Bay Area Regional Working Group: Meeting #4 June 19, 2018 San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) 4911 Central Ave, Richmond, CA 94804 **PowerPoint available online at www.adaptingtorisingtides.org/projects/art-bay-area Welcome and Introduction: Carey Batha • ART Bay Area project recap, project progress to-date, rationale for organizing vulnerability assessments by Operational Landscape Units (OLUs) o Question: What are the gray areas on the OLU map? Carey: These are the OLUs we are not assessing. We are assessing ART Bay Area assets within 13 OLUs (out of 30). You can find a map of these 13 OLUs here and on the final page of these notes. However, we are also addressing certain long linear assets, such as transportation and the bay trail, throughout the region. Presentation on SFEI Operational Landscape Units (OLUs): Julie Beagle • Introduction to OLU development, scientific grounding, and intended uses o Question: What’s a polder? § Answer (Jeremy Lowe, SFEI): A polder is an area of pressurized land below normal tidal level. For example, an island is above tide line. A polder is land that sits lower than the tide line and therefore very vulnerable to flooding. o Question (from online group): Do OLU boundaries consider rivers or drainage divides? § Answer (SFEI): Yes, OLUs are the expression of watersheds at the Baylands. One of the principles for the delineation was to avoid splitting watersheds or tidal sheds. Each OLU represents the receiving end of one or more watersheds. While the OLU itself must be a manageable size (i.e. the Alameda Creek OLU can’t go all the way to Livermore), the analyses included the watershed inputs of water and sediment. Two watershed- based adaptation measures that could be considered are reconnecting creeks to Baylands, as well as green storm water infrastructure in the watersheds. o Question (from online group): Was there community input into the OLU process/development? § Answer (SFEI): This was not a community stakeholder process but more of a science process. However, we have received a lot of input from many groups of people. We have a technical advisory group and a group of policy and regional advisors. We also have met with community groups like Resilient Communities Initiative and Environmental Justice Coalition for Water to get their input. Through our work with the San Mateo and Marin adaptation planning projects, there are large community/stakeholder processes focused on individual OLUs of interest to these projects. Presentation on ART Bay Area OLU Example: Heather Dennis • Results from vulnerability assessments in the Belmont-Redwood OLU o Question (from online group): How are priority conservation areas (PCAs) identified? § Answer (ART Team): PCAs are identified through consensus and nomination by local jurisdictions and park/open space districts as lands in need of protection due to pressure from urban development or other factors. PCAs are categorized by four designations: Natural Landscapes, Agricultural Lands, Urban Greening and Regional Recreation. Learn more about the PCA designation process here: https://abag.ca.gov/priority/conservation/ o Question/Comment (from online group): I noticed Bair Island and Greco Island are not shown as priority conservation areas. § Answer (ART Team): Bair Island and Greco Island have not been designated at PCAs. However, each island hosts a San Francisco Water Trail site that has been designated as PCA. For more information, check out: https://abag.ca.gov/priority/conservation/ o Question/comment (from online group): The map showed Inner Bair Island as a "vulnerable community" – it’s a restoration site in the National Wildlife Refuge. § Answer (ART Team): According to the ART Bay Area methodology, the “vulnerable community” designation is made using data from the US Census. The original geospatial extent of Census block groups covers areas that are unpopulated, such as National Wildlife Refuge restoration sites and the Bay itself. The segment including Inner Bair Island likely stretches inland to include portions of Redwood City with characteristics that make them more vulnerable to sea level rise. Segments of displayed Census data have been removed for visualization purposes, such as those that stretch into the Bay. Depending on availability of GIS data, this site may be removed as well. Break Engagement Exercise: Uncovering Shared Vulnerabilities • During this exercise, the working group split up into table groups, each with a map of an OLU depicting the various assets being analyzed in the ART Bay Area vulnerability assessment. The groups brainstormed the ways these assets share vulnerabilities to sea level rise, and how the consequences of flooding could cross asset categories. • Many groups discussed the various projects, planning efforts, and programs occurring in these areas that could affect flood risk over time. • Several groups brainstormed questions that should be addressed in the vulnerability assessment. Santa Clara Valley OLU: Group #1 Participant report out: There are lot of projects going on in this area that could impact vulnerability including a wastewater treatment plant (Sunnyvale treatment plant); a large project by the Army Corp, SCWD, and the Conservancy building a major levy; and an additional shoreline study (Santa Clara Shoreline). It will be important to coordinate with Alameda County to understand projects and efforts going on in the area, and how they might affect future flood extent along the shoreline. Additionally, NASA and Google are in this area; it is unknown what’s happening along those portions of the shoreline. Santa Clara Valley OLU: Group #2 Participant report out: This group noted the same wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) projects going on in Sunnyvale and Santa Clara as well as power stations and toxic sites in the area. The group discussed impacts of groundwater and toxic plumes spreading upstream with sea level rise, which is different than what they do today, and discussed what would happen if sewage plants can no longer discharge. This could lead to toxic waste and untreated sewage backing up into the streets or people’s homes. The focus area also contains a fire station; it would be difficult for emergency personnel to get in and out with flooding. The group discussed how impacts to the power system for the area could affect the ability of residents to communicate during a flood event. This led to a discussion of acute versus chronic flood issues. With chronic issues resulting from groundwater and/or surface level flooding, perhaps managed retreat is an option. If properties are uninsurable or have zero sale value, maybe communities can receive public financial assistance. In this area, there could be a transportation narrative, energy narrative, public health narrative, and several more. It is a different way to think about these issues, and translates scientific information into something people can relate to. Note from ART team: we must be cautious with ideas about relocating communities, especially when community members themselves aren’t present. The ART team recognizes that we need to increase efforts to increase involvement of vulnerable community members in this project. Mission Islais OLU: Group #1 Participant report out: One of the focus areas within this OLU is at Islais Creek, where there is extensive flooding, transportation assets, a vulnerable community, the Port of San Francisco, and contamination. There is a physical vulnerability of overtopping along some portions of the channel banks and the mobilization of contaminants where people recreate and work. Heron’s Head is an important recreational area (and could be lost as soon as 2050). There are a lot of jurisdictions overlapping in this area. The Port owns a lot of land including the channel shoreline. The Port has a relationship with MTA, who run the T Third Street MUNI over the 3rd Street bridge, but the bridge is owned by SF Public Works. Participants indicated that people who live or work near this area, or come here to recreate, don't have a lot of information about future flood risk and that this is an informational vulnerability. Participants recognized that within the Mission-Islais OLU, there is a lot of diversity of uses, shoreline types, and development status and that focus areas in this OLU help us think about different strategies. Napa – Sonoma OLU: Group #1 Participant report out: This area is more rural than the others considered in this exercise. The group identified some clusters of vulnerable urban areas like Vallejo. Napa has a large flood protection project, but the group was uncertain about the level of sea level rise the project was designed to accommodate. The group was curious to know who is dependent on the fire station and power plants shown on the map, and how flooding would affect the surrounding communities. The group also discussed several issues related to Highway 37. First, adaptation options considered for Highway 37 could affect the wetlands inland of it; allowing tidal flow under the highway would best protect those wetlands. Second, Highway 37 serves as an important transportation route for residents of Vallejo, which represents a dependency between ART Bay Area assets. Similarly, Highway 37 and the railroad depend on privately owned levees currently being discussed in sea level rise planning efforts on Highway 37 and Regional Measure 3 (providing $100 million towards transportation improvements). Though currently a freight railway, but there are conversations around converting the railroad to passenger rail; however, it is vulnerable to flooding. The group also discussed how some contaminated sites may cause problems in Vallejo. The group speculated whether the edge of Napa river is the ideal place to locate a PDA given flooding concerns. The group suggested including Highway 121 (though that may be outside area) and the Sonoma Raceway in the ART Bay Area analysis, because they are important assets in this area. East Bay Crescent: Group #1 Participant report out: This area is dense in population and toxic sites, mostly around the industrial areas of Emeryville.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Albany Beach
    1 San Francisco Bay Area Water Trail Site Description for Albany Beach Location, Ownership, and Management: Albany Beach is located on the Albany shoreline in northwestern Alameda County in the city limits of Albany. The beach is located at the base of the Albany Peninsula, with the Golden Gate Fields racetrack to the east, Buchanan Street and the Albany Mudflats Ecological Reserve/State Marine Park (SMP) to the north, and San Francisco Bay and City of Albany lands to the west. Albany Beach is part of McLaughlin Eastshore State Park and is managed by the East Bay Regional Park District. Contact Name: Takei, Kevin Contact Phone: (510) 544-2321 Contact E-mail: [email protected] Southern beach entrance Albany Beach Northern beach entrance Facility Description: Albany Beach is a launch and destination for paddlers and boardsailors, providing a convenient launching point for exploration of the Eastshore State Park shoreline to the north and south. The beach does not have a ramp, boarding pier, or floating dock, but the beach is suitable for lighter watercraft, such as kayaks, canoes, and stand up paddleboards. Boaters may want to bring "boat wheels" (small boat dolly) to help get their boats and boards from the parking lot to the beach, because some of the parking is quite a distance from the beach. Boardsailing is concentrated in the southern portion of the beach and boardsailors will often use the existing Golden Gate Fields dirt parking area for equipment rigging. The East Bay Regional Parks District and City of Albany provide a variety of shoreside facilities, including an ADA portable restroom, trails, bike racks, and parking.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Albany Homeless Task Force Thursday, December 20, 2012 – 7:00 Pm Albany Senior Center, 846 Masonic Avenue – South Room
    City of Albany Homeless Task Force Thursday, December 20, 2012 – 7:00 pm Albany Senior Center, 846 Masonic Avenue – South Room Meeting Outline ITEMS TIME 1. Adoption of November 15, 2012 Meeting Notes 7:00 – 7:05 PM 2. Guest Speakers: Police Chief Mike McQuiston and Sgt. Chris Willis 7:05 – 7:50 PM 3. Staff Update: EveryOne Home; funding sources; low income housing inventory; 7:50 – 8:05 PM McLaughlin Eastshore State Park Plan (Bulb portion); Dignity Village Evaluation Report 4. Report on framing January City Council report – Members Pipkin, Kleinbub and 8:05 – 8:15 PM Winkelstein 5. Discussion on expanding options to Council 8:15 – 8:35 PM 6. Report on MHSA Advisory Committee – Member Thrush 8:35 – 8:45 PM 7. Research on programs that serve the homeless 8:45 - 8:55 PM 8. Items for the next Agenda: City of Berkeley Public Commons for Everyone 8:55 – 9:00 PM Initiative 9. Adjournment 9:00 PM Attachments: a) November Meeting Notes b) Categories – Ending Brainstorming list c) Urban County 2012 Action Plan d) Inventory of subsidized-rental Housing e) McLaughlin Eastshore State Park Plan (Bulb portion) f) Dignity Village Evaluation Report Next meeting: January 17, 2013 at 7:00 PM City of Albany Homeless Task Force Thursday, November 15, 2012 – 7:00 pm Albany Senior Center, 846 Masonic Avenue – South Room Meeting Notes Members present: Ruth Cashmere, Barbara Chambers, Andrew Franklin, Brian Johns, Lisa Kleinbub, Gordon McCarter, Paul O’Curry, Sharon Pipkin and Julie Ann Winkelstein Staff present: Ann Chaney and Isabelle Leduc 1. Adoption of October 18, 2012 Meeting Notes Motion: Motion was made by Member Winkelstein and seconded by Member O’Curry to accept the October 18, 2012 minutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Board Meeting Packet
    REVISED July 20, 2021 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Board Meeting Packet SPECIAL NOTICE REGARDING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AT THE EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, JULY 20, 2021 at 1:00 pm Pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order No. N-29-20 and the Alameda County Health Officer’s Shelter in Place Orders, the East Bay Regional Park District Headquarters will not be open to the public and the Board of Directors and staff will be participating in the Board meetings via phone/video conferencing. Members of the public can listen and view the meeting in the following way: Via the Park District’s live video stream which can be found at https://youtu.be/e87Tch3yvBk Public comments may be submitted one of three ways: 1. Via email to Yolande Barial Knight, Clerk of the Board, at [email protected]. Email must contain in the subject line public comments – not on the agenda or public comments – agenda item #. It is preferred that these written comments be submitted by Monday, July 19, 2021 at 3:00 pm. 2. Via voicemail at (510) 544-2016. The caller must start the message by stating public comments – not on the agenda or public comments – agenda item # followed by their name and place of residence, followed by their comments. It is preferred that these voicemail comments be submitted by Monday, July 19, 2021 at 3:00 pm. 3. Live via zoom. If you would like to make a live public comment during the meeting this option is available through the virtual meeting platform: *Note: this virtual meeting platform link will let you into the https://zoom.us/j/98698918978 virtual meeting for the purpose of providing a public comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Albany Bulb – Safety Hazard Removal City of Albany May 2008
    Albany Bulb – Safety Hazard Removal City of Albany May 2008 Description: This project will create a safer environment, and increase the usable area of The Bulb through the removal of exposed concrete and rebar that are remnants of this former landfill, and through the removal of noxious weeds, planting of native species, and habitat restoration. The Bulb is a semi-wild area, reserved for hiking, enjoying views, observing birds and animals, and providing opportunities for solitude. It was created early in the 1960’s and filled until 1983. Landfilled material consisted primarily of construction debris and landscape wastes. Municipal wastes and industrial wastes were not allowed. The Albany Bulb is included in the Eastshore State Park Plan, which was adopted in 2002, however the land is still owned by the City of Albany. The ESP Plan designates the Bulb as “Conservation” and contains policies to protect and enhance upland habitat for wildlife. Policies in the ESP Plan that relate to the removal of safety hazards at the Bulb are as follows: A-13 and A-15 Develop and implement a program for the removal of safety hazards associated with construction debris on the surface of the Neck and Bulb (e.g., unstable rubble piles, unsafe structures and protruding rebar). The clean- up program should be designed to minimize disturbance to upland wildlife habitat. Approaches that involve mass grading and wholesale removal of vegetation are not appropriate…Break up large concrete and construction debris to improve appearance, reduce safety hazards, etc. Cost: It is estimated the project would be $250,000 ($8,000/day over 30 working days).
    [Show full text]
  • Final Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
    11-1 CITY OF ALBANY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT Agenda Date: December 2, 2019 Reviewed by: NA SUBJECT: Final Climate Action and Adaptation Plan REPORT BY: Elizabeth Carrade, Sustainability Coordinator Claire Griffing, Sustainability & Resilience Manager Jeff Bond, Community Development Director SUMMARY This agenda item introduces the final Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, which prioritizes actions that support low-carbon transportation choices, reduce the use of natural gas in the built environment, discourage carbon-intensive consumption habits, and promote climate adaptation and resilience in order to reach the City of Albany’s long-term climate action goals. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the City Council adopt Resolution 2019-XX adopting the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan and authorizing staff to begin implementation. CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION That the City Council adopt the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan under the condition that the interim target is changed from 60% reductions by 2035 to 70% reductions by 2030. BACKGROUND Through the Albany City Council’s Strategic Vision, the City is committed to fostering a healthy and sustainable urban village by advancing actions that promote climate stability. In 2007, the Council formed a Sustainability Committee (now Climate Action Committee) to advise on greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction strategies. In 2010, the Council adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP), which outlined a course of action for the City to reduce emissions 25% by 2020. Strategies focused on six sectors: building energy strategies, transportation and land use, waste reduction, green infrastructure, water conservation, and food and agriculture. Through energy and water use improvements, waste reduction efforts, a focus on active transportation, and a new carbon-free default electricity supply from EBCE, the City has successfully decreased communitywide emissions by 33%—exceeding the 2020 goal.
    [Show full text]
  • Albany Climate Change Chapter
    February 14, 2017 Albany Climate Change Chapter Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Climate change will affect Albany, California ........................................................................................... 3 Adaptation can help Albany protect its communities and assets in the face of changing climate conditions.................................................................................................................................................. 4 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Climate change will affect Albany, California ........................................................................................... 7 2. Climate Hazards Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 8 Inland Flooding ......................................................................................................................................... 9 Climate change may increase flood risks in Albany .............................................................................. 9 Albany will potentially face more frequent, severe floods ................................................................... 9 Few citywide assets are exposed to flood risk ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CESP History.Pdf
    Author’s Note and Acknowledgments When the planners for the new Eastshore State Park proposed that a history of the campaign to create the Eastshore State Park be written, I leapt at the opportunity to do this. As a participant, I realized that any history I wrote would be colored by my own recollections and involvement. Nevertheless, I felt that it was important for others to have some sense of what it was like to be actively involved in a citizens’ movement to create a major public park for the entire Bay area. I also believed it was important and necessary to preserve the memory of many of those who are still involved and to record for posterity the deeds of those who are no longer with us to share their memories. I also wanted to make people aware of the connection between the campaign to create the Eastshore State Park and the Save the Bay campaign, one of most important citizen movements and environmental campaigns in all of the San Francisco Bay area since the end of World War II. This is a history from the point of view of activists in that park campaign. I use the term “park advocates” as a short hand for them. It is not intended to be a definitive history of this campaign. To do that would require much more time and support than I had. It would also require access to the Santa Fe Railroad’s archives, which I suspect would not be opened up to me or to anyone else, for that matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Winter/Spring 2018
    City of Albany recreation & community services Winter/Spring 2018 © richellgen/iStockphoto.com community-building albany-style Danger: broken ice! So you’ve lived on your block quite a while—years, perhaps—and you still don’t know the name of the neighbor across the street? Ending the awkward- ness is a good first step in building community on your block. After all, com- munity starts at home! We dare you: ring the doorbell and introduce yourself. Sounds simple, but it can be intimidating to break the ice—especially if you have nodded hello to a perfect stranger for years. Just do it—you will both feel better. Another ice-breaker: Become a member of your Nextdoor neighborhood (see page 63). Nextdoor is a great way to meet your neighbors and to stay in- formed of neighborhood issues and events, find a lost cat or the best painter in town, or call the nice man down the street by his first name. For more information: how might albany create a stronger, safer, more vibrant community where democracy works at a local level? www.albanyca.org/community Getting to know one’s neighbors is a start. When neighbors interact— whether through block parties, home-garden produce sharing, or book club meetings—connections are formed between people and trust is built. Such social capital can lead to a stronger, safer community, a community where its members have a greater sense of belonging. contents time to bundle-up for spring Winter is the perfect time to be thinking of spring, and—believe it or not—it’s already time to be thinking about summer if you have offspring in Albany .
    [Show full text]
  • New Technique for Identifying Plankton by Color
    ESTUARY SCIENCE • RESTORATION • WATERSHED • POLITICS SPECIES BAY • WATERSHED SCIENCE • RESTORATION San Francisco Estuary Partnership Mokelumne’s Pitch for Wild River Flatlines Dry Times for Valley Refuges New Technique for Identifying Plankton by Color PCB Levels in Small Fish Surprise Scientists Alameda Creek Crawls Toward Fish-Friendly Future Delta Council Finetunes Habitat Protocols NE WS SEPTEMBER 2014 VOL. 23, NO. 3 Plankton Pigments ...... 3 Lavender Invader ....... 4 New Water Atlas ........ 4 Alameda Creek ......... 5 PCBs & Small Fish ...... 6 Valley Refuges .......... 8 Delta Habitats .......... 9 Suspense for Mokelumne 10 Pelican Movie .........11 2 SEPTEMBER 2014 3 ESTUARY NEWS SCIENCE NEW INTERACTIVE MAP Around the Bay DEBUTS FOR FLOODZONE Our Coast, Our Revealing BIRDS CROWD ROCK VISITORS Future (OCOF), & VICE VERSA — Managing a collabora- Alcatraz — once a federal prison, now tive project with Plankton Pigments part of the National Park system—is a many partners delicate balancing act. As an historic site, designed to help Keeping tabs on San Francisco Bay’s fucoxanthin (brown), its cultural resources come first. But planners and land wildlife involves counting plants. That while dinoflagellates the return of colonial seabirds since the use managers means tracking the relative numbers have a lock on peridinin prison closure adds another mandate. prepare for rising and types of the microscopic floating (brown-gold), and cya- Alcatraz hosts San Francisco Bay’s larg- sea levels and plants that feed the Bay. Known as nobacteria alone make est breeding colony of western gulls; its changes in storm phytoplankton, their number includes zeaxanthin (orange). only colonies of Brandt’s cormorants, pe- patterns, has just diatoms, dinoflagellates, cyanobacte- lagic cormorants, and pigeon guillemots; added San Fran- ria, and chromophytes, to name a few.
    [Show full text]
  • A Walk in the Eastshore State Park Meetings
    . 2371 EUNICE STREET, BERKELEY, CA 94708 Dedicated to the preservation and restoration of public paths, steps and walkways in Berkeley for the use and enjoyment of all. Berkeley’s Berkeley Path Wanderers Association is a grassroots volunteer group of community members who have come together to increase public awareness of the City of Berkeley’s pathways. BPWA hopes to accomplish this goal through volunteer-led path walks; identification and accurate mapping of A Newsletter of the Berkeley Path Wanderers Association, Fall 1999 Vol. 2 No. 4 Berkeley’s complete path network; and eventual restoration of paths that have been ATHS blocked or obscured. We hope the final P outcome of the community effort will be the A Walk in the Eastshore State Park preservation and on-going maintenance of all The Bayshore Trail the paths, lanes and steps throughout Berkeley. now extends from the Richmond Marina to Point Isabel. The seg- ment from Point Isabel Meetings south to the Albany Bulb 7-9 pm Live Oak Park Recreation Center is nearing completion. Nov. 18 General Meeting Walking south from Flat Land paths the Albany Bulb, along possible speakers: Susan the privately owned Schwartz & Zasa Swanson waterfront of Golden Gate Fields, you can Jan. 20 Board Meeting enter the new Eastshore Feb. 17 General Meeting State Park south of Gilman. There is Pedestrian Transportations wonderful exploring in the undevel- near a remnant of the marsh at the con- by Christy Camp oped park from Seabreeze Market at fluence of Middle and Cerrito Creeks. University Avenue and Frontage Road, Firm land lay behind the sandy cres- Mar.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape Phenomena at the Albany Bulb Wasteland Karl Kullmann
    The Garden of Entangled Paths: Landscape Phenomena at the Albany Bulb Wasteland karl kullmann Over four decades, the Albany Bulb in the San Francisco Bay Area, California, Karl Kullmann is Associate Professor, United States of America metamorphosed from a dumpsite to a thicket harbouring College of Environmental Design, a clandestine community. Since the forced decampment of this spontaneous University of California, Berkeley, society, the site has endured as a living ruin that continues to inspire the explorative California, USA. impulses of visitors. While residual structures and decaying scrap-sculptures Email: [email protected] represent the tangible face of the site and its heterotopic past, more nuanced underlying landscape phenomena ground this cultural legacy. In exploring these phenomena, this paper offers a counterpoint to the tendency to engage with wastelands programmatically and pictorially while overlooking the influence of the corporeal landscape. The emergent nature of these phenomena suggests that the KEY WORDS agency of design might circumvent typically fraught interactions with undesigned waste-scapes by assuming characteristics of the gardener. Disorientation Thicket ver several decades, urban wastelands arose as a topic of substantial interest Topography Oto the spatial design fields. This focus is partially a consequence of increased Paths supply, as globalised manufacturing led to the proliferation of de-industrialised and de-urbanised sites in developed economies. From an environmental viewpoint, the ‘closure’ of the global map (Bann, 1983) and shifting perceptions of nature attributed wildness value to sites formerly disregarded as badlands (Rink and Herbst, 2012). The appeal of wastelands also reflects the recognition that many of the sanctioned public realms in suburbanised cities make inadequate contributions to city life (Sennett, 1993, 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • Waterfront Element Regional Park District and the 1992 General Plan
    C H A P T E R 10 WATERFRONT ELEMENT A. INTRODUCTION The waterfront is one of Albany’s defining In addition, the Element draws on plans which physical features and has been the focus of several pre-date the 2002 State Park Master Plan, high-profile planning initiatives over the past five including a 1995 City proposal to the East Bay decades. The purpose of the Waterfront Element Regional Park District and the 1992 General Plan. is to summarize the policies that have resulted from those initiatives, and to provide a foundation This Element carries forward existing City policy for the planning and implementation work that for Golden Gate Fields. Pursuant to a 1990 voter will take place in the future. initiative known as Measure C, any change to the existing land use and zoning regulations on the The Waterfront Element carries forward Albany’s waterfront would be subject to approval by vision of creating a spectacular new park along the Albany voters. The 2015 General Plan does not eastern shore of San Francisco Bay. It also propose such changes, and concludes that a acknowledges the need for continued discussion subsequent planning process (and citywide vote) about the future of Golden Gate Fields. would be required if and when they are proposed. This Plan retains the “Commercial Recreation” The Element builds on and incorporates existing General Plan Map designation for Golden Gate plans and programs, most of which address Fields established by the prior (1992) Plan, as well publicly owned land. Foremost among these as the policy direction for the site.
    [Show full text]