Sitting by the dock of the bay
Step into the WayBack machine with me and we’ll travel to January 6, 1970. Hey, look over there. The latest edition of the Alameda Times Star is just hitting the streets! This being the glorious past, people are swarming to the paper, interested in the goings on around town. Gasps are heard, someone faints, what could it be?
We make our way to through the crowd, and we see it. There, on the front page, the paper has discovered that two public Right of Way Access points connecting Fernside Blvd. to the Estuary have been fenced off by neighboring property owners. That’s just not right!
Over the next few days, indignant letters to the editor are written. The writers cannot believe it. How dare people do these things. Oh…wait….the letters are from the property owners. They say “of course we did it, the public access was a nuisance.” Apparently, when people use public spaces, trash and noise increases. Uniformly closing down the access was the wise choice.
We return to the present, comfortable in the knowledge that all was made right, except that it hasn’t been. Publicly owned access to the water continues to be blocked off. But city staff is finally on it!
The concerns mentioned in the paper are the same ones raised whenever public access issues come up, whether they be bus stops, bus shelters, city parks, access to the water, etc. Trash, people, noise, hooligans. And to be honest, these are all possible (and even probable) outcomes of encouraging public use of public spaces. I just don’t think that they need to be mitigated by closing down access. As I live next to Lincoln Park, I could easily use these same arguments to justify closing the gates to the Park and creating one heck of a big backyard for my neighbors and myself. Nothing generates noise, trash and the possibility of hooliganism like a big public open space.
In fact, the city actually does something like this at Littlejohn (or is it Longfellow). The park is gated and the neighbors have the key to open and close it in the morning. This after a rash of incidents many years ago. From what I know about it, the system seems to work most of the time, but occasionally, park user-wannabes show up and are unable to get in because the keyholder forgot to unlock the gate. It’s a drastic measure.
But back to the water access. Finally, after 37 years, city staff is beginning to work on this issue and is currently looking at options for resolving the numerous needs. After 37 years, the community will have the ability to have a discussion about whether or not the access is worthwhile or not and the community can be a part of the discussion. (given the current climate in the city, I can’t help but mention that there’s another community discussion attempting to start on yet another 30+ year old issue. I wonder if the same arguments about the access will be raised. I mean, it’s been 37 years since the access was blocked, so why would we need to open it?).And let me be clear, I’m not sure it was staff who dropped the ball on this issue. The General Plan (Policy 2.10.c) covers this issue: “Stop the trend toward private use of public property.” It looks like it has been political non-action that’s allowed this to sit for so long.
The city has 6 public right of way accesses to the water on the east end:
- Fairview and Fernside (the driveway is a Public ROW, a car is often parked in it making it impassable)
- Monte Vista and Fernside (blocked)
- Fernside between High and Monte Vista (ROW is designed into the duplex entrance way)
- Liberty and East Shore
- Central and East Shore
- Meyers and East Shore (blocked)
The question is whether community benefits outweigh inconveniences to specific property owners. There’s no cut and dried answer. Many factors need to be weighed, including public benefit, usefulness, etc. In the coming months, this issue will most likely start seeing a higher profile than it has in 37 years.
UPDATE: Here’s a map I threw together of the area and the 6 access points.
Leave a Reply