CC MIN 1973 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

358 Following the slide presentation , Director of Parks and Recreation responded to questions , and gave assurance that the process would involve getting input from the community through neighborhood meetings , going into more detail before reaching the final concept . The development of the right of way was to be for the benefit of all the citizens , but t aking into consideration the rights of the people adjacent to the property . He indicated the ideas in the preliminary proposal were g leaned from their survey , and they would like very much to get as much neighborhood input as possible . Councilman Norris inquired whether an agreement existed between City and S an Francisco Water Department for the right of way , and Director of. Parks and Recreation indicated he did not believe there was , other than the leases now pending on the property , but that if Council wished to Proceed , they would initiate discussions with the San Francisco Water Department to solidify agreements . If the City is not interested in the development , he felt that the San Francisco Water Department might very well offer the land for lease to adjacent property owners . In response to question by Councilman Rhodes , Director of Parks and Recreation indicated that cost of double tennis courts would approximate up to $9 , 500 , exclusive of lighting , and required a half to three - quarters acre . Mayor Keckley invited interested persons in the audience to speak , Lillian Semeit advised that she lived next to the right of way , and approved oved development , but not tennis courts in an 80- foot easement , and indicated there was a serious drainage problem behind the Community Club . She complained of trucks , as well as bicycle riding , and stated if the property is developed , they would demand protection . She felt no one in their area wanted it developed . City Manager reiterated that the matter was before Council at this time only as a very preliminary proposal as result of Council ' s request for investigation and feasibility study , and was not meant to be definitive . Mr . Ragnacci , 1557 Fernside , stated that he had received no communication regarding the proposed development except the first survey . He indicated objection to development and felt it would be a waste of money . Doris Davidson , 1551 Fernside , complained of lack of notification of meetings , as well as of vandalism in the right of way and inability of policing the property . Marshall Blank, 823 Piedmont Way , indicated he represented the property owners in the strip designated. as Zone 2 on the drawing , and that they had expressed in the survey the preference for grass and trees , and not hiking trails as indicated by symbol on the drawing . He expressed concern about criminal activities that he said had taken place there and stated that he and his neighbors did not want pedestrian traffic in that area . 4/23/73 Reg . Mtg .