Blogging Bayport Alameda

May 6, 2011

Road rules

Filed under: Alameda, City Council — Tags: , — Lauren Do @ 6:02 am

On Tuesday night at the City Council meeting, which I just got around the finally finishing, Mayor Marie Gilmore reported during Council Communications that she had recently met with the East Bay Regional Parks Department (EBRPD) and the issue of the surplusing and auction of Neptune Pointe came up.    She mentioned that EBRPD was very interested in purchasing the property because it would fit in with their general plans, but that the Feds were very clear that the procedure would be to go through this auction process.

Here’s the sticking point, according to EBRPD the road that leads into the property, McKay, actually belongs to EBRPD.  So any potential bidder should know that (1) EBRPD wants the property for their own use and (2) they own the only access road into the property.

Something I did not mention in my initial post, but that Marie Gilmore also brought up was the fact that the Feds have provided some pretty standard disclaimers as to the information presented in the packet.   The packet does recommend that any potential bidder talk to the City and find out the constraints of the property, and the ownership of the only access road into the property is a big one.

In lighter news, this weekend is the Park Street Spring Festival, I’m looking forward to finding the elusive packable floppy straw hat of my dreams and funnel cake.  And garlic fries.   In that order.  Well, maybe funnel cake first.   See you all at there!

And in other Park Street news, Crema, the bakery that was supposed to go into the storefront that used to be Pippin Hill (or is it the Space Happy spot) either way, you’ve seen the big posters with the macaroons on it.   Crema announced on its Facebook page that it was not able to hold its lease due to “market conditions beyond” their control and asked that their fans stay tuned as the “readjust.”


  1. I think it would be great if Neptune Point became a park. I love that they own the road, too perfect! Isn’t it weird that the best waterfront views in Alameda are not home to multi-million dollar estates like they would be in a similar East Coast setting? We also have relatively few waterfront restaurants for an island if you think about it. The last thing we need is another jam-packed McMansion gated community. Maybe a campground? I have some friends from Colorado who are doing a bike trip in Sonoma and want to spend time after camping along the water. Trouble is a lot of the oceanside spots are pretty nippy this time of year. With our climate, it might be a prime location. Bummer about Crema, it would be within walking distance from my house. Of course my waistline could do without it. Too bad they could never get a workable bakery deal for the Bon Aire building.

    Comment by Denise Shelton — May 6, 2011 @ 7:14 am

  2. “…it weird that the best waterfront views in Alameda are not home to multi-million dollar estates like they would be in a similar East Coast setting?”

    No it’s no weird at all, since the best waterfront views have been co-opted by the birds and to ‘whoever we can give it to free as long as they are PC’. So don’t pretend the ‘barren of humans water view’ is some great humanitarian lovefest by common citizens. The one place the view wasn’t co-opted by do-gooders, by the way, is on BFI and it does have big buck private dwellings to view the water.

    Comment by Jack Richard — May 6, 2011 @ 9:09 am

  3. Looking at this site from above, it would be perfect for an addition to Crown Beach, I hope that it will be possible for EBRPD to get control of it. I understand that there probably is no money available for it. But as for housing we still have the Base.

    Comment by John P. — May 6, 2011 @ 9:12 am

  4. 2. A lot of those BFI “private” dwellings have a nice public access trail running right across their backyards separating them from the water. People go fishing out there even at night. They may be expensive homes, but that and the fact that the airport noise is an issue, hardly makes them exclusive or elite. If I had a lot of money, that’s the last place I’d want to live. Also, if things have always been so PC (and we know they haven’t) why did they develop Southshore the way they did with opdles of so-so apartment complexes fronting the water instead of single family homes and/or commercial properties that could benefit from the view like restaurants? They finally put a couple of restaurants out there, but it’s the sushi place and McDonald’s, neither of which takes advantage of the view. Just doesn’t make sense to me. The bird sanctuary stinks to high heaven when the tide is out, so I can understand why there isn’t much over there. Anybody know what the issues were way back when? There were of course stately homes on the waterfront until they put in the landfill and built Southshore, but it’s odd nothing took their place. That era was certainly not PC, so how come no one did any single family home development at the time?

    Comment by Denise Shelton — May 6, 2011 @ 9:46 am

  5. that’s “oodles” –time for stronger reading glasses.

    Comment by Denise Shelton — May 6, 2011 @ 9:48 am

  6. So I have some familiarity with the process for disposing of surplus military properties, but I’m not so familiar with other federal properties. If this was a military property, there would have been a process where the EBRP could have worked with the Dept. of Interior to have them do a fed to fed transfer and then the DOI could have given the land to EBRP.

    In looking on the GSA website, I noticed this:
    Public uses for properties are those that are accessible to and can be shared by all members of a community, and include community centers, schools and colleges, parks, municipal buildings and many more.

    GSA’s Office of Property Disposal notifies state and local agencies of the availability of any surplus federal real property that they may be eligible to acquire under certain laws. These laws allow property to be transferred to public agencies and institutions at discounts up to 100 percent of fair market value for:

    * Public health or educational uses
    * Public Parks and Public Recreational Areas


    So I am wondering. Did the feds contact EBRP to ask if they wanted this property? If so, what was the response. If not, maybe it is time for folks at EBRP to contact our congressional designation see if a mistake needs to be rectified.

    Comment by Doug Biggs — May 6, 2011 @ 9:53 am

  7. Just for you Denise.

    Comment by Jack Richard — May 6, 2011 @ 10:02 am

  8. Expanding the Crab Cove-Crown Beach parks complex would be the best use for the federal property, far better than commercial or residential uses, IMHO.

    I hope that Doug is correct about someone missing the direct-transfer option at the GSA.

    Comment by Jon Spangler — May 6, 2011 @ 10:04 am

  9. 7. Aw, Jack. You shouldn’t have. No really, you shouldn’t have.

    Comment by Denise Shelton — May 6, 2011 @ 10:09 am

  10. 8
    I agree, as long as it’s not a bunch of EBRP District offices.

    Sorry Denise, I couldn’t help myself. I had opdles of fun listening to it. Sounds like me deep into happy hour.

    Comment by Jack Richard — May 6, 2011 @ 11:22 am

  11. 10. Actually, I think that parrot really was drunk. The really good talkers are much clearer than that. My in-laws had an African Grey that could imitate members of the family’s voices convincingly enough to fool you. He also did carpentry noises which was not real fun. But the best one, which I witnessed or I would never had believed it, was when their puppy squatted on the papertoweling beneath the bird’s perch and he (the bird) called out, “Un, un, unh! Don’t you poop there!”

    Comment by Denise Shelton — May 6, 2011 @ 1:18 pm

  12. Mayor Marie Gilmore did note that the EBRPD wanted to put some “operational facilities” out there. What that translates to is anyone’s guess at this point.

    Comment by Lauren Do — May 6, 2011 @ 1:40 pm

  13. Well if it’s an ‘operational’ facility maybe it’s where they’ll dissect Crab Cove critters for the little kiddies. Or maybe install a prosthetic fin on a Shark whose original is steeping with some noodles.

    Is it happy hour yet?

    Comment by Jack Richard — May 6, 2011 @ 5:52 pm

  14. Doug (#6) writes, “Did the feds contact EBRP to ask if they wanted this property?”

    I don’t know. But I do know that as soon as the property went on the market I contacted the park district and pushed them to look into it. Maybe others did the same.

    I agree that the EBRPD should get a deal on the property.

    Comment by Irene — May 7, 2011 @ 8:39 am

  15. 4. “anyone know what the issues were back then?” Yep, I do. South Shore Filling began 1955. Doric did many sgl-family, “ranch-style” homes=on Sunset, Coral Reef, Harbor Light Rds., etc. Remember there was no Measure A lo-density measure then hence the big beachfront apt complexes. But wave erosion of Shoreline Dr. was an immediate & persistent problem well into the 1970s until the beach was rebuilt,I think ,in the 1980’s.
    Y’all should go to the last open house @ Neptune Pointe. I went to 2=no one else was there! 1 bldg is so moldy they can’t open it to show buyers around.

    Comment by Dr. G — May 7, 2011 @ 12:38 pm

  16. 15
    Port of Oakland had engineering cognizance over the South Shore fill as well as the Oakland airport runways. My father-in-law was a surveyor for the Port back then and I had to suffer through long renditions of the ninety hour workweeks they had to work during the South Shore filling of the middle fifties.

    I remember, I think in the 70’s, we used to watch, during the winter months, the waves during high tide windy days crash over Shoreline Drive at Grand St.

    Comment by Jack Richard — May 7, 2011 @ 4:40 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: