Executive Summary iii
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... vii
Section I: Background .................................................................................................... 1
Introduction ................................................................................................................. 3
Study History ........................................................................................................ 3
Purpose and Role of the Plan .................................................................................. 6
Plan Organization .................................................................................................. 7
The Estuary Shoreline ................................................................................................ 11
Multiple Jurisdictions ........................................................................................... 14
Trends in Military Use of the Shoreline ................................................................ 15
Emerging Roles for the Estuary Shoreline ............................................................. 18
Section II: Objectives ................................................................................................... 21
Land Use .................................................................................................................... 23
Market Trends ...................................................................................................... 23
Issues and Opportunities ...................................................................................... 28
Land Use Objectives ............................................................................................. 29
Shoreline Access and Public Spaces ............................................................................. 33
Shoreline Access ................................................................................................... 33
Issues and Opportunities ...................................................................................... 36
Shoreline Access & Public Space Objectives .......................................................... 37
iv Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Regional Circulation & Local Street Network ............................................................ 43
Barriers ................................................................................................................. 43
Issues and Opportunities ...................................................................................... 44
Regional Circulation & Local Street Network Objectives ..................................... 45
Section III: District Recommendations ........................................................................ 51
Jack London District .................................................................................................. 53
Land Use .............................................................................................................. 56
Shoreline Access and Public Spaces ....................................................................... 67
Regional Circulation, Local Street Improvements Transit & Parking ..................... 73
Oak to Ninth Street District ...................................................................................... 83
Shoreline Access & Public Spaces .......................................................................... 86
Land Use .............................................................................................................. 92
Regional Circulation & Local Access ..................................................................... 95
San Antonio/ Fruitvale District .................................................................................. 103
Land Use ............................................................................................................ 103
Shoreline Access & Public Spaces ........................................................................ 113
Regional Circulation & Local Street Improvements ............................................ 116
Section IV: Moving Forward ...................................................................................... 125
Steps Towards Implementing the Estuary Policy Plan ................................................ 127
Summary of Land Use Classifications ................................................................. 132
Appendix: ...................................................................................................................... 139
A. Jack London District Potential Designated Historic Properties & Districts ........... 141
Index........ ...................................................................................................................... 142
Credits .......................................................................................................................... 144
Executive Summary v
List of Figures
I- 1. Regional Context ........................................................................................................ 4
I- 2. Oakland Neighborhoods Adjacent to Estuary .............................................................. 5
I- 3. Planning Area Districts ................................................................................................ 7
1- 4. Activity Centers ....................................................................................................... 13
I- 5. Jurisdictions ..................................................................................................... 16 & 17
II- 1. Existing Land Use .......................................................................................... 24 & 25
II- 2. Existing Public Access and Open Space ........................................................... 34 & 35
II- 3. Illustrative Shoreline Access and Public Space Plan .......................................... 40 & 41
II- 4. Illustrative Circulation Plan ............................................................................ 46 & 47
III- 1. Jack London District: Current Ownership .............................................................. 54
III- 2. Jack London District: Existing Land Use ................................................................ 55
III- 3. Central Jack London District: Illustrative Development Strategy ............................. 58
III- 4. Jack London District: Existing Public Access and Open Space ................................. 65
III- 5. Jack London District: Illustrative Shoreline Access and Public Space Plan ................ 66
III- 6. Jack London District: Illustrative Circulation .......................................................... 72
III- 7a & b. Jack London District Illustrative Street Cross Sections .......................... 76 & 78
III- 8. Oak to 9th District: Current Ownership ................................................................ 84
III- 9. Oak to 9th District: Existing Land Use ................................................................... 85
III- 10. Oak to 9th District Illustrative Public Space Key Map .......................................... 87
III- 11. Oak to 9th: Bird’s- Eye Illustrative Perspective ...................................................... 89
III- 12. Clinton Basin Illustrative Cross Section ....................................................... 96 & 97
III- 13. 5th Avenue Illustrative Cross Section .................................................................... 98
III- 14. Oak to 9th District: Illustrative Circulation .......................................................... 99
III- 15. San Antonio/ Fruitvale District: Current Ownership ............................................ 104
III- 16. San Antonio/ Fruitvale District: Existing Land Use .............................................. 105
III- 17. San Antonio/ Fruitvale District Sub- District Map ................................................ 106
III- 18. San Antonio/ Fruitvale District: Illustrative Cross Sections .................................. 117
III- 19. San Antonio/ Fruitvale Illustrative Circulation .......................................... 118 & 119
vi Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
III- 20. San Antonio/ Fruitvale District: Illustrative
Cross Sections ( cont’d ..................................................... 120 & 121
III- 21. Fruitvale Avenue Illustrative Cross Sections ................................ 122
IV- 1. Land Use Classifications ................................................. 130 & 131
Appendix
A. Jack London District Potential Designated
Historic Properties & Districts.......................................................... 141
Executive Summary vii
Executive Summary
As the twenty- first century approaches, na-tional
and international trends have created
new opportunities for the urban waterfront
and its role for the City of Oakland. Recog-nizing
this potential and the strategic nature
of the Oakland Estuary, the Port of Oakland
and City of Oakland have undertaken the
preparation of this plan to reinforce Oakland’s
identity as a livable city on the bay.
The “ Estuary Policy Plan” ( Also referred to as
the ‘ Estuary Plan’) includes objectives and
policies to enhance the future of the area of
Oakland between Adeline Street, the Nimitz
Freeway, 66th Avenue and the Estuary shore-line.
The plan is a result of community
concerns first articulated by the League of
Women Voters in its award- winning report
entitled “ The Waterfront: It Touches the World;
How Does It Touch Oakland?” , subsequently
reinforced by the goals, objectives and poli-cies
established by the General Plan Congress
in the 1998 update of the Oakland General
Plan.
The basic premise of the plan and its preced-ing
efforts is that the Estuary is a resource of
citywide and regional significance. This area
cannot be viewed as a single- purpose district
isolated from the city, but rather as a diverse
and multifaceted place that connects the city
and the bay.
The Estuary Policy Plan calls for a system of
open spaces and shoreline access that provides
recreational use opportunities, environmental
enhancement, interpretive experiences, visual
amenities, and significant gathering places. A
series of individual parks, open spaces and
shoreline access points, connected by a con-tinuous
landscaped parkway with promenades,
bikeways and shoreline trails, is recommended.
In addition to enhancing existing facilities, new
parks are proposed at the mouth of the Lake
Merritt Channel, at the site of the Ninth Av-enue
Terminal, at Union Point, and within the
Jack London District.
Further, the Estuary Plan proposes a variety
of uses that strengthen Oakland’s position as
an urban center, accommodate economic
growth, and encourage development that
complements the downtown and adjacent
neighborhoods.
The plan reinforces the Jack London District
as the East Bay’s primary dining and enter-tainment
venue, by promoting mixture of
retail, dining, entertainment and visitor- serv-
viii Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
ing uses oriented to significant gathering places
and public access areas along the water.
The plan proposes the preservation of indus-trial
areas which are necessary to support
Oakland’s port, as well as the city’s role in food
processing, manufacturing and distribution. In
addition, the emerging trend toward loft- type
residential and off- price retail establishments
in the Jack London District is encouraged to
continue.
The plan proposes the large- scale transforma-tion
of the area from the Lake Merritt Chan-nel
to the Ninth Avenue Terminal into a mix
of artisan work/ live lofts, hotel, cultural and
commercial- recreational uses that will comple-ment
the planned open spaces and parks along
the water.
The plan recommends strengthening the liv-ability
of existing and future residential devel-opment
within the Kennedy Tract, and sug-gests
new opportunities for small- scale office,
business and commercial establishments. In
certain areas ( e. g., around the Con- Agra facil-ity
in the San Antonio/ Fruitvale District), the
plan supports the retention of existing indus-tries,
but acknowledges that they may relo-cate
for a variety of reasons. If that occurs, the
plan suggests land use priorities for an appro-priate
transition to new urban development
in the future.
The Estuary Policy Plan also proposes signifi-cant
measures to improve both regional and
local access. The proposed circulation system
is aimed at reducing the barrier effect of the
freeway by improving on and off ramps and
by enhancing local vehicular access to inland
areas.
The plan recommends creating a continuous
landscaped recreational parkway, accommodat-ing
pedestrians and bicycles as well as transit
and vehicular access, along the entire five- and-a-
half- mile length of waterfront, between 66th
Avenue and the Jack London District. This
parkway would help knit together the diverse
parts of the Estuary shoreline, thereby estab-lishing
an identity of Oakland as a waterfront
city.
The Estuary Policy Plan also emphasizes the
need for connection between waterfront uses
and inland areas. The plan promotes enter-tainment-
oriented development in the Jack
London District, and extending waterfront ac-tivities
along Lower Broadway, toward the
downtown. At the same time, development
of the area between Estuary Park and the
Ninth Avenue Terminal will create a signifi-cant
place for Oaklanders to gather for events,
and achieve a long- held objective of connect-ing
the Estuary to the Lake Merritt Channel,
Lake Merritt, and inland neighborhoods.
Redevelopment at Embarcadero Cove is
planned to create additional windows to the
Estuary. A new park at Union Point and im-provements
to the shoreline should create a
new focus along the water for Brooklyn Ba-sin,
San Antonio, Fruitvale, Central East Oak-land,
and other inland neighborhoods. Exten-sion
of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Regional
Shoreline westward to High Street will also
provide open space opportunities for East
Oakland residents and visitors to enjoy the
environment of San Leandro Bay.
Finally, the Estuary Policy Plan recommends
some critical first steps in implementing the
plan and achieving the vision. It identifies what
is necessary to move on to the next level of
action.
Executive Summary ix
In total, the Estuary Policy Plan is a waypoint
in a community- wide dialogue that has been
underway for many years. It follows up on
ideas that were first presented several decades
ago; more recently reinforced by the League of
Women Voters and the Oakland General Plan.
It is both a recognition of the importance of
this unique asset to Oakland, and a long- range
vision of the Estuary’s potential.
At the same time, the plan initiates a series of
steps that can achieve the vision. By begin-ning
now, and working hard, Oakland can
enhance the waterfront, fulfill its unmet po-tential,
and reclaim its role as a true waterfront
city.
x Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Section I: Background 1
I Background
2 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
The 5.5- mile long Estuary Planning Area extends from Adeline Street on the west to 66th Avenue on the east.
Section I: Background 3
Introduction
In 1996, the Port of Oakland and the City of
Oakland embarked on an unprecedented co-operative
effort to develop the first plan in
Oakland’s history focused specifically on the
Estuary shoreline ( Figure I- 1). The Estuary
Policy Plan represents an effort conducted over
a period of approximately 18 months to pre-pare
a plan for 5 1/ 2 miles of urban water-front
within the heart of the city and port.
This effort encompassed a planning area ex-tending
from Adeline Street to 66th Avenue,
including all of the lands on the water side of
I- 880 within Port and City jurisdiction. The
study area touches many of the city’s neigh-borhoods
as well as downtown, and is brack-eted
at the ends by Oakland’s airport and sea-port
( Figure I- 2).
Oakland can claim the most extensive and di-verse
bay shoreline of any community in the
region. Yet, for many, the experience of the
Oakland waterfront is fragmented— limited
to specific areas, such as the highly visible ship-ping
terminals or the commercial activities and
special events at Jack London Square. Al-though
its shoreline extends for 19 miles along
the edge of the city, Oakland is more often
viewed as an inland gateway at the hub of mul-tiple
rail and highway corridors than as a wa-terfront
city.
STUDY HISTORY
In recent years, community interest in the
waterfront has increasingly focused a desire for
improved public access, environmental qual-ity,
civic image and identity, recreation, and
other publicly oriented activities.
In the early 1990s, public dialogue about
Oakland’s waterfront began with the update
of the Open Space, Conservation and Recre-ation
Element of the Oakland General Plan.
At about the same time, the League of Women
Voters published a report, “ The Waterfront. It
Touches the World; How Does it Touch Oak-land?”
( June 1993), which focused on the
waterfront. The report strongly promoted
Oakland’s identity as a waterfront city. This
report became a call to action for waterfront
advocates and the community at large.
The efforts of the League of Women Voters
spawned the Waterfront Coalition, a grassroots
citizens organization that, in turn, sparked even
broader interest and support for waterfront
revitalization. In 1995, a charrette was spon-sored
by the Port and the City to help formu-
4 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
FIGURE I- 1: Regional Context
􀀀
􀀀 􀀀 􀀀
􀀀 􀀀 􀀀 􀀀
􀀀 􀀀 􀀀
S a n F r a n c i s c o B a y
280
880
980
580
260
61
13
24
13
123
61 185
185
77
880
580
80
101
80
80
OAKLAND
INTERNATIONAL
AIRPORT
Lake
Merritt
San
Leandro
Bay
SAN
FRANCISCO
OAKLAND
Treasure
Island
Emeryville
Fruitvale
San
Leandro
Orinda
Piedmont
Berkeley
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY
ALAMEDA COUNTY
CONTRA COSTA CO.
ALAMEDA CO.
Outer
Harbor
Estuary
Planning Area
NAS
ALAMEDA
Alameda
Section I: Background 5
late a vision for the waterfront that would, in
turn, provide additional policy support.
At the time, the Oakland General Plan was
being updated, overseen by a community- wide
advisory committee known as the General Plan
Congress. A Waterfront Subcommittee of the
General Plan Congress was formed. In 1996
the General Plan Congress published its draft
Goals, Objectives and Policies report for the
entire waterfront area. The policies recognized
the waterfront as having untapped potential for
redevelopment, publicly oriented activities,
and enhanced public access. One of these poli-cies
specified the need for more detailed study
and planning in the Estuary portion of the wa-terfront.
Hence, the Oakland Estuary Policy Plan.
The Estuary Plan project has been undertaken
as a joint effort by the Port of Oakland and
the City of Oakland. The plan incorporates
comments and input from other public agen-cies,
including the Bay Conservation and De-velopment
Commission ( BCDC), East Bay
Regional Parks District ( EBRPD), the Trust
for Public Lands, the City of Oakland Life
Enrichment Agency— Parks, Recreation and FIGURE I- 2: Oakland Neighborhoods Adjacent to the Estuary
6 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Cultural Services, and the Oakland Museum.
Draft concepts and recommendations were
presented to the City- Port Liaison Commit-tee,
the City Planning Commission, and the
Board of Port Commissioners.
Guidance, input, and direction in the plan-ning
process were also provided by the Estu-ary
Advisory Committee, a diverse group rep-resenting
a broad spectrum of community in-terests.
The advisory group was facilitated by
the nonprofit organization Oakland Sharing
the Vision. This group also helped organize
the community involvement process. Mem-bers
of the Advisory Committee committed
significant energy and effort to shaping the
planning effort. They met nine times in pub-lic
sessions, and hosted a public workshop with
consultants and staff.
To assist in preparing the draft of the Estuary
Plan, the Port and City engaged a team of con-sultants
led by ROMA Design Group. ROMA
served as the lead firm, directing the efforts of
an Oakland- based team of consultants, includ-ing
Hansen/ Murakami/ Eshima, associated ar-chitects;
Hausrath Economics Group, urban
economists; Gabriel- Roche, Inc., public par-ticipation
and transportation; Korve Engineer-ing,
traffic engineering; as well as numerous
others offering expertise in specialized techni-cal
areas.
PURPOSE &
ROLE OF THE PLAN
The Estuary Policy Plan has been prepared in
an attempt to address issues and concerns that
have arisen related to continuity and accessi-bility
of the shoreline, the quality and charac-ter
of new development, and the relationship
of the shoreline with surrounding districts and
neighborhoods. More specifically, the plan
builds upon the goals for the waterfront pre-pared
by the General Plan Congress. The goals
are summarized as follows:
! Increase the awareness of the waterfront
throughout the city and region, and maxi-mize
the benefit of Oakland’s waterfront
for the people of the city.
! Promote the diversity of the waterfront by
providing opportunities for new parks, rec-reation,
and open space; cultural, educa-tional
and entertainment experiences; and
new or revitalized retail, commercial and
residential development.
! Enhance and promote the city’s waterfront
for the economic benefit of the commu-nity,
with emphasis on Oakland’s position
as a leading West Coast maritime terminal
and a primary Bay Area passenger and cargo
airport.
! Connect the waterfront to the rest of the
city, with emphasis on linking the adjacent
neighborhoods and downtown directly to
the waterfront, reducing physical barriers
and the perception of isolation from the
water’s edge, and improving public access
to and along the waterfront.
! Preserve and enhance the existing natural
areas along the waterfront.
The Estuary Policy Plan is intended to be in-corporated
into the General Plan, which in-cludes
elements regarding Land Use & Trans-portation,
Open Space, Conservation & Rec-reation
( OSCAR), Historic Preservation,
Housing, Noise andd Safety.
Compared to the General Plan, the Estuary
Policy Plan has a more focused geographic
scope, and is therefore more specific in nature.
In addition to policy recommendations that
Section I: Background 7
will be integrated into the General Plan, a com-panion
document, the Estuary Plan Implemen-tation
Guide, will be prepared. The Imple-mentation
Guide will identify specific steps
to be undertaken to implement the recom-mendations
of the Estuary Policy Plan. These
include detailed strategies and work programs
to create and implement projects, site design
and development standards, funding and in-stitutional
strategies, and other administrative
steps necessary to carry out the Estuary Policy
Plan.
Plan recommendations will also be reflected
in the Oakland Waterfront Public Access
Plan, which will identify public access oppor-tunities
for the entire Oakland waterfront.
The Estuary Policy Plan may also serve as a
basis for revisions and amendments to the
BCDC San Francisco Bay Area Seaport Plan,
plans for the regional San Francisco Bay Trail,
and planning documents prepared by other re-gional
agencies, such as the Association of Bay
Area Governments ( ABAG), the Metropoli-tan
Transportation Commission ( MTC), East
Bay Municipal Utilities District ( EBMUD)
and the East Bay Regional Parks District
( EBRPD).
PLAN ORGANIZATION
The Estuary Policy Plan presents recommen-dations
related to land use, development, ur-ban
design, shoreline access, public spaces, re-gional
circulation, and local street improve-ments
for the entire waterfront and individual
districts within it.
San Leandro
Bay
Oakland
29th Ave.
Fruitvale Ave.
San Leandro St.
High St.
66th Ave.
International Blvd.
Park S t.
Lake
Merritt
Oakland Estuary
Coast Guard
Island
Alameda
14th St.
Broadway
Embarcadero
Market St.
Oak St.
5th Ave.
14th Ave.
International Blvd.
Adeline St.
16th Ave.
Jack London Oak- 9th
San Antonio-
Fruitvale
         	 
             	 
       	    
980
880
8 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Section I includes all of the introductory ele-ments,
which provide an overview and sum-mary
of the planning process, the planning area
and surrounding context, major plan concepts
and recommendations.
Issues to be resolved, opportunities to improve
the situation and objectives to be realized are
described in Section II of the plan. They are
organized by functional topics: Land Use,
Shoreline Access, Public Spaces, Regional
Circulation, and Local Street Improvements.
Section III of the plan recommends policies
for each of the three districts within the Estu-ary
planning area. As shown in Figure I- 3,
these districts include:
! ‘ Jack London District’, extending from
Adeline Street to Oak Street;
! ‘ Oak- to- Ninth Avenue District’, from Oak
Street to the Ninth Avenue Marine Termi-nal;
and
! ‘ San Antonio/ Fruitvale District’, from 9th
Avenue to 66th Avenue.
Section IV of the plan, entitled “ Moving For-ward”,
describes the next steps in implement-ing
the Policy Plan. It identifies the critical
activities necessary to sanction the plan, gives
decision- makers and staff direction to begin
to implement the plan, and establishes the
regulatory controls necessary to insure com-pliance
with it.
Section I: Background 9
10 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Oakland’s harbor circa 1882, at the present- day Jack London Waterfront, supported a diverse range of maritime and commercial activities.
Section I: Background 11
The Estuary Shoreline
Oakland, California has a waterfront.
In Oakland, the shoreline of San Francisco Bay
extends 19 miles, from San Leandro Bay to
the Oakland- San Francisco Bay Bridge. At
its northern end, the shoreline is dominated
by the Port of Oakland’s marine terminals.
At the southern end lies Oakland International
Airport. Between the seaport and the airport
is the five- and- a- half- mile Estuary shoreline
( Figure I- 4). The Oakland Estuary is one of
California’s most diverse shores, encompass-ing
a variety of physical environments and set-tings,
each with its own distinct quality and
character.
Today, the Estuary can be viewed as a single
community resource that binds together the
shorelines of Alameda and Oakland. Com-pared
to other parts of the bay, the Estuary is
more like a river. It is linear in form and con-tained,
rather than open and expansive like
the broader bay. It creates an environment
that is intimate in scale and character. It frames
dramatic views to the San Francisco and Oak-land
downtown skylines.
The Estuary is an urbanized edge that has de-veloped
over a span of more than 100 years of
city history. Unlike the hillside areas of the
city, this area is intensely developed, with ur-banization
extending all the way to the water’s
edge. Very little open space or vegetated area
exists, with the notable exceptions of Estuary
Park and the Martin Luther King, Jr. ( MLK)
Regional Shoreline.
Oakland’s waterfront figures prominently in
the history and life of the city. It is both the
birthplace and birthright of what is now a mod-ern
city and national transportation hub. The
settlement which became Oakland was first es-tablished
on the Estuary, at a transshipment point
where water- borne goods were off- loaded and
transferred to transport and land networks.
Over the years, the waterfront has been domi-nated
by the development of the Port of Oak-land.
Extensive backland area and rail connec-tions
have given the Port the competitive edge
needed to become one of the largest container
ports on the West Coast. Additionally, the
Oakland Airport’s central location within the
prosperous bay region has made it one of the
fastest growing air passenger and cargo facili-ties
in the United States. These two centers
support more than 20,000 direct jobs within
the region, but they are both land intensive
operations that make it difficult for residents
to take advantage of the waterfront.
12 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Most of the improvements were made once the
City wrested control of the waterfront from
the railroads in the early 1900s. The shoreline
was extended westerly to the San Francisco
incorporated limits following a momentous
court case that finally settled the long- stand-ing
controversy between the City and the rail-roads
over tidelands.
After that, Oakland experienced a period of
city building that brought municipal docks,
quays, wharves, and belt line railways to the
waterfront.
With the advent of air travel in the late 1920s,
the City acquired land for a commercial air-port
that became the starting point for many
history- making transpacific flights. In 1936,
the San Francisco- Oakland Bay Bridge was
completed, signaling the emergence of the
automobile for personal travel; thirteen years
later, in 1949, the six- lane Eastshore Freeway
( now I- 880) was constructed through Oak-land.
Following the ship- building years of World
War II, Oakland’s port facilities shifted to the
Outer Harbor, where a good supply of
backland could support containerized ship-ping.
This shift in technology proved to be a
valuable investment for the City and the
Port— one that would establish Oakland’s
position in the region and West Coast as a ma-jor
international port of call for the transship-ment
of goods.
As a result of this growth, Oakland’s water-front
has been dramatically transformed
through filling, dredging, and shoreline stabi-lization
efforts. The shoreline was once a se-ries
of coves, bays, inlets, and tidal marshlands
fed by creeks and watercourses from the hills;
over time, human activity advanced it incre-mentally
outward into the bay. The Estuary
was narrowed by filling and lengthened by
dredging until it became a linear tidal canal
that connects San Francisco Bay with San Le-andro
Bay.
At the same time, Oakland residents have long
supported the notion of a commercial water-front.
A number of major investments in
shoreline and infrastructure improvements
were approved, primarily for the purpose of
expanding trade and commerce.
In addition to the port facilities, the Estuary
has historically served commercial and indus-trial
purposes. In the mid 1800s, the village
of San Antonio on San Antonio Creek ( now
within the incorporated limits of Oakland)
supported an active wharf and lumber indus-try
supplied by redwoods from the nearby hills.
In what is now Jack London District, early
uses included fishing, shipping and maritime
commerce, and iron works located along First
and Second streets west of Broadway. With
the advent of rail access, the Estuary became
the terminus for agricultural goods and pro-duce,
and agricultural processing facilities, such
as Con Agra, were also built.
In recent decades, the industrial and commer-cial
character of the Estuary area have contin-ued
to evolve.
In the southern and inland portions of the
shoreline ( San Antonio, Fruitvale and Central
East Oakland areas) business offices and large-scale
commercial uses have been developed in
what was once a traditional industrial area char-acterized
by manufacturing and agricultural
processing. Further to the north and west, in
the area now known as Embarcadero Cove,
hotels and motels, offices and restaurants have
been built along the narrow stretch of shore-line
once occupied by marine- related busi-
Section I: Background 13
nesses, and marinas have been built along the
water’s edge, providing for recreational boat-ing
use.
The Ninth Avenue Terminal still remains in
use— one of two such maritime facilities east
of the Alameda- Oakland Tubes ( the other be-ing
the Encinal Terminals across the Estuary
in Alameda).
The Jack London District is far more com-mercially
oriented than any other portion of
the Estuary shoreline, and has seen the great-est
amount of change along the waterfront in
the past 20 years. The mix of restaurant, re-tail,
theaters, entertainment and office uses has
transformed Jack London Square into a pri-mary
entertainment venue, and has provided
opportunities for Oakland residents and visi-tors
to experience the waterfront.
Furthermore, the development of work/ live
housing has added to the traditional commer-cial
manufacturing and industrial character of
adjacent inland areas, and has helped to estab-lish
this inland area as a lively urban mixed-use
district.
Throughout the Estuary, development patterns
vary. There are large superblocks of industrial
land; islands of remnant neighborhoods; the
narrow, arching shoreline along the old Brook-lyn
Basin; and the urban grid that extends from
the surrounding city through the Jack Lon-don
District to the water. Variations in the
urban pattern affect the opportunities for con-nection
and infill development. For instance,
the grid pattern of streets and older warehouse
buildings within the Jack London District cre-ates
an attractive urban scale that is well con-nected
with the surrounding city.
On the other hand, barriers to the water exist
in many forms along the Estuary. Interstate
880 is the most obvious of many physical bar-riers
that separate the waterfront from the rest
14 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
of the city. At the Lake Merritt Channel, the
rail lines, a major sewer line and the overhead
freeway combine to create a formidable physi-cal
and visual barrier that interrupts the link
between Lake Merritt and the Estuary. To the
south of the Lake Merritt Channel, the free-way
becomes an at- grade facility, and thus an
even more imposing barrier.
Major thoroughfares, which traverse the en-tire
length of the city, may lead to the Estuary
shore, but often in an unceremonious fash-ion.
Broadway, one of the city’s most impor-tant
streets, terminates in an ambiguous zone
of parking, service delivery trucks, and pedes-trians
in the area south of the Embarcadero.
East of the Lake Merritt Channel, Fifth Av-enue
crosses under the freeway and changes
alignment as it meets the Embarcadero. Other
important streets— 16th Avenue, Fruitvale
Avenue, High Street, and 29th Avenue/ Park
Street— enter the Estuary area, and immedi-ately
shift alignment or meet difficult inter-sections,
and thus add to the overall sense of
disorientation experienced along many por-tions
of the waterfront today.
Throughout the study area, infrastructure and
other built facilities are aging. Although there
have been some recent transportation improve-ments
( e. g., the Amtrak station at Jack Lon-don
Square, removal of the Union Pacific
tracks on 3rd St.), little investment has been
made over the years in ongoing maintenance
and repairs. There are many areas of the wa-terfront
where improvements are needed, not
so much to expand capacity, but to upgrade
conditions. Along the I- 880 freeway, which
is now nearly 50 years old, substandard con-ditions
exist relative to the spacing of intersec-tions,
and seismic improvements are needed.
Roads and utilities need to be repaired, and in
some areas the shoreline needs to be reinforced.
MULTIPLE JURISDICTIONS
Like most other urban waterfronts, many gov-ernmental
agencies have jurisdiction within the
Estuary area ( Figure I- 5). The study area in-cludes
significant amounts of inland areas,
within which the City has jurisdiction and
provides regular municipal services. Planning
and development within the jurisdiction of
the city are subject to typical municipal regu-latory
review and permitting authority.
Also included in the study area are lands and
water within the jurisdiction of the Port of
Oakland. The Port is a unique agency of city
government, which is given the responsibility
by the Oakland City Charter to own, develop
and manage lands along the Estuary within
the specified area of Port jurisdiction.
In its development role, the Port acts as a land-lord;
offering sites to lease to the private de-velopment
community and taking an active
role in project development. The Port also
has the unique authority to undertake its own
land use planning, project planning, and project
approval. It reviews and approves building
projects on private property within its area of
jurisdiction, and undertakes its own environ-mental
review and certification process.
Although the Port manages these lands, it does
so “ in trust” on behalf of the State of Califor-nia.
Ultimate authority over their use is main-tained
by the California State Lands Commis-sion
under the public trust ( aka ‘ Tidelands
Trust’) doctrine. Tidelands Trust properties
are limited to uses that promote maritime
trade, transportation and commerce, public
recreation and open space.
Section I: Background 15
Port jurisdiction includes a much larger area
than Port- owned land within the Tidelands
Trust, and includes private as well as public
properties.
In addition to the City, the Port and State
Lands Commission, the San Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development Commission
( BCDC ) exercises considerable influence over
Estuary sites that lie within a 100- foot ‘ Shore-line
Band’ that surrounds the entire San Fran-cisco
Bay. Within its area of jurisdiction,
BCDC insures that development is consistent
with the San Francisco Bay Plan and the San
Francisco Bay Area Seaport Plan. Addition-ally,
BCDC reviews and has permit authority
over all individual waterfront projects that are
developed within the Shoreline Band, to in-sure
that they maximize public access to the
Bay and minimize the amount of bay fill that
is used.
In addition, other large public property own-ers
within the Estuary area will play a role in
the implementation of this Plan. They in-clude
Alameda County, the East Bay Munici-pal
Utility District ( EBMUD), the East Bay
Regional Park District ( EBRPD), and a myriad
of state agencies with specific functional man-dates.
Also, a number of quasi- public agencies
and institutions, including Laney College and
the Peralta Community College District, con-trol
lands within the Lake Merritt Channel
area .
Private land parcels tend to be relatively smaller
in size, with the exception of certain indus-trial
sites such as Con Agra and Owens-
Brockway. However, some key parcels have
been assembled under single ownership and
could undergo dramatic changes. Such parcels
include those associated with the Produce Mar-ket
in the Jack London District, Fifth Avenue
Point, and Tidewater Business Park.
TRENDS IN MILITARY USE
OF THE SHORELINE
From a regional perspective, several current
trends will help to shape the future of the Es-tuary.
Perhaps the most significant of these is
the changing status of military lands. For over
50 years, much of the shoreline in the Bay
Area has been occupied by military uses estab-lished
at the onset of World War II. Recent
downsizing of the armed services has brought
about the closure of many bases, amounting
to approximately 10,000 acres within the Bay
Area.
In the East Bay, several military bases in Oak-land
and Alameda have closed; each with its
own implications for the region and for the
Estuary planning area. For instance, the 125-
acre FISC site in Alameda, across the Estuary
from Jack London Square, is being pursued as
a mixed commercial, office and residential
project, which would help to reinforce this part
of the Estuary as an activity center.
Within Oakland, the reuse of the Oakland
Army Base provides an opportunity to con-solidate
maritime activities away from the In-ner
Harbor into the Outer Harbor. Currently,
significant portions of the Estuary area are used
for maritime support: ( e. g. truck and container
storage, break- bulk cargo handling, and port-related
operations). Locating these activities in
areas such as the former army base could not
only improve efficiency of operations, but also
free up the Estuary shoreline for a variety of
uses beneficial to surrounding neighborhoods.
16 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Section I: Background 17
18 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
EMERGING ROLES FOR THE
ESTUARY SHORELINE
Changes in military lands, transportation
technology, and the economy of the city pro-vide
the opportunity to transform the declin-ing
industrial waterfront into one of the city’s
most vibrant and valuable assets. Already, a
number of new roles for the Estuary have be-gun
to emerge. They form the fundamental
building blocks for the creation of an urban
waterfront which accommodates diverse ac-tivities,
and which is physically accessible to
residents and visitors.
The Estuary area is a unique environment
which intrinsically lends itself to active and
passive recreation. The shoreline offers op-portunities
for a wide variety of water- ori-ented
recreational activities, including fishing,
viewing, sitting, bicycling, jogging, walking,
and birdwatching. The Bay Trail and the
MLK Regional Shoreline, in the southern
portion of the estuary, contribute greatly to
the emerging role of the Estuary as a place
for recreation and open space.
As a protected water space, it is one of the most
attractive sites within the Bay Region for wa-ter-
oriented sports, particularly boating. Sail-ing
has an established presence in the estuary,
which has become the largest single focus of
recreational boating in the Bay Area. There is a
long- established tradition of rowing, canoeing
and kayaking, all of which are well suited to
the calm, smooth waters of the area.
Throughout the Estuary area, urban pioneer-ing
is underway, with the introduction of work/
live and artist studio spaces into mature indus-trial
and commercial districts. New neighbor-hoods
are being established, and existing neigh-borhoods
are expanding and diversifying. New
uses are occupying older buildings, forming
idiosyncratic combinations within distinctive
districts.
Adjacent to downtown, the Jack London Dis-trict
is evolving into a citywide and regional
center for urban recreational pursuits, includ-ing
dining, shopping and entertainment.
Through the concerted efforts of the Port of
Oakland, Jack London Square has also become
the city’s primary venue for celebrations, pa-rades,
races, and major events. The recent addi-tion
of the Jack London Cinema and Yoshi’s
jazz club to the existing restaurants has also
contributed greatly to the attractiveness of the
area as an entertainment destination in the East
Bay.
Traditional industry, warehousing and gen-eral
commercial uses continue to play an im-portant
part in maintaining the role of the
Estuary as a place of employment.
Both traditional and emerging roles for the
estuary area could be further reinforced as trans-portation
projects are undertaken. The projects
will create a stronger link between the water-front
and the surrounding city. Recent rail-road
consolidations resulted in the removal of
one set of tracks that transverse the Estuary
shoreline. Seismic improvements planned for
the I- 880 freeway by Caltrans offer the po-tential
to modify existing interchanges and
provide greater access to the waterfront.
Finally, public access improvements planned
by the Port and City, in conjunction with the
City of Alameda, will result in new opportu-nities
for pedestrian and bicycle movement
along the shoreline.
Section I: Background 19
This is a unique moment in time for
Oakland’s waterfront. Guided by a long- range
plan and goal for sustainability, livability, and
accessibility, revitalization of the waterfront
can occur, and the Estuary can become an at-tractive
amenity that adds to the identity and
overall livability of the city as a whole.
20 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Section II: Objectives 21
II Objectives
22 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
The Estuary shoreline will support a broad range of land uses and activities.
Section II: Objectives 23
Land Use
During the past several decades, with the ad-vent
of containerized cargo handling facilities
and the development of the Inner and Outer
harbors at the Port of Oakland, the traditional
role of the mid Estuary shoreline as a place for
maritime trade, transportation, commerce, and
industry has declined. Although the only cargo
handling facility remaining in the Estuary plan-ning
area is the Ninth Avenue Terminal, a
number of industries still remain that were once
water related or provided support services for
an economic base that has now shifted else-where.
The closure of large military bases on
the waterfront is likely to further the trend
toward consolidation of maritime industries
to the west, and could open up new market
opportunities for the future of the Estuary
shoreline.
MARKET TRENDS
Traditional Heavy Manufacturing. As in
other urban areas, older heavy industrial uses
continue to decline along the waterfront as
markets change, facilities become obsolete, and
the region expands outward. Existing opera-tions
remain because of significant investments
in facilities and continued good proximity and
access to markets and suppliers. The enclave
of food- related businesses in the San Anto-nio/
Fruitvale area is an example where some
older operations have remained and newer,
more specialized operations have moved in
because of the availability of facilities and good
proximity to markets. The Owens- Brockway
facility is an example of a large production fa-cility
with significant capital investment that
is likely to remain viable.
Warehouse, Distribution, and Storage. Ware-housing,
distribution and storage activities are
prominent along the waterfront as well as in
other industrial areas of Oakland. The seaport,
the airport, major freeways, and a central lo-cation
in the region are the factors supporting
the transportation and wholesale trade indus-tries
in the planning area. Facilities are gener-ally
characterized by large land areas and rela-tively
minimal warehouse structures and dock-ing
facilities. While there is a demand for such
facilities, the planning area does not offer sig-nificant
locational advantages over other loca-tions
in East Oakland, West Oakland, and else-where
along the I- 880 corridor. Over time,
improvements that capitalize on the water-front
location and enhance the attractiveness
and value of the planning area for other uses
are likely to make the area less desirable for
warehouse, distribution and storage activities.
24 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Section II: Objectives 25
26 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Construction Industry. The construction in-dustry
has remained healthy in Oakland. There
are a number of construction- related business
operations in the planning area. These busi-nesses
are there because of the area’s central
location, freeway accessibility, and available
land. Investment in capital facilities is not
substantial in most cases. Like the warehouse,
distribution and storage uses, the planning area
no longer offers significant locational advan-tages
for construction uses, and water access is
not as critical. It is likely that, over time, the
planning area will become less desirable for
such uses.
Wholesale Produce Industry. The wholesale
produce industry in Oakland is centered at the
Oakland Produce Market in the Jack London
District. However, market operations are not
expected to remain there over the long term.
A recent City study identified that physical
conditions of the existing facilities are inad-equate
for modern, efficient operations, and
that the type of modern distribution facility
needed cannot be provided at the current lo-cation.
Eventual relocation of the wholesale
produce market will offer opportunities for
reuse of the area.
Light Industrial Activities. Within the plan-ning
area, there have been some transitions
from heavier industrial to lighter industrial
uses. Examples of light industrial uses in the
area include light manufacturing firms, boat
repair and sales operations, artisans, graphics
and printing businesses, construction contrac-tors
and special trades, and security and busi-ness
service firms. Most of these types of uses
have located in existing older buildings, adapt-ing
space as needed, although the stock of large,
older buildings is not always well- suited for
this market.
There is the potential for future growth of
light industrial activities in the planning area.
Development of flex- type space that allows
businesses with different activities and func-tions
would be desirable, as would improve-ments
to enhance the desirability of older in-dustrial
areas by providing some level of ame-nity,
upkeep, and security.
Research and Development. Research and
Development ( R& D) and various high- tech-nology
uses have been expanding in the inner
East Bay as growth continues in these sectors
throughout the region. Campus- type business
park development is desired by many of these
uses. Locations in the planning area with the
strongest potential for such development in-clude
those offering an attractive, high- ame-nity
environment; good access and proximity
to services; a quiet, somewhat contained site
area; and a certain critical mass or minimum
scale of development.
A waterfront setting, views, recreation facili-ties,
and open space all enhance the market-ability
for such uses. Although Oakland has
not established itself in the R& D market, at-tributes
of portions of the planning area could
be competitive.
Office. Office uses have been growing within
the planning area. The mix of uses and his-torical
quality of the Jack London District
support a less- traditional office niche in close
proximity to the Oakland Central Business
District ( CBD). The area’s convenient loca-tion
and its opportunities for new space, for
interesting space in older industrial buildings,
and for owner- occupied office space have at-tracted
a wide variety of smaller office ten-ants,
including architects, consultants, media-related
firms, and insurance, law, and other
professional service firms. The demand for
office space is expected to continue to grow.
Section II: Objectives 27
Lower cost office space in the Embarcadero
Cove area has also attracted office uses. That
location’s relative isolation from other office
activities has been offset by a waterfront set-ting
and lower cost space with surface park-ing.
Commercial. A range of commercial uses and
activities exist along the waterfront, and have
been increasing in importance over time. Po-tential
exists for increased commercial activity
throughout the planning area.
As a destination for dining, entertainment and
retail uses, Jack London Square’s performance
has improved significantly since the early
1990s. Major new attractions ( Jack London
Cinema, Barnes and Noble, Yoshi’s), estab-lished
restaurants, and numerous special events
now bring thousands of people to the area.
There is momentum to build on and great
potential to strengthen and expand the area as
a stronger and desirable destination for retail,
dining and entertainment activities.
Additional unique uses and attractions, as well
as physical improvements, will be important
to create a more inviting “ people place” that
better capitalizes on its waterfront setting.
Outside of Jack London Square, eating and
drinking establishments that take advantage
of water views and ambiance are evident, but
not plentiful. There is potential for growth
of these uses as new development occurs, pub-lic
access and open space improvements are
made, and larger numbers of people are attracted
to the waterfront.
Larger scale retail uses also have been success-ful
in the planning area. A mix of retailers of-fering
home furnishings, children’s and spe-cialty
items, and off- price goods provide a
shopping attraction in the Jack London Dis-trict.
Retailers are doing well and sales have
been increasing. There is potential to add simi-lar
types of retailers nearby. Oakland and the
inner East Bay are very underserved in goods re-tailing.
Good freeway accessibility and visibility, the
availability of a large, formerly industrial sites,
and a location on a major route ( I- 880) are
key factors in the recent development of a large
new retail uses such as the Super K- Mart in
the San Antonio/ Fruitvale area. Other large
retailers ( e. g. Arvey’s Paper) have located in the
more industrial areas of the Jack London Dis-trict
because of freeway accessibility, proxim-ity
to downtown, and the availability of large
warehouse buildings. These types of locations
in the planning area are likely to remain at-tractive
to larger retail uses.
Hotels/ Motels. Hotels and motels in the plan-ning
area have been very successful. Lodging
in the Embarcadero Cove area offers moder-ately
priced rooms on the waterfront with
good freeway accessibility and proximity to
the Oakland Airport. Additional hotel devel-opment
will soon be under construction in
that area. Lodging in the Jack London Dis-trict
includes moderately priced hotel/ motel
units and a full- service hotel at the waterfront.
Potential exists for a higher amenity waterfront
hotel in the Jack London District. Over time,
hotels are a potential use for other waterfront
locations, particularly in the Oak - to- Ninth
area, after new open space and recreation uses
are developed there.
Housing and Work/ Live. Residential uses in
the planning area range from single- family
units in the Kennedy Tract neighborhood to
higher density units and loft housing in the
Jack London District and work/ live units in
transitioning industrial areas. The mixed- use
character of the planning area makes it attrac
28 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
tive for work/ live activities, which are com-patible
with both the industrial and residen-tial
areas. Work/ live studios in the older in-dustrial
waterfront areas are relatively afford-able
among such uses in the East Bay, and are
attractive to artisans and craftspeople working
on the premises as well as to incubator- type
businesses. Work/ live and loft housing in the
more central portions of the Jack London
District is more attractive to East Bay artisans
and entrepreneurial professionals, and com-mands
higher prices and rents. Throughout
the planning area, work/ live and loft housing
has been developed through the conversion and
rehabilitation of older warehouse and indus-trial
buildings.
There is the potential for more work/ live uses
and housing in the planning area in the fu-ture.
Improvements that capitalize more on
the waterfront location in the San Antonio/
Fruitvale District could enhance the attractive-ness
of that area for additional conversions of
existing buildings to work/ live activities. The
development of new housing in this formerly
industrial area would require public investment
in infrastructure and amenities, and would
need to be done at a scale large enough to cre-ate
a neighborhood identity.
There also is the potential for additional work/
live and loft housing in the Jack London Dis-trict
in the future. There are some opportuni-ties
for additional conversions of warehouse
buildings to work/ live lofts and some oppor-tunities
for new construction. Prices and rents
in the area will eventually reach levels high
enough to cover the costs of newly constructed
loft housing and work/ live projects. The
district’s industrial/ artistic feel, its mix of uses,
and its urban development pattern are impor-tant
aspects of the area’s desirability for urban,
nontraditional types of housing.
ISSUES & OPPORTUNITIES
With the decline of its historic industrial, ware-housing
and commercial uses, there is the op-portunity
to establish a new role for the Estu-ary—
one that emphasizes a publicly spirited
place that is tied more closely to the surround-ing
neighborhoods and districts.
In the future, successes in certain areas ( such as
Jack London Square) can be extended, exist-ing
residential neighborhoods reinforced, new
mixed- use neighborhoods established, viable
industries supported, and incompatibilities
between heavy industrial uses and residential
neighborhoods mitigated. The new uses can
help to strengthen the economy of the city
and shape Oakland’s identity as a waterfront
city an identity that will be a source of pride
and enjoyment for residents and visitors for
years to come.
More specifically, the Estuary Policy Plan rec-ommends
reconfiguring land use patterns
along the shoreline, to build upon the follow-ing
opportunities:
! Urban Entertainment and Mixed Uses
Extending from the Waterfront to the City
Center and Chinatown. The Jack Lon-don
District has been established as a re-gional
destination for retail, dining and en-tertainment,
and as a lively mixed- use dis-trict.
There is now the distinct potential to
build on the successes of the area, create a
stronger regional destination, and establish
activity centers that benefit the city as a
whole. The strength of the entertainment/
mixed- use segments of the economy offers
an opportunity to realize a long- held city
objective to connect the waterfront ( physi-cally
and economically) to downtown Oak-land.
Intensifying these uses at Jack Lon-don
Square, and expanding them along the
Section II: Objectives 29
Broadway Street corridor will realize that
objective.
! Redevelopment of Declining Commercial
and Industrial Areas. Some portions of
the Estuary shoreline are underutilized, due
in large part to the decline of the industrial
base that historically has dominated the Es-tuary.
Today, the Estuary provides an op-portunity
area for new uses that contribute
to and/ or benefit from a waterfront envi-ronment.
It can also be a valuable resource
in fostering nontraditional land uses within
existing buildings ( such as work/ live, arti-san
studios, incubator, commercial and
R& D).
At the same time, these older buildings rep-resent
the history of the city. To the extent
possible, they should be preserved and
adapted to contemporary re- use.
! Reuse of the 5th Avenue to 9th Avenue
Area. The possibility of consolidating
maritime operations in the Oakland Outer
Harbor creates opportunities for a major
redevelopment effort in an area extending
from the Ninth Avenue Terminal to the
mouth of the Lake Merritt Channel. This
area offers the largest single opportunity in
Oakland to provide for dramatic, large-scale
economic development, plus a main
public space at the waterfront.
A system of inter- connected open spaces
can connect the Estuary shoreline with Lake
Merritt. There is potential to build upon the
diverse nature of the shoreline and provide
for a variety of water- oriented recreational
activities ( both passive and active). These
recreational uses can be complemented by
public- oriented activities, including hotels
and restaurants, as well as nonprofit insti-tutions,
cultural facilities, and existing ar-tisan
studios on private property.
LAND USE OBJECTIVES
Objectives for land use recognize the Estuary
as an attractive location for development op-portunities
and intensification of a variety of
activities. They are based on and reinforced
by the objectives in the General Plan Elements
addressing Land Use & Transportation ( 1998),
Open Space, Conservation & Recreation
( OSCAR; 1996), Historic Preservation ( 1994)
and Housing ( 1992).
Objective LU- 1: Provide for a broad mix-ture
of activities within the Estuary area.
As the waterfront changes away from indus-trial,
warehousing and maritime support uses,
a broader range of new uses should be encour-aged
that are complementary with the exist-ing
uses that remain. Development should
build upon the value of the waterfront as a
community amenity and attraction.
A variety of uses can contribute in making the
Estuary of value to Oakland’s community and
an attractive regional destination. A balance
of uses and activities such as commercial, rec-reation,
and residential - both traditional and
non- traditional - will add to a dynamic water-front.
Additionally, innovative mixes of cul-tural
arts, institutions, and events that entice
people to experience and enjoy the waterfront
in a variety of ways should be included. Mea-sures
should be established to protect against
incompatibilities between diverse uses.
Objective LU- 2: Provide for public activities
that are oriented to the water.
The Estuary waterfront should be developed
in keeping with the spirit of the public trust,
30 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Objective LU- 3: Expand opportunities and
enhance the attractiveness of the Estuary as
a place to live.
The Estuary has been a place for people to
live, with neighborhoods established close to
jobs on inland sites. The mix of jobs and
housing is characteristic of urban waterfront
locations, and provides a precedent for modern
day mixed use. It should remain so.
In the future, opportunities to develop hous-ing
should be supported in the Estuary study
area. An expanded residential population and
associated services would support commercial
and recreational uses, and over time generate
neighborhoods. A larger day and night popu-lation
would add to the safety and livability
of the waterfront. Development should be
designed to avoid the feeling of ‘ gated’ or pri-vate
communities. 1
Objective LU- 4: Develop the Estuary area
in a way that enhances Oakland’s long- term
economic development.
The waterfront has historically been, and
continues to be, an important place to
promote economic development and
employment opportunity in Oakland.
Waterfront locations are attractive areas for
businesses and commercial uses. Oakland’s
Estuary can accommodate a wide variety of
uses which will add to the economic helath
and well- being of the City. Opportunities
range from hotels, restaurants, and
entertainment venues to retail, general office
space, cultural facilities, and business parks. At
the same time, existing commercial and
industrial uses that are already extablished and
which also contribute to the City’s tax and
employment base should be encouraged to
expand. These are all ‘ growth industries’, which
present the opportunity for Oakland’s
residents and business community to receive
direct and indirect economic benefits.
Employment opportunities, the tax base, and
spin- off activities should expand with the
introduction of new waterfront developments.
In addition, the tax revenue derived from new
development will add to the ability to develop
the open space and other amenities which are
envisioned.
All of this economic activity will succeed in
the Estuary area because of the unique business
environment created by the waterfront’s
amenities. Strong economic links should be
forged between the waterfront and the rest of
the City, so that the benefits derived from
waterfront development are realized in the
Estuary study area and beyond.
Objective LU- 5: Provide for the orderly
transformation of land uses while
acknowledging and respecting cultural and
historical resources.
Transformation of the Estuary should take
place in an orderly fashion, incrementally, and
in consideration of the long- range goals of the
city.
The Estuary Policy Plan calls for changes in
land use and new development projects that
will be implemented over an extended time
frame, within the context of a dynamic urban
environment. Infill of vacant and underutilized
parcels, as well as demolition or buildings
adapted for reuse should occur while respect-ing
cultural and historic resources, when ap-plicable.
1 See Oakland General Plan, Land Use Transportation Element, Policy W9.3.
Section II: Objectives 31
The waterfront is one of the city’s most his-toric
areas. There are several districts, sites and/
or buildings of significance, which should be
respected, assessed, and preserved, if feasible. 2
Objective LU- 6: Create greater land use
continuity between the Estuary waterfront
and adjacent inland districts.
The historic development patterns in the
Estuary study area have resulted in a unique
juxtaposition of industrial, residential, and
commercial uses, plus divisive transportation
corridors. It is an objective of the Estuary Plan
to minimize the adverse impacts associated
with incompatible uses.
Currently, there is a break in the land use
pattern as it meets the Estuary shoreline.
Adjacent neighborhoods and districts are
interrupted by transportation corridors, thus
exaggerating the contrast between activities
along the shoreline and those in inland areas of
the city.
While the regional transportation corridors are
here to stay, local- serving roadways and streets
should be aligned and designed to enhance
greater continuity of land use. This will allow
the Estuary area to become a more integral
part of the city. More specifically, Broadway,
Webster, Fifth, 29th, Fruitvale, 42nd and High
Streets should be assessed and carefully de-signed
when they are reconstructed to promote
clear and safe means of access from inland
neighborhoods to the waterfront.
2 See Oakland General Plan, Historic & Preservation Element, Policies 3.0 series.
32 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
The Estuary shoreline will include a wide range of open space experiences.
Section II: Objectives 33
Shoreline Access & Public Spaces
The planning of open space in Oakland has
long focused on the physical features of the
city— in particular, the creeks and canyons
leading from the hills to the Estuary.
Over 100 years ago, in 1888, landscape archi-tect
Frederick Law Olmsted made a proposal
for a “ wildwood” chain of parks throughout
the city. Later, in the early 1900s, Mayor Mott
engaged the world- famous planner Charles
Mulford Robinson to prepare a plan for the
city. The 1905 Robinson plan established a
system of parks and playgrounds under the
newly created Oakland Park Commission, and
laid the foundation for a regional park sys-tem.
Following bond approval, a period of
park development ensued. Lakeside Park sur-rounding
Lake Merritt was developed, and
Lake Merritt itself became the first official
wildlife refuge in the state of California.
However, Robinson identified a significant
problem which has only partially been re-solved:
Residents had “ no access to their glo-rious
waterfront on one of the most beautiful
bays of the world.”
Although Lake Merritt, the creeks and hill-sides
were viewed as important elements in
Olmstead’s chain of parks and open spaces
within the city, the shoreline was not origi-nally
conceived in open space terms. At the
turn of the century, when parks and play-grounds
were being built in inland areas, docks
and wharves, were being constructed on the
waterfront. Although the Robinson plan had
identified the concept of building a recre-ational
pier at the foot of Broadway, the wa-terfront
was principally seen as a place of com-merce.
However, recreational activities such as fish-ing,
viewing, sitting, bicycling, jogging, and
walking, have increased in recent years, along
with recognition of the shoreline’s value as
habitat for wildlife and as a place for
birdwatching, nature walks, and interpretive
and educational experiences.
SHORELINE ACCESS
Efforts to develop public access along the
shoreline have been guided by BCDC, which
( in a joint effort with the City and the Port) is
currently preparing a public access plan for the
entire Oakland waterfront, including the Es-tuary
shoreline. In addition, the EBRPD is
developing plans to extend the Martin Luther
King, Jr. Regional Shoreline ( an environmen-tal
reserve on the eastern end of the planning
area).
34 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Section II: Objectives 35
36 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
San Francisco Bay Trail
Regional interest in a continuous pedestrian
and bike path along the bay has resulted in
efforts coordinated by the Association of Bay
Area Governments ( ABAG) to create a 400-
mile Bay Trail in nine bay counties. In Oak-land,
21 miles of the Bay Trail are planned,
but only 8.5 miles have been completed, pri-marily
on existing public streets in the Em-barcadero
Cove and Jack London Square ar-eas.
Water Spaces
Certain recreational activities fit well within
the confines of protected water of the Estu-ary.
Small boat sailing, rowing, canoeing, and
kayaking established a presence along the wa-terfront,
and are activities well suited to the
calm, smooth waters of the Estuary. The tra-dition
of rowing dates from the early 1900s,
when the University of California ( Cal Crew)
located its boathouse in the area amid ware-houses
and agricultural industrial businesses.
Recreational interest in the shoreline has in-creased
with time, particularly as industrial and
warehouse activities have shifted away from
the mid Estuary to the western periphery of
the city. In particular, recreational boating has
expanded dramatically.
Plans are underway by the Port, City, and other
entities to improve and expand boating facili-ties.
Specifically, the Port is rebuilding its 160-
berth marina at Jack London Square and Cal
Crew has proposed the relocation and expan-sion
of its boathouse within the Union Point
area. In addition, a new Aquatics Center is
planned in Estuary Park, which would expand
the programs that currently take place on Lake
Merritt and provide boating instruction and
similar activities.
Special Events
Through the efforts of the Port of Oakland,
the waterfront has increasingly developed into
the primary location for Oakland’s civic
events, community celebrations, and cultural
activities. Some of these are major events at-tracting
several thousand people, such as Cir-que
du Soleil, the Fourth of July fireworks,
lighting of the Christmas tree, and boat pa-rades.
Others are large events that are somewhat less
intensive, and may be spread out over the en-tire
Jack London waterfront and occur over a
day or weekend ( such as the boat show, Festa,
etc.). Major concerts have been very success-ful,
and over the past three years, attendance
has tripled to crowds as large as 15,000. Other
events include weekly farmers’ markets, con-certs,
special celebrations and rallies, which
typically attract around 1,000 people and are
typically staged at the foot of Broadway.
ISSUES & OPPORTUNITIES
What was evident to Charles Robinson in
1905, to the League of Women Voters in 1993,
and to the General Plan Congress in 1996, is
still an issue today. Although several places
exist where public waterfront access has been
provided ( eg., MLK Regional Shoreline, Jack
London Square, Estuary Park, Portview Park,
several fishing piers, etc), the Estuary shore-line
is not a cohesive open space system.
Existing sites are isolated from one another
and from the rest of the city and often not
well identified or developed. Open space is fre-quently
shared with automobile traffic. The
only existing city park within the area, Estu-ary
Park, is difficult to find and is poorly main-tained.
Furthermore, some of the prominent
Section II: Objectives 37
spaces that are used for major civic celebra-tions
and events are subject to future develop-ment.
Despite tremendous community interest in ex-panding
open space and recreational opportu-nities
along the Estuary, the creation of a co-hesive
open space system has been stymied by
existing ownerships and water- related busi-nesses,
interrupted roadways, and barriers cre-ated
by rail spurs.
Yet, the waterfront offers many opportunities
to add to the amount and quality of public
recreational space. It has the capability to sup-port
a wide variety of recreational activities,
( particularly water sports), and the potential
to provide visual relief, opening up intensely
developed urban areas to the bay. A number
of opportunities exist to create a “ necklace” of
open spaces along the Estuary. As changes in
land use occur, continuous public access punc-tuated
by larger open spaces and linked to the
rest of the city, will become an attractive ele-ment
of a revitalized waterfront.
Opportunities to establish a larger and more
coherent network of shoreline access and public
recreational spaces include:
! Continuous Shoreline Access / Fill In Gaps
in the Bay Trail. A continuous Bay Trail
immediately adjacent to the shoreline, with
a separated pedestrian path ( where physi-cally
feasible) as well as a continuous recre-ation-
oriented boulevard that accommo-dates
pedestrians and bicyclists and provides
for vehicular and transit access.
! Waterfront Parks. New waterfront parks
along the Bay Trail, ranging from additional
urban spaces for intensive recreational ac-tivities
to large open areas for performances,
competitive events, or civic celebrations.
! Boating and Water- Oriented Recreation.
Additional facilities for boating, in particu-lar,
to facilitate the transition of smaller craft
( canoes, rowboats, kayaks) into the water.
! Link to Lake Merritt. A public open space
and pedestrian linkage along Lake Merritt
Channel between Estuary Park and Lake
Merritt, to build upon the recreational
value of the lake and the Estuary, and to
create stronger ties with the surrounding
communities, in a manner that maintains
the high quality of regionally significant
wildlife habitat.
! Tidelands Enhancement. Additional tidal
marshland enhancement areas to provide
valuable habitat for birds and other wild-life
species, and new opportunities for bird
watching and other educational/ interpretive
experiences.
! Connections to New Parks and Open
Spaces. Connections to new parks and
open spaces planned along the opposite
shore, in Alameda and on Coast Guard Is-land,
to reinforce the Estuary as a primary
open space for the communities adjoining it.
SHORELINE ACCESS &
PUBLIC SPACE OBJECTIVES
Objectives for access and public spaces recog-nize
the emerging role of the waterfront as a
key place for open space and recreation within
the city and region. It builds upon the objec-tives
for public access, open space, and recre-ation
articulated in various planning docu-ments,
most notably the Open Space, Conser-vation
and Recreation Element ( 1996) and the
Land Use and Transportation Element ( 1998)
of the General Plan.
38 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Objective SA- 1: Create a clear and
continuous system of public access along the
Estuary shoreline.
Provision of continuous shoreline access is an
important goal embraced by both regional and
local communities. Futhermore, it is a spe-cific
mission of BCDC and ABAG’s Bay Trail
program, and a prime objective of the East
Bay Regional Park District. In the Oakland
segment, the intention is to provide a con-tinuous
system of public waterfront spaces,
and to provide for a continuous open space
network which connects all waterfront ele-ments,
which provides a variety of waterfront
experiences.
Within the parameters of safety and security,
development of public facilities should be un-dertaken
according to site- specific standards,
based on the physical capacities and program-ming
needs of the particular site.
There is a diverse sequence of spaces along the
shoreline, including the protected nature of
the Lake Merritt Channel; the marshy habitat
that extends to Damon Slough; the expansive-ness
of the Fifth Avenue Point shoreline edge;
the sheltered character of the Embarcadero
Cove, Brooklyn Basin and Coast Guard Is-land;
and the lively areas within the Jack Lon-don
District. Each of these special qualities
should be reflected in the design of parks,
promenades, and open spaces.
General objectives for the provision/ enhance-ment
of open space and associated facilities at
all locations include:
! Preservation and protection of the natural
features, wildlife and vegetation;
! An easily identifiable standard sign system
that can be implemented throughout the
open space system, to provide directional/
orientation/ interpretive information;
! Physical improvements to increase visitor
comfort, safety, and pleasure ( eg. separated
paths, landscaping, lighting, observation
pads, comfort stations, trash receptacles,
furniture, emergency services, vehicular
parking, etc.)
Objective SA- 2: Punctuate the shoreline
promenade with a series of parks and larger
open spaces.
A number of parks and larger open spaces are
proposed that would build on the intrinsic
character of the shoreline and provide for a
wide range of recreational experiences. The
intent is to create series of parks and other
publicly accessible spaces, capable of accom-modating
a wide variety of recreational activ-ity,
connected by a shoreline promenade.
These could include:
! A portion of the “ Meadow” in front of
the Port Building in Jack London Square;
! A new “ Green” to anchor Phase 2 devel
opments at Jack London Square;
! A new “ Greenway” extending along Webster
Street to connect Jack London Square to
the inland neighborhoods;
! Expansion of Estuary Park;
! A series of parks in the 5th- 9th Avenue
area;
! A new park at Union Point; and
! Expanded and improved facilities along
the MLK Regional Shoreline.
Section II: Objectives 39
Objective SA- 3: Emphasize visual corridors
and open space links to surrounding inland
areas.
To make the Estuary shoreline more accessible,
links to inland areas should be strengthened.
Visual corridors and physical links to the wa-ter
should be provided at regular intervals along
the shoreline, using the grid of city streets in
their full widths, to enhance the connection
between inland areas and the water. In addi-tion,
the design of open spaces should pro-mote
opportunities to appreciate views and
waterfront amenities from inland areas. At
the same time, key corridors should be extended
outward to the Estuary itself, to provide view-ing
experiences that are unique to the Estuary.
Objective SA- 4: Develop opportunities for
recreational activities that are oriented to the
waterfront and serve identified neighborhood
needs.
Recreational areas along the waterfront should
meet the needs of the region and the city as a
whole, as well as specific adjacent neighbor-hoods
and districts. Programming of larger
recreational areas should be undertaken in con-junction
with the EBRPD, neighborhood or-ganizations
and other interested parties to en-sure
that the recreational activities provided
help to meet identified needs.
Objective SA- 5: Enhance natural areas along
the shoreline.
There are significant opportunities along the
Estuary shoreline and Lake Merritt Channel
to enhance remnant tidal marshes and other
natural areas. These areas can add to the visual
enjoyment and diversity of the shoreline, and
expand wildlife habitat for birds and other
species. They can also create outdoor areas for
direct learning and experiences related to na-ture.
Objective SA- 6: Encourage the development
of educational and cultural programs and
interpretive facilities that enhance
understanding of the waterfront environment.
The Estuary shoreline is an ideal site for learn-ing
about nature, the history of the city, the
economic activities supporting it, and the
unique recreational and leisure activities avail-able
to residents. In order to enhance public
awareness and understanding of the contribu-tion
the Estuary makes to the quality of life in
Oakland today, all waterfront facilities should
be considered as potential visitor centers. To
the extent feasible, significant historic sites and
buildings should be preserved, adapted for re-use,
and explained. Open space and shoreline
access areas should be programmed to include
educational and interpretive elements.. Ac-tivities
such as historic walks and self- guided
tours should continue to be offered. Plaques
or appropriate markers that recognize and
commemerorate the waterfront’s history
should be encouraged. 3
To the extent feasible, significant historic sites
and buildings should be preserved, adapted for
re- use, and explained. Open space and shore-line
access areas should be programmed to in-clude
educational and interpretive elements.
3 See Oakland General Plan, OSCAR Element, OS 7.3.
40 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Section II: Objectives 41
42 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
A continuous waterfront parkway will provide for pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular movement along the Estuary shoreline
Section II: Objectives 43
Regional Circulation & Local Street Network
Soon after its inception in 1852, Oakland ( and
the waterfront in particular) became a major
crossroads within the region, state, and nation.
An early catalyst for economic development
occurred in 1869 with the establishment of
Oakland as the western terminus of the trans-continental
railroad. Subsequent development
of transportation infrastructure focused on the
railroad terminus: steam trains and ferries to
take passengers to San Francisco, wharves and
steamers to move freight, and additional rail
connections to distribute goods up and down
the coast.
In the years since, Oakland’s strategic location
has helped to enhance the city’s role as the hub
of a transportation network serving the city,
the San Francisco Bay region, and entire West-ern
half of the United States. BART, Amtrak,
aviation services all have joined the historic
freight operations as major components of
Oakland’s transportation function.
While Oakland’s comprehensive system of pas-senger
and freight transportation represents
important economic arteries for the Bay Re-gion,
it has been developed at the expense of
the local circulation system.
BARRIERS
In the Estuary area, the sheer magnitude of
the regional transportation infrastructure has
contributed to the fragmentation of the local
street system, and created a physical and psy-chological
barrier between the city and its wa-terfront.
For example, railyards separate the waterfront
and the city, penetrable only at specific grade
crossings along the line. But the difficulties
posed by the rail network for local circulation
were magnified by construction of the I- 880
freeway, which parallels the railroad right- of-way.
The combination of the freeway, the rail
corridor, and the BART corridor creates a
physical barrier to auto traffic as well as pedes-trians
and bicyclists.
Additionally, the juxtaposition of the freeway
system over the city grid has created a series of
oddly- shaped land parcels that are hard to
make use of. Confusing interchanges, sub-standard
ramps, and circuitous routing of traf-fic
are disorienting to travelers in the Estuary
area. The confusing nature of the circulation
system creates safety problems and disincen-tives
for those unfamiliar with the area to visit.
44 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Furthermore, it is not possible to walk, bi-cycle,
or drive directly from one end of the
Estuary to the other. Crosstown routes that
link the hills and the bay are ambiguous, and
meet the Estuary shoreline in an awkward or
interrupted fashion.
Crossings of the Estuary to Alameda and
waterborne connections to the larger region
are fairly limited, considering the proximity
of destinations in the two cities. Three bridges
and the two tubes provide vehicular access
between Oakland and Alameda, and a ferry
terminal at Jack London Square provides ac-cess
to Alameda and San Francisco. However,
these connections are clustered at the ends of
the Estuary, leaving a large reach of the shore-line
( Jack London Square to Fruitvale) with-out
connections across the water that link it
to Alameda or the larger Bay Region.
ISSUES & OPPORTUNITIES
It is absolutely necessary to clarify and improve
the circulation system to and along the water-front
in order to meet the objective to enhance
the image and identity of the Estuary area and
make the waterfront a more integral part of
the city. Several opportunities exist to create a
more comprehensible and amenable circula-tion
system that ties together the various at-tractions
of the waterfront, and reconnects them
to the city. These include:
! Embarcadero Parkway. A continuous
parkway connecting Oak Street on the west
with 66th Avenue on the east could be cre-ated.
This parkway would not only pro-vide
a critical link in the circulation net-work,
but would also provide a sense of
orientation, connect diverse open spaces,
and provide paths for strolling and passive
recreation.
The parkway could be designed to accom-modate
a full range of transportation
modes, including automobile, transit, bi-cycles
and pedestrians, but managed as a
“ slow street” to discourage through move-ment
of truck traffic.
! Freeway Access. Simplifying and enhanc-ing
freeway access to and through the area
could be achieved by consolidating freeway
ramps and linking them to major thor-oughfares.
Existing on and off- ramps oc-cur
in a seemingly haphazard manner, and
do not meet current standards. Although
interchange improvements can only be un-dertaken
with Caltrans’ approval and in-creasingly
must rely upon nontraditional
sources of funding, consideration should
be given to the creation of full- movement
interchanges at selected points along the
freeway ( Caltrans standards suggest one-mile
intervals) and to the removal of sub-standard
on and off- ramps.
As an integral part of these improvements,
it is important to enhance parallel circula-tion
on both sides of the I- 880 corridor,
but away from the Estuary shore.
The absence of direct connections from I-
880 ( Cypress Freeway) to Downtown Oak-land
and Jack London Square is a concern
to the city. Efforts must be made imme-diately
to rectify this severe problem, and
make the waterfront accessible from the
regional freeway network.
! Local Access. Local access corridors across
the freeway that enable motorists, pedes-trians
and bicyclists to reach the water could
be constructed. Once freeway ramps are
consolidated at the major interchanges,
opportunities to create and enhance links
Section II: Objectives 45
to inland neighborhoods can be maxi-mized.
! Waterborne Transportation. New links
by waterborne transit ( eg. ferries, water
taxis and shuttles) that utilize the Estuary
as a corridor for circulation, and which con-nect
future activity centers on both the
Alameda and Oakland sides, can be estab-lished.
Ferry service from existing terminals is ex-pected
to increase between Oakland/
Alameda and San Francisco, as well as to
Treasure Island, Angel Island, and other
recreational destinations.
In addition, there is the potential for water
taxi and shuttle service in the upper reaches
of the Estuary, linking activity centers as
they develop. While expanded water taxi
and ferry service has long been pursued in
the Estuary, this may be an opportune time
to tie it more closely to new development
opportunities.
! Transit Loop. A trolley line along the
Broadway spine, connecting the Jack Lon-don
Square with the City Center and be-yond,
could be implemented. Although
more difficult to accomplish, there is also
an opportunity to establish a rail transit
link between the Fruitvale BART station
and Alameda along an existing rail right-of-
way on Fruitvale Avenue, which crosses
the Estuary into Alameda.
! Parking. As land uses change in the Estu-ary
area, adequate parking will be required
to support new uses. Parking areas should
be strategically located, in accordance with
urban design objectives for the area. Park-ing
facilities should be evenly distributed
and accessible, while avoiding prime wa-terfront
spaces and pedestrian precincts.
REGIONAL CIRCULATION &
LOCAL STREET NETWORK
OBJECTIVES
Objectives for regional circulation and local
street networks recognize the importance of
circulation and access to support the objectives
for land use, public access and public spaces.
These add specificity to a number of objectives
reflected in the General Plan Land Use &
Transportation Element and Bicycle &
Pedestrian Plan.
Objective C- 1: Improve and clarify regional
access to Oakland’s waterfront.
Interchanges along the I- 880 freeway should
be consolidated at arterial roadways and
brought up to current standards to improve
access to and within the Estuary area.
The I- 980 connection to the Alameda Tubes
at the Jackson Street off- ramp currently routes
traffic through city streets, and should be im-proved
to alleviate congestion on local streets
and clarify access routes to Alameda and on
Oakland local streets.
Improved freeway interchanges should be con-sidered
at 5th Avenue, 23rd Avenue, Fruitvale,
and High Street/ 42nd Avenue. A new inter-change
should be investigated to provide di-rect
access from I- 880 to Jack London Square
and downtown Oakland.
46 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Section II: Objectives 47
48 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Objective C- 2: Establish a continuous
waterfront parkway; a safe promenade for
pedestrians, bicycles, and slow- moving
automobiles.
For the most part, vehicular circulation should
be accommodated on existing roadways.
However, a continuous waterfront parkway is
a top priority in the Estuary Policy Plan. The
Parkway should take advantage of and stay
within the Embarcadero right- of- way, extend-ing
from Jack London Square to Park Street.
Beyond Park Street, it may be necessary to
purchase additional right- of- way to allow the
parkway to be connected through to Fruitvale
Avenue and beyond to Tidewater Avenue and
66th Street.
West of Oak Street, the parkway should meet
the city grid, providing several routes west to
Mandela Parkway.
The configuration and cross- sectional charac-ter
of the roadway will likely vary, depending
on availability of right- of- way, adjoining land
uses, and traffic conditions. The parkway and
all other waterfront roads should treated with
appropriate landscaping, lighting, signage, rest/
overview areas, and, where appropriate, park-ing,
and other features which provide a con-tinuous
parkway character for pleasant driv-ing,
walking, and cycling. The parkway should
be slow- moving. The roadway should be ac-companied
by separate or contiguous bicycling
and pedestrian paths where feasible.
Objective C- 3: Balance through movement
with local access along the waterfront.
In many urban waterfronts, shoreline trans-portation
corridors have been allowed to be-come
freeway- like environments, providing
through movement at the expense of local ac-cess.
The concept of the Embarcadero Park-way,
described above, aims to properly bal-ance
local access with through movement.
Traffic- calming methods should be incorpo-rated
into roadway design throughout the
study area, to ensure that vehicular movement
is managed in consideration of recreational and
aesthetic values. The parkway should not be-come
an overflow or alleviator route to the I-
880 freeway, and it should prohibit through
truck movement.
Objective C- 4: Strengthen local circulation
connections between Oakland neighborhoods
and the waterfront.
With anticipated improvements to the re-gional
transportation system, better connec-tions
can be made between the waterfront and
inland neighborhoods.
Specifically, emphasis should be placed on
improving those connections which already
exist: Washington, Broadway, Webster,
Franklin, Oak, 5th, 16th, 23rd, 29th Avenues,
Fruitvale and High Streets. These links can be
strengthened through alterations of street
alignments or extensions of existing roadways,
relocating parking areas, and improving pedes-trian
facilities.
Objective C- 5: Promote transit service to and
along the waterfront.
Land and water- based transit services should
be extended to and along the waterfront. Tran-sit
services should be focused along Broadway,
Washington, Franklin, Third, and Fruitvale.
Section II: Objectives 49
A special transit loop linking Jack London
Square with other significant activity centers
( eg., Old Oakland, the Oakland Museum,
and the Lake Merritt and City Center BART
stations), should also be encouraged. Passen-ger
rail service between Fruitvale BART and
Alameda should be studied further.
Redevelopment on both the Oakland and
Alameda sides of the Estuary may, in the future,
warrant increased ferry and water taxi service.
Water taxis can link activity centers on both
sides of the Estuary, transforming the water-way
into a viable boulevard that brings together
the Oakland and Alameda waterfronts.
Objective C- 6: Improve pedestrian and
bicycle circulation.
Bicycle and pedestrian networks should be
extended throughout the waterfront. By en-hancing
the Embarcadero Parkway, a continu-ous
pedestrian path and bicycle route can be
established along the waterfront. Links from
the parkway to upland neighborhoods are pro-posed
along connecting routes, including Oak,
Lake Merritt Channel, 2nd Street to 3rd
Street, Fifth, Fruitvale, and Alameda to High,
as well as the grid of streets in the Jack Lon-don
District.
Objective C- 7: Provide adequate parking
without diminishing the quality of the urban
environment.
In the Jack London District in particular, pro-vision
of adequate parking is critical to
accomodate both existing and future demands.
Several sites currently used for surface parking
are subject to future development. In addi-tion,
parked vehicles are ‘ spilling over’ into
pedestrian areas, to the detriment of the
District’s attractiveness. To resolve this, a com-prehensive
parking management strategy
should be developed to plan for and provide
adequate parking.
50 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Section III: District Recommendations 51
III District Recommendations
52 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Aerial view of the Central Jack London District.
Section III: District Recommendations 53
The Jack London District encompasses ap-proximately
225 acres of land situated between
Adeline Street on the west and Oak Street on
the east. Properties within the district are pre-dominantly
in private ownership, but also in-clude
some large public land holdings ( Figure
III- 1). In particular, the Port of Oakland has a
significant presence, with ownership of 31
acres of land on the water side of the Embar-cadero,
as well as additional parcels inland. The
Jack London District historically served as an
important center of maritime trade and com-merce,
and today is associated with the figure
of Jack London, his seafaring adventures, and
spirit of rugged individualism. These historic
resources are represented in the historic prop-erties
and districts that exist throughout the
Jack London District ( Appendix A).
Over the past several decades, the Jack Lon-don
District has experienced tremendous
change. The westward growth of the port and
development of container terminals on filled
land, as well as the decline in shipbuilding and
fishing after World War II, brought about a
transformation in the area. Many of the ser-vice
support and industrial uses that tradition-ally
occupied the district declined and left the
area. Some buildings were vacated as these
uses moved elsewhere; others continued to be
used, but not fully; and still others were
adapted to new uses.
Although industrial and distribution uses re-main
dispersed throughout the district, they
are particularly concentrated in the western
portions of the district between Adeline Street
and Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard, close
to the port’s maritime services in the middle
and outer harbors.
The construction of regional transportation
projects in the 1960s, such as the Webster Tube
to Alameda and the Nimitz Freeway, and the
siting of large- scale public buildings along the
freeway corridor, contributed to the physical
isolation between this area and the rest of the
city ( Figure III- 2).
Today, the transformation of the Jack Lon-don
District is well underway. Uses such as
retail, dining and entertainment have expanded
along the waterfront. Home improvement
and off- price retail outlets are emerging to the
west of Broadway, with office, work/ live and
loft residential uses are increasing to the east.
It is an opportune moment to capitalize upon
these positive trends and realize longstanding
Jack London District
54 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Section III: District Recommendations 55
56 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
community objectives for renewal of the dis-trict
as a whole.
The Jack London District should play an in-creasingly
important role in contributing to
Oakland’s quality of life and making the wa-terfront
a more visible part of the city. The
area is closely tied to downtown Oakland,
both physically and functionally. The contin-ued
redevelopment of the Jack London Dis-trict
is essential not only for the district itself,
but also as part of a citywide and downtown
improvement strategy that will help to repo-sition
the downtown as a multidimensional
activity center.
LAND USE
The policies for land use emphasize strength-ening
the district’s economic role within the
region, building on existing trends and poten-tials,
and broadening the appeal and quality
of the area. Envisioned for the area is a mix of
uses that builds on the amenity of the water-front
and provides a strong connection with
the downtown.
Specifically, within the Jack London District,
the Estuary Policy Plan reinforces existing
trends toward commercial and residential land
uses ( Figure III- 3). New uses should be pro-moted
as infill development at Jack London
Square and along the Broadway spine to cre-ate
an intense area of public interest and activ-ity
that seamlessly links the waterfront to
downtown Oakland.
To the east of Broadway, new residential de-velopment
that is compatible with the existing
industrial use and character of the area should
be encouraged. A residential population in this
area can infuse new vitality into the district as
a whole. West of Broadway, the trend toward
off- price retail should be continued and en-couraged.
The Jack London waterfront is becoming a significant regional destination. The Cirque du Soleil attracted hundreds of
thousands of visitors in 1997.
Section III: District Recommendations 57
58 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
For ease of discussion, the Jack London Dis-trict
has been subdivided into 7 subdistricts.
Land use policies for each are presented as fol-lows:
Retail, Dining, &
Entertainment District
POLICY JL- 1: REINFORCE RETAIL, DINING
AND ENTERTAINMENT USES ALONG THE
WATERFRONT, AND EXTEND THESE USES
ALONG BROADWAY TO CREATE A REGIONAL
ENTERTAINMENT DESTINATION.
The Jack London Square has been established
as a significant regional destination for retail,
dining and entertainment. The Estuary Policy
Plan recommends that existing pattern of uses
be expanded and intensified within the Phase
I portion of Jack London Square ( i. e., be-tween
Clay and Webster Streets), and that the
district to be expanded northward along the
Lower Broadway corridor between the Embar-cadero
and Fifth Street.
More specific policy guidance for development
within this area includes:
JL- 1.1: Expand commercial uses along the
entire five- block frontage of Lower
Broadway. The plan recommends that a
coordinated redevelopment effort be pursued
by the Port, the City, and the private sector to
revitalize Lower Broadway as an integral
extension of the waterfront and downtown.
( See also Policy JL- 13.1) These blocks are
particularly important for retail, dining, and
entertainment uses. Upper level office uses
and ground- floor retail uses should be
encouraged, to promote activity and daytime
populations on the streets.
If necessary, acquisition and assembly of selected
frontage properties for development projects
should be facilitated by the use of redevelop-ment
tools as part of an overall strategy of in-tensification
and enhancement.
JL- 1.2 Intensify Phase I of Jack London
Square. Within the Phase I portion of Jack
London Square, ( i. e., between Clay and
Webster Streets) the Estuary Policy Plan rec-ommends
the intensification of retail, dining,
office, hotel, and entertainment activities in
conjunction with the enhancement of water-front
open spaces and other shoreline ameni-ties.
All ground- level frontages of buildings
should be developed as active publicly- oriented
attractions such as retail, dining or entertain-ment
uses.
Infill developments should be carefully de-signed
to insure that views and shoreline ac-cess
are maximized, and that the continuity of
pedestrian areas is maintained. In order to in-tensify
the continuity of pedestrian activity
within the area, several infill and development
opportunities are identified. These include:
! A “ flagship” retail anchor or entertainment
attraction, on the vacant site at the south-west
corner of Broadway and the Embarca-dero.
Development of this site should gen-erate
significant activity and interest at this
key intersection. This development should
be of a landmark design befitting its strate-gic
location.
! A freestanding restaurant, dining pavilion,
or other attraction adjacent to the proposed
‘ Meadow Green’ open space and historic boat
basin at FDR Pier. ( See Policy JL- 9.1). This
development should create a strong desti-nation
at the western terminus of the Wa-ter
Street corridor.
Section III: District Recommendations 59
! Additional kiosks and retail extensions in
the plaza adjacent to the existing Barnes &
Noble bookstore. The kiosks, food carts, etc.
should help to intensify activity on a daily
basis, and provide patrons with high- qual-ity
food services and an attractive environ-ment
for outdoor eating, with views to the
water.
In addition, expansion of existing retail
uses on the south side of the plaza will es-tablish
a stronger retailing edge. Water Street
should be maintained as a through prom-enade.
The design of the pavilions and re-tail
extensions should contribute to the fes-tive
visual environment.
! A cafe extension on the south side of 77 Jack
London Square ( the Oakland Tribune build-ing).
A cafe extension or similar structure
should be constructed to create a more in-teractive
environment along this segment
of the Water Street promenade.
! Hotel Expansion. The Waterfront Plaza
Hotel should be encouraged to expand
within the ‘ footprint’ of the existing ho-tel/
restaurant, the “ Water Street III” retail/
office building and the courtyard between
the two buildings.
Ground- level uses that face on Water Street
and the shoreline promenade should be
publicly accessible, and include retail, res-taurants,
public attractions, or other simi-lar
uses. While visitor pick- up and drop-off
should be accommodated, all parking
should be off- site. ( See Policy JL- 13)
! Redevelopment of the block bounded by the
historic boat basin, the Embarcadero, Clay
and Jefferson streets for public- oriented com-mercial-
recreational and/ or cultural use ( e. g.,
maritime museum). This longer term
project should be pursued to help activate
the water’s edge and create a major activity
anchor at the western edge of the Jack Lon-don
waterfront.
! Upper level office use throughout this sub-area.
Similar to the Lower Broadway area,
upper level office uses should be encour-aged
to promote an active daytime popu-lation.
Development should be carefully
sited and designed to avoid shadowing of
the Water Street axis.
Commercial- Recreation District
POLICY JL- 2: ENCOURAGE THE REDE-VELOPMENT
OF PHASE II OF JACK LON-DON
SQUARE BETWEEN WEBSTER AND
ALICE STREETS.
The Phase II portion of Jack London Square
represents a generation of waterfront redevel-opment
undertaken in the 1960s and 1970s.
Today, many of the buildings at Jack London
Village are in deteriorating condition. Conti-nuity
of public pedestrian access between Jack
London Village and the rest of the Jack Lon-don
District is circuitous and unfriendly.
While the Heinolds First and Last Chance Sa-loon
and Jack London’s cabin provide a unique
sense of the historic waterfront, they are iso-lated
in relation to surrounding activities.
This and adjacent sites currently used for park-ing
are the only viable opportunities to de-velop
additional commercial and recreational
uses, and add to the luster of Jack London
Square as an entertainment venue. However,
development of these sites requires extraordi-nary
sensitivity to the waterfront location, the
shoreline edge, and to surrounding activities.
Specific policy direction is provided:
60 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
complementary to the character of the ad-jacent
warehouse district. ( See Policy
JL- 13)
! A pedestrian bridge across the Embarcadero
and rail tracks to the Phase II development
should be encouraged to supplement at-grade
access. The design of this structure
should complement the existing bridge at
the Washington Street garage and Amtrak,
and add to a sense of arrival at the water-front
district.
Off- Price Retail District
POLICY JL- 3: ENCOURAGE THE EXPAN-SION
OF OFF- PRICE RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS
WEST OF BROADWAY.
Currently, in the area west of Washington
Street to MLK Boulevard, there is an eclectic
mix of uses that includes offices, studios, re-tail,
warehouse and light industrial uses. These
businesses tend to fit well in this environment,
which bridges the more intense regional en-tertainment
and dining attractions at the
water’s edge and the heavier industrial and ser-vice
commercial uses inland and to the west.
fully sited and designed to avoid shadow-ing
of the Water Street axis.
! Integrated parking to serve the hotel/ con-ference/
office center. Parking facilities
should be designed to conceal the parking
functions from the Marina Green and the
waterfront. Parking for bicycles, as well as
rooftop recreational uses could be included.
! Heinold’s First and Last Chance Saloon should
be retained in its present location, either as
a stand alone feature ( if feasible) or by in-corporating
it within the new frontage at
the current site, as a landmark element.
! A distinctive visual landmark at the east-ern
terminus of Jack London Square and
Marina Green. The design and height of
buildings along Water Street could create
this visual landmark.
! Inland of the Embarcadero a parking struc-ture
should be constructed where it can serve
visitors of both Phase I and Phase II portions
of Jack London Square, as well as the Pro-duce
District and the Loft District. The
parking structure should incorporate active
ground- level uses and be designed to be
JL- 2.1: Encourage the redevelopment of
Phase II of Jack London Square for commer-cial-
recreational and waterfront- oriented
uses. Phase II of Jack London Square should
be redeveloped comprehensively, in a manner
that provides significant public attractions, and
unimpeded shoreline access around and
through the site. This shoreline access should
surround the proposed ‘ Marina Green’ ( See
Policy JL- 8.2), providing perimeter activities
and attractions that complement and enliven
the waterfront environment.
Redevelopment efforts should incorporate the
following:
! A high- quality hotel and conference center.
! Ground- level retail, restaurants, public at-tractions,
and other amenities facing the
Marina Green and the shoreline prom-enade,
with office and/ or housing uses
above.
! Upper level office use throughout this sub-area.
Upper level office uses should be en-couraged
to promote an active daytime
population. Development should be care-
Section III: District Recommendations 61
Opportunities exist to expand and strengthen
this unique district with additional retail space
within rehabilitated warehouse buildings and/
or new construction. Therefore, the lower
intensity nature of the district should be main-tained,
and some of the convenient surface
parking that exists should be retained.
However, additional structured parking will
also be required to serve the area and Jack Lon-don
Square in the longer term. Consideration
should be given to a future garage within the
general vicinity of Cost Plus. The Off- Price
Retail District should also be included within
a larger parking district to ensure reciprocal
parking arrangements. ( See Policy JL- 16)
Produce District
POLICY JL- 4: PRESERVE THE HISTORIC
CHARACTER OF THE PRODUCE DISTRICT,
AND ENCOURAGE ACTIVITIES THAT CREATE
A VIABLE URBAN MIXED- USE DISTRICT.
The Produce District represents the most sig-nificant
concentration of food- related busi-nesses
within the city. It is also among the
oldest enterprises along the Estuary, dating
from 1917, when the City relocated the facili-ties
from 11th and Webster streets to the vi-cinity
of Third and Franklin. Today, it encom-passes
several blocks and occupies approxi-mately
130,000 square feet of space operated
by 13 merchants, the majority of whom sell
directly to local restaurants. In addition, the
Oakland Grill, at the heart of the district, has
established a restaurant business that caters to
Produce District customers and lunchtime of-fice
workers, as well as regional patrons.
The Produce District is recognized by many for
its distinctive market buildings, with wide cano-pies
and broad openings, as well as the morning
activity of large trucks and forklifts moving
produce on the sidewalks and in the streets.
JL- 4.1 Encourage the sensitive rehabilitation
and adaptive reuse of existing buildings. Re-tention
of the historic character and ambiance
of the Produce District should differentiate it
from other Oakland destinations, and should
complement nearby retail, dining and enter-tainment
activities along Broadway and the wa-terfront.
All efforts to preserve the existing
structures are encouraged, whenever feasible;
however, if not feasible, development shall
incorporate elements depicting the unique his-toric
character and features of the buildings
( eg., canopies, overhangs and arcades, etc.).
JL- 4.2: Provide for a mix of new uses in the
Produce District. Recognizing market and
financial factors, the plan recommends a di-verse
range of uses, including existing whole-sale
and distribution activities. Priority should
be given to attracting food- oriented retailers
that can maintain the character of this market
district, particularly at the key intersection of
Third and Franklin Streets. Other uses, includ-ing
office, retail, work/ live lofts and warehous-ing,
should also be encouraged.
JL- 4.3: Encourage the location of a farmers
market along Franklin Street. In order to
retain the market character of the Produce Dis-trict,
it is recommended that Franklin Street
be improved as an expanded venue for the
A mixture of home improvement and off- price retail
businesses have created an attractive district immediately
west of Jack London Square.
62 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
weekly farmers market, which currently oc-curs
at Jack London Square. This recommen-dation
would require closure of the street to
traffic and parking on market days. ( See Policy
JL- 16)
Mixed Use District
POLICY JL- 5: IN AREAS OUTSIDE THE EX-ISTING
BOUNDARIES OF THE HISTORIC DIS-TRICT
( API) AND EAST TO THE LAKE
MERRITT CHANNEL, ENCOURAGE THE DE-VELOPMENT
OF A MIX OF USES, INCLUDING
HOUSING, WITHIN A CONTEXT OF COM-MERCIAL,
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL/ MANUFACTUR-ING
USES, AND ANCILLARY PARKING.
The area east of Broadway to the Lake Merritt
Channel, between I- 880, the Embarcadero and
2nd St. east of Oak Street is characterized by a
number of food- related businesses, warehouses
used for storage and distribution of products,
some office uses, as well as a mixture of ser-vice
and support uses.
A mix of uses, including housing, should be
encouraged in order to support the retail and
entertainment uses in the adjacent districts, and
to help promote a more secure and vital envi-ronment
with a day and nighttime popula-tion.
Other uses, including light industrial, ware-housing
and distribution uses, should also be
encouraged to remain within this area. To ac-commodate
the desired mixture of uses and
minimize land use conflicts, new development
should incorporate appropriate measures to
recognize these existing uses and related activities
and provide appropriate buffers to adjacent land
uses.
New development should maintain the char-acter
of the existing multistory warehouses and
industrial buildings.
! Active, publicly oriented ground- level
uses with windows and doors oriented
toward the street, and build- to lines along
streets are encouraged.
! Use of industrial materials ( e. g. corru-gated
metal, glass, steel) should be encour-aged.
! On- site parking and loading should be
concealed from view from the street and/
or encapsulated within the buildings. Sur-face
parking lots should be well land-scaped.
The existing plaza at the Amtrak Station
should be retained as open space and for tran-sit
drop- off. Development on the remainder
of the site should be designed to accentuate
the civic gateway function of the rail terminal
building.
The historic produce market with its projecting awnings
and vibrant street- life is a unique district in downtown
Oakland.
Section III: District Recommendations 63
Waterfront Warehouse District
POLICY JL- 6: ENCOURAGE THE PRESER-VATION
AND ADAPTIVE REUSE OF EXISTING
BUILDINGS IN A NEW WATERFRONT WARE-HOUSE
DISTRICT. USE OF BUILDINGS AND
NEW INFILL DEVELOPMENT SHOULD IN-CLUDE
JOINT LIVING AND WORKING QUAR-TERS,
RESIDENTIAL, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL,
WAREHOUSING & DISTRIBUTION, WHOLE-SALING,
OFFICES AND OTHER USES WHICH
PRESERVE AND RESPECT THE DISTRICT’S
UNIQUE CHARACTER.
The Waterfront Warehouse District occupies
portions of the nine blocks, bounded by the
entire existing historic district Area of
Primary Importance ( API). This district has
a significant concentration of well- preserved
warehouses whose unique physical
characteristsics are associated with the
historic use of the Estuary. The district is
currently a viable warehouse district with a
variety of industrial activities.
The district is also home to new residents,
artists & artisans, and professionaals. Recent
private initiatives have adapted many
existing buildings for re- use as residential,
offices, joint living and working quarters,
and smaller commercial tenants such as
design firms, computer and multi- media
businesses, law firms, consultants, restau-rants,
etc. This mixture of uses and activities
should be encouraged to help promote a 24-
hour population.
Other uses, including office, light industrial,
warehousing, distribution, and ancillary
parking, should continue to be encouraged.
Adaptive re- use of existing buildings, as well
as new infill development, should be en-couraged.
In order to preserve the character
of the district, development should be
compatible with adjacent uses, and incorpo-rate
physical features that reinforce the
district’s unique scale, historic flavor and
activities. Zoning regulations should be
flexible enough to accommodate the diverse
mixture of uses and activities that define the
district. The following should be pro-moted:
! Active, publicly oriented ground- level
uses or habitable spaces built to prop-erty
lines with windows and doors that
are oriented toward the street,
! Build- to lines along streets.
! Adequate setbacks and separations
between adjacent buildings.
! Distinguish building mass or elevations
into different components of approxi-mately
one- quarter block or less.
! Character- defining architectural fea-tures
and appurtenances, including
multi- paned sash windows, parapets
and simple restrained cornices, sidewalk
canopies and awnings, flat roofs,
Over the past five years numerous work/ live and loft studio rooftop features , historic signs. etc.
projects have been developed in the
Jack London District.
64 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
! Balconies and areas of private open
space should be discouraged on the
front elevations of buildings. Rather,
they should be in the back of the
building, between buildings, or as roof-top
terraces, and designed to avoid
privacy impacts on adjacent buildings.
! Use of industrial materials ( e. g. concrete,
masonry, metal, brick, glass, steel), to re-inforce
the interesting mix of exterior
building materialsr..
! On- site parking and loading concealed
from view from the street and/ or encap-sulated
within the buildings. Surface
parking lots should be well landscaped.
Light Industrial District
POLICY JL- 7: MAINTAIN LIGHT INDUS-TRIAL
AND WAREHOUSING USES WEST OF
MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. BOULEVARD.
The Estuary Policy Plan recommends main-taining
light industrial activities, including
warehousing and distribution uses, west of
Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard where a
concentration of industrial activities exist. Of-fice
and retail uses should be encouraged within
this area as well, to promote economic diver-sity.
These uses should be carefully screened
to ensure that they are compatible with exist-ing
industrial activities and with the adjacent
West Oakland neighborhood north of the I-
880 freeway.
Light industrial uses should also be consid-ered
within other portions of the Jack Lon-don
District, including the Off- Price Retail Dis-trict
and the Produce District.
Waterfront Mixed Use District
POLICY JL- 8: ENCOURAGE THE MIX OF
USES EAST OF ALICE STREET TO
PROMOTE LAND USE COMPATIBILITY,
WHILE MAINTAINING AND ENHANCING
WATERFRONT VIEWS AND ACCESS.
Along the waterfront East of Alice Street are
two large residential developments ( Portobello
condominiums and the planned complex on
the Port’s 9- acre ‘ Site B’), separated by the
KTVU television station. Given the
differentiation of land uses, and the large- scale,
self- contained nature of each, development
continuity is lacking. They should be better
integrated with each other, with the
surrounding area, and with the
waterfront. These developments can be
enhanced with exterior site treatments which
use common features ( such as lighting and
street furniture), coordinated landscaping and
architecture, and other amenities. It is
particularly important that the waterfront
promenade be a unifying feature which ties
together the disparate developments and
maintains continuity of waterfront access. At
the same time, site enhancements should strive
to strengthen connections between the
waterfront and inland areas. In addition, the
boundaries of these sites with the adjacent Jack
London Square Phase II projects ( See Policy
JL- 2) and Estuary Park ( See Policy OAK- 2.1)
should be carefully considered as projects
develop, to enhance compatability.
SHORELINE ACCESS &
PUBLIC SPACES
While Jack London Square has established it-self
as a popular regional destination, the full
potential of its public environment is still un-realized.
Simply providing additional retail
and entertainment venues, while important,
is not enough to make the district an attrac-tive,
inviting destination. It is equally impor-tant
to enhance the public spaces and to offer
opportunties for general interest activities out
Section III: District Recommendations 65
66 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
Section III: District Recommendations 67
side of the buildings.
Currently, public space along the Jack Lon-don
District waterfront is inconsistent.
Sprinkled throughout the district are good
examples of areas for public access, gathering,
and overall enjoyment of the water’s ameni-ties.
However, there are also areas where easy
access and enjoyment are not as evident; where
access is interrupted or constrained at key
points; where pedestrian areas are compro-mised
by conflicts with automobiles; where
dramatic views to the water from inland areas
are not evident; where design of amenties is
not cohesive or inviting.
It is not the total amount of open space that is
at issue, but rather where the open space is
located and how it is designed, structured and
managed. Therefore, policies promoting bet-ter
shoreline access and enhanced public use
within the Jack London District emphasize:
! Improving existing public spaces
! Adding additional open space for variety
of recreational pastimes
! Maximizing opportunities to use the
water
! Insuring continuity and cohesiveness of
design
! Maintaining and enhancing views
! Staging of special events
! Minimizing pedestrian/ vehicular conflicts
POLICY JL- 9: ESTABLISH A WELL STRUC-TURED
SYSTEM OF WATER- ORIENTED OPEN
SPACES, CONSISTING OF THE FOLLOWING
ELEMENTS.
JL- 9.1: Improve existing shoreline access,
open spaces, and connections between inland
areas and the water:
The grid of city streets should be the basis for
establishing public access between the inland
areas and the water. Thee full width of the
street grid system should be preserved, and
whereever feasible, be extended to the Estuary
shoreline.
! The “ Meadow Green”: Approximately
two- thirds of the existing open area west
of the Waterfront Plaza Hotel ( referred to
as “ Site A” or the “ Meadow”) should be
maintained as open space. The site should
be enhanced by maintaining the lawn, and
adding street furniture, lighting and other
amenities for active and passive use. Exist-ing
surface parking along the shoreline edge
should be removed to extend the park to a
pedestrian promenade along the edge of the
water.
This open space should be designed and
programmed to take advantage of the ex-traordinary
activities that surround it. Ex-isting
views of the Howard Terminal cranes
Much of the open space in Jack London Square is shared
with automobiles which creates pedestrian conflicts and
confusion.
68 Oakland Estuary Policy Plan
and the Estuary, proximity to the historic
boat basin, FDR Pier, the ferry terminal,
the Waterfront Plaza Hotel, Port building
as activity centers all contribute to the
uniqueness and popularity of the site. These
elements should be reinforced as the site is
upgraded.
The remainer of the site should be devel-oped
as a freestanding restaurant, dining pa-vilion,
or other attraction that is carefully
oriented to complement the Meadow
Greetn and the surrounding activities. ( See
Policy JL- 1.2) .
! “ The Broadway/ Franklin” Plaza: The
Barnes & Noble plaza, including the adja-cent
Broadway and Franklin street ends,
should be reconfigured as necessary to cre-ate
an active pedestrian- friendly open plaza.
The plaza should function as the ‘ main
square’ of the Jack London district. It
should be designed and programmed to ac-commodate
events, kiosks, displays, the an-nual
Jack London Christmas tree, and
other temporary uses and activities which
attract large groups of people. Surround-ing
restaurants should be encouraged to use
the space as an extension of their outdoor
dining facilities.
In addition, the plaza should accommodate
creation of a suitable landmark terminus
of Broadway, in keeping with significance
of Broadway’s role and civic importance.
The plaza should be designed to accom-modate
service and emergency vehicles.
Valet parking currently servicing the restau-rants
should be limited to drop- off and
pick- up only. Specifically, automobiles
should not be stored or parked in the plaza.
Visitor parking should be accommodated
in the Barnes & Noble garage or other suit-able
parking facilities. ( See Policy JL- 13)
! Shoreline Promenade: The shoreline walk-way
between the Waterfr