General Plan

Monday was the first of several "workshops" to get public input on Richmond's new general plan. After extensive outreach, the turnout was fairly disappointing. Daniel Iacofano of MIG, the developer that is charged with building or rebuilding Richmond, led the discussion.

The idea is that we are starting with a blank canvas. MIG has no plan and these workshops along with the "plan van" will capture the residents and business owners' vision of what Richmond should be. The plan van goes to neighborhoods where people do not or cannot leave to attend the workshops to gather as many opinions and ideas as possible.

From plan van responses, MIG put together a preliminary list of assets and issues for the workshop attendees to address.

The assets listed:

• strong diverse social fabric
• shoreline (32 miles - the most shoreline of any city in the Bay Area)
• growing economic base (places like campus bay and berlex, new Target location on MacDonald)
• large sites, enormous potential

The issues listed:

• safe & liveable neighborhoods
• stronger schools & libraries (community centers)
• expanding job opportunites (training programs to not only raise quantity but quality of jobs)
• improving environment (clean up industrial waste)
• housing (affordability)
• urban places (looking at other bay area cities for examples i.e emeryville)
• new energy on major coridors (big streets like Cutting, MacDonald, etc)
• MacDonald revitilization plan (retail needs)
• capitalizing on transit
• connecting people to parks

Public Comments

• sidewalks are bad, no connectivity (especially problematic for wheelchair bound citizens)
• places for kids (reconstruct libraries, afterschool programs, parks)
• homeless shelters
• support for seniors
• affordable housing for reunited families
• identify target population (provide numerical targets)
• don't just gentrify the area, provide the services to go along with the housing developments
• redevelopment displaces the city
• develop network of bike paths and community gardens
• land should be set aside for food, green industry (used to be bread basket for this city)
• 24th st is an eye sore: noisey and dangerous. industry is encroaching on residents
  
• Richmond needs to be rebuilt for current residents instead of looking to bring in outsiders
• MacDonald should be redeveloped for foot traffic instead of auto- natural hazards and airflow should be considered
• the usability of city services and transportation needs to be reworked
• Shorelines, parks (i.e Pt. Pinole, Pt. Richmond, Wildcat) not accessible for residents of downtown Richmond.
• The freeways divide the communities. (580 and 80)
• Lack of infrastructure (many parts of the city are out of immediate medical response time, sewers in bad shape)
• Environmental protection: There needs to be impact mitigation on shorelines, wetlands
• Real estate has skyrocketed and seniors have to move because social security does not pay for rising rent. Also, there is no foot access to basic need

A Richmond city planner defended the 580 and further suggested water transit links through major shoreline areas (some stupid comment about a hovercraft to costco). He also insisted on the importance of partnering with private developers to make the city viable. I didn't like the tone this took. While the workshops and the plan van are exactly how this process should be done, I am under the impression that the folks at MIG, at least the ones I've come in contact with, are not terribly responsive to new ideas. They say they want creative alternatives but they don't believe in them. Their "inside-the-box" thinking is not going to transform Richmond or implement these public comments.

The next workshop is tomorrow. For full schedule and other ways to get involved, go here.