Apr 5 2011

Opinion: Blair Park Plan Changes as Often as the Wind Blows

A letter submitted by a Piedmont resident asks for a detailed analysis of costs, as well as parking/traffic:

I’m very disappointed that City Council’s resolution on March 21st did not specifically ask that a detailed cost analysis be provided immediately for the Blair Park project along with a condition that all funds must be ‘banked’ before  any demolition/construction begins in Blair Park.  I am also concerned that the direction given for further traffic study is vague and does not specifically include the new Maxwelton intersection.  The PRFO plan suggested by City Council returns back to 40 parking spaces, which was clearly identified as insufficient in the EIR.  The 2nd field (or ‘grassy glade’ as some prefer to call it) will still create a parking demand and will still be available as a game-sized playfield at any time.  The number of parking spaces on plans from PRFO has gone from 80 to 40 to 62 and now back to 40 over the past three years.  Evidence of current higher use of parking was presented to the EIR consultants and Council on many opportunities and to this po
int has continued to be ignored even though the EIR itself stated it “will be provided to decision makers for review.”

The first plan submitted for Council review in June 2008 contained 2 small fields with huge retaining walls, no reference to traffic or crosswalks and 80 parking spaces.  In September 2008 one field was enlarged, no reference to traffic or crosswalks and 80 parking spaces remained.

The plan approved for EIR review in September 2009 contained one large playing field (artificial turf) with huge retaining walls, berms and fencing, one smaller playing field (artificial turf) with retaining walls and fencing, a pedestrian bridge, a concessions stand, a dog run, an undefined upper walkway and two parking lots for 40 cars.

The plan submitted on January 19, 2011, for the Recreation Commission review contained one large playing field (artificial turf) with huge retaining walls, berms and fencing, a ‘grassy glade’ with grass and no fencing), a tot lot, a PAR course, a climbing wall, a dog run, an upper walkway, with a verbal reference to signalized crossing at 3 possible locations, and two parking lots for 62 cars.

The plan submitted on February 17, 2011, for the Parks Commission review contained one large playing field (artificial turf) with huge retaining walls, berms and fencing, a ‘grassy glade’ with grass and no fencing, a tot lot, a PAR course, a climbing wall, a dog run, an upper walkway, a verbal reference to “slow traffic down, to essentially gum up the works”with no plan in hand, and two parking lots for 62 cars.

The plan submitted on February 24, 2011, for Planning Commission review contained one large playing field (artificial turf) with huge retaining wall, berms and fencing, renamed the 2nd field a ‘grassy glade’ field with grass and fencing, a tot lot, a PAR course, a climbing wall, a dog run, an upper walkway, bike paths, narrowed Moraga Avenue, added two roundabouts at Red Rock Road and Maxwelton, and two parking lots for 62 cars.

The plan submitted to City Council for approval on March 21st contained one large playing field (artificial turf) with huge retaining wall, berms, and fencing, a ‘grassy glade’ field with grass and fencing, a revised stairway to the upper walkway, verbally referenced using the “Blackwell” traffic plan for a signalized crosswalk at Red Rock Road, and two parking lots for 40 cars.

Apparently the plan changes as often as the wind blows.   Parking with its traffic implications and a means to safely cross Moraga Avenue (at Rock Road and Maxwelton) change with every plan and yet none of these options appear viable at simple review and have not been appropriately analyzed by a traffic expert.  In over 3 years of plan changes, the most important  issue of safety has not been resolved.  Any recreational activity in Blair Park is dependent upon the ability to safely get people to and from the park.  The second playing field was turned to a ‘grassy glade’ in order to reduce the number of parking spaces required on the site.  That field will still be used for sports practice, game warm-ups, casual recreation, and could be lined for soccer games at any time in the future.  It should not result in a reduction of cars parked.

Please insist that your City Council members keep safety for our residents, our children, first and foremost  in their decision-making and not approve any plan in Blair Park until an exhaustive review has been performed by an independent, qualified traffic expert which shows a safe and effective solution for crossing Moraga Avenue using realistic parking requirements.

The truth of the matter is that there is not enough real estate in Blair Park to support two fields and sufficient parking.  Maybe it’s time to open all eyes and take another look at the alternative plans to slightly enlarge Coaches Field to accommodate a larger soccer field.

Joannie Semitekol

Piedmont Resident

(This letter expresses the personal opinions of the author.  All statements made are the opinion of the writer and not necessarily those of the Piedmont Civic Association.)

One Response to “Opinion: Blair Park Plan Changes as Often as the Wind Blows”

  1. So, the City of Piedmont plans to plant ONE live-oak tree in Crocker Park for Arbor Day. Bully for them. Then they plan to chop down FIFTY-FIVE mature live-oaks, plus ONE HUNDRED other trees, in Blair Park, to build that monstrously oversized “Sports Complex”? How stupid is that?
    Blair Park, in Moraga Canyon, is the only undeveloped space left in Piedmont. I don’t consider it “wasted space” and neither do the more than 800 other people who signed petitions, wrote letters and attended City Council meetings to protest the construction of a huge “Sports Complex” that is totally unsuited to the site, not to mention the months of construction work along a narrow canyon road that serves as a major artery between the Montclair district and Oakland, and the very possible damage that may be done to the houses at the top of the canyon as a result of the digging into the cliff that the size of this misbegotten project will necessitate.
    The Piedmont City Council voted 4-to-1 to approve the Sports Complex project in its original form, completely disregarding the opinions of neighbors and the alternate–and far less obtrusive–plans by two city architects, opting for a design that will destroy the canyon, its trees, and its wildlife forever, result in a huge, ugly retaining wall along Moraga Road, and disrupt the traffic and the lives of the neighbors immediately affected by it–WITHOUT a solid guarantee by the project’s backers that the money for it will cover any contingencies and/or future damage to the homes at the top of the canyon! Again, how stupid is THAT?

    –Susan D. Martin
    32 Glen Avenue
    Oakland, CA 94611
    (510) 653-8551

Leave a Comment