Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes <br />Planning Commissic <br />12/11/85 <br />indicated that at the current time there is no master plan for <br />the park, but if one doesn't provide certain amenities, for <br />example, picnic tables, it is conceivable that people will not be <br />bringing up coolers with their lunch and drinks to the area. <br />Commissioner Michelotti asked Ms. Bengtson to review the East Bay <br />Regional Park proposal. Ms. Bengtson explained she has been on a <br />committee and assured the Commission that no public vehicular <br />access was ever explored but that there would be pedestrian <br />access for park users and vehicular access for park maintenance <br />people only. She did not have a problem with hikers going from <br />one park to the the other across the ridge. Chairman Wilson then <br />asked about the Everett Nevins property and whether or not the <br />City ever considered it in any of their plans. Ms. Bengtson <br />indicated the City had never approached the issue. <br />Mr. Fairfield again addressed the Commission indicating that he <br />and Ms. Bengtson had agreed on the staging area because it is <br />physically the best way to get a large group of people to the <br />park in cars. He asked for relief in park dedication or growth <br />management fees to help offset the loss of units proposed. <br />Commissioner Michelotti suggested another possible staging area <br />might be to the south. Mr. Fairfield indicated it would then be <br />probable that the City would have to acquire San Francisco Water <br />land and there would be no advantage to the park users in this. <br />Commissioner Lindsey indicated he would like to make park access <br />a separate issue to be mutually worked out between the Planning <br />Commission and Park Recreation at a separate meeting and act on <br />the project without it. Mr. Fairfield indicated this would be <br />fine with him. <br />Messrs. Swift and Fairfield restated the options available for <br />access; a north trail, a south trail, or the original plan with <br />some kind of road. A fourth option would be no park access. <br />Commissioner Lindsey indicated he would prefer having a park <br />access but would like the opportunity to work with Park and <br />Recreation Commission in an effort to determine its best <br />location. <br />Commissioner Innes reviewed the cost of having access to the <br />existing staging area vs the alternatives. Mr. Fairfield <br />reviewed the approximate costs depending on slope, width and <br />length. <br />Chairman Wilson stated he would like to keep the door open for a <br />roadway access to the park. <br />Commissioner Innes spoke to traffic concerns of the area. <br />Commissioner Lindsey indicated he would like to see (1) access to <br />the park be taken out of the development request at this time (2) <br />make arrangements to meet with the Park and Recreation Commission <br />as soon as possible at a joint meeting for making a proposal to <br />- 6 - <br />