No preview available
2008-07-01- 5-G Handout'`r ~% 1~fi JJ ~ '•r. 1. ., 'FYI ~ .~ •µ. ~ rs ; ~ ~~~ ~' ~,~, r .' f tiR ~.'~ CITY OF ALAMEDA CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX July 1.rt, 2008 ~~~VS~L~"~~G ~.. . ~ .. fiasr7a>yat 4act Kncinrr,nrraH Fo~t~~S~ RECFiARDSON & QSSQC. ~o~~ c~u~s~ ~~~~~rECrs Re; Agenda Item #5-~ 07-O1-OS ALAMEpA A+II.IIVICIPAL Ci^L'F CiOLIR$E C. 1 921 Master Plan Chuck Corica Golf Complex Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ..r^r,r......rr..........^....nu......^......n..r...,........r..........^r .................^....^.^.............^.n..r RECAP OF OPERATIONAL REVIEW FINDINGS .......................................................................2 Gperating Results ..................................................................................................................2 Physical Assessment of Chuck Corica ..................................................................................3 Management Gptions And Recommendativn ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 3 REVENUE ENHANCEMENT !COST REDUCTION OPPORTUNITIES UNDER CONTINUED SELF-OPERATION ...................................................................................................................... 5 Po#ential Revenue Enhancements .........................................................................................5 Potential Expense Reductions ............................................................................................... 6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 6 CHUCK CORICA MASTER PLAN ...............................................................................................1 Executive Summary ...............................................................................................................7 Master Plan ............................................................................................................................9 Approach ....................................................................................................................................... 9 ~bjectives ....................................................................................................................................10 Legacy &History .........................................................................................................................10 The Golf Experience ....................................................................................................................11 Master Plan Phasing 5equence ..................................................................................................12 Narrative of lrnprovements: Earl Fry Course Hole-by-Hole} ......................................................2Q Narrative of Improvements to South Course ............................................................................... 30 Capital Improvement Master Plan ............................................................................................... 31 PROJECTED ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE FOR THE CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX 3~ Implementation of Master Plan ............................................................................................32 General Assumptions .................................................................................................................. 33 Majar Lease Terms ......................................................................................................................33 Basis far Projections ....................................................................................................................34 Cash Flow Statement ...........................................................................................................36 Chuck Corica GC Projected Financial Performance ~- Master Plan Scenario ............................ 37 Financial Projections Results ......................................................................................................40 SUMMARY CONCLUSION ..............................~.............,.................,..,............,.............,...........4~ APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................43 Appendix A -Description of Re-use Plan Conceptual Plan} ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,44 Appendix B - History of the Chuck Corica Galf Complex and the Bell Legacy ..................45 Appendix G-Phasing Sequence Exhibits ..................................... ...................................... 5D Appendix D-Scorecards ....................................................................................................62 Appendix E -Probable Cost Estimates ...............................................................................65 Introduction National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc., a subsidiary of the National Golf Foundation, was retained by the City of Alameda to create a master plan for the continued operation of the City's Chuck Corica Golf Complex, which is owned and operated by the City of Alameda. Throughout this report, we may refer to shortened names for; the City of Alameda ~"City"}, and National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. ~"NGF Consulting" or "NGF"}. In undertaking the creation of the master plan for Chuck Corica, NGF Consulting strongly considered both the economic impact of the facility to the City and the historical significance of the facility in the Alameda community. The master plan is in#ended for use by City of Alameda officials in determining the appropriate course of action for the future of Chuck Corica with regard to operational structure and the implementation of needed capital improvements. As was the case with the operational review, the creative of the master plan was commissioned with ultimate goal of protecting, preserving, and enhancing the Chuck Corica Golf Complex as a valuable community asset into the future. The key consultants contributing to this study effort were Ed Getherall, Senior Project Director and Richard Singer, Director of Consulting Services, fvrthe National Golf Foundation, and Forrest Richardson, owner and President of Forrest Richardson & Associates ~"FRA"}. Development of the Master Plan involved additional site visits by Mr. Richardson, as well as additional research for specific site data, site constraints, and City requirements. During the process, input was sought from golf course operations and maintenance staff, City officials, and the Gvlf Commission. In the next section, we will summarize the f ndings of the operational review completed last year, discuss potential incremental revenue generation opportunities for Chuck Corica Golf Complex, and present our conclusions regarding whether these vpportu~nities would be sufficient to make self-operation a viable long term option for the City. INe will then present the master plan that NGF Consulting and FRA believe offers the best strategic vision for the future operations and preservation of the Chuck Corica Golf Complex. National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc, Master Plan -Chuck Corica Gvlf Complex - ~ Recap of Operational Review Findings The creation of the master plan is an extension of NGF Consulting's operational review of Chuck Corica, completed in late 2007. Please refer to NGF Consulting's "Cperational Review and Recommendations for City of Alameda" for detailed report}. The overall goal of the operational review was to identify strategies and policies than could be practically implemented to increase the overall economic performance of the golf complex, and maximize the economic return to the City. GPERATING RESULTS NGF Consulting's review of operations at the Gity of Alameda's 45-hole Chuck Corica Golf Complex revealed a facility rich in tradition and history. However, Chuck Corica had suffered ever recen# years, with play declining by about 100,000 rounds since the late 1990s. As the report detailed, the decline occurred for a variety of reasons, including the tremendous increase in golf course supply in the Bay Area, operational and facility-specific issues, and sacio- economictrends that are affecting golf demand throughout the country. Despite the fact that Chuck Corica remains the busiest golf facility in the Bay Area, decreasing revenues and rapidly increasing labor and other operating costs have resulted in annual operating deficits and a deferral of needed capital improvements. Below we summarize some of the notable trends relating to operating results at Chuck Corica for the time period of Fiscal Year 2001-D2 to FY 2005-06. • Activity at Chuck Corica declined by nearly 73,000 rounds, or by 35.2°/°, while paid rounds decreased by more than 75,000, a decline of 37.6%. Average rounds played per good weafl~er day also declined steadily, from 618 to 4fi4. Paid rounds per playable day fell by about 28°/°, to 432.5. • Total receipts decreased by $1.35 million, or by 25.3°/°. • Wages and Benefts, which represent the largest single expense item for Chuck Corica, increased by $502,000, or 27.7°/°. Cn a per-round basis, wages & benefits increased by 97.1 °/°, from $8.75 per round to $17.27. At the same time, wages & benefts per revenue dollar increased by 70.6°/°. • Labor costs as a percentage of total operating expenses excluding depreciation, debt, and transfers increased from 53.2°/o to 62.5°/a. • Total operating expense per round increased by 68°/°, while total expense per round including depreciation, debt, and annual transfers increased by fi4°/° to $38.67 per round. This latter figure was essentially the cosf of producing a round of golf of C~ruck Corica d u ri ng FY 05-Dfi . • Gperating IncomelLoss, went from a positive $1.125 million to a negative $632,000. This included surcharges treated as a reduction in revenues and PILQT ~"Payment in Lieu of Taxes~1R01 ~"Return on Investment"7, but before Cost Allocation and Debt. National Galf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Phan --Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 2 • Excluding Cvst Allocation, transfers, and debt service, Operating lncomelLoss went from a positive $1.57 million to a negative $70,627. Subsequent f nancial results provided tv NGF Consulting reveal that activity at Chuck Corica increased by about 10,7DD rounds in FY 20D6-07, to just fewer than 145,DDD. However, rounds played per good weather day continued #heir downward trend and the facility experienced a net loss, after transfers, of nearly $637,OD0; net losses through May of FY 2007-08 totaled just under $996,DDD. As a result, the unrestricted fund balance had fallen to just under $1.16 million through May, 2DD8 --about one-third of what it was just three years ago. PHYSICAL ASSESSMENT aF CHUCK CORICA NGF made a series of operational recommendations, detailed in the previous report, aimed at improving the financial results if the City were to continue to self operate Chuck Corica. Another critical component of the operational review was the physical assessment of the facility. NGF Consulting, along with Forrest Richardson, identified a series of physical plant deficiencies at the facility, and presented a prioritized list of capital improvement needs. These recommendations were intended to be guidelines for future considerations, and some of these are components of the master plan that will be presented later in this report. The common goal driving the identification and prioritization of improvements was the strengthening of the City's golf asset, and thus the golf experience, ultimately resulting in an increase for, at the least, a preservation} of market share in this highly competitive environment. NGF and FRA observed that remvdelinglrenovatian at Chuck Corica throughout the years has been largely reactionary and less than optimal, as no master plan existed for how the work should be prioritized or carried out.lNe concluded that, with proper planning and execution, the City of Alameda could shape the future ~of Chuck Corica, taking advantage of strengths associated with each course especially the Bell legacy at the Earl Fry Course}, and ultimately bringing the courses back to the grandeur and reputation they once enjoyed. The Master Plan Team also noted that none of the recommendations made in this report will be realized under the "old" method of allowing change tv happen in a vacuum, The policy of small changes here and there, annual replacement activity without regard to an overall master plan, or attempting isolated improvements in lieu of major change, will not suff ce. Far this reason, we believe that the global master plan created for the Chuck Corica Golf Complex will provide a viable tool for use in implementation, further prioritization and budgeting. MANAGEMENT OPTIONS AND REC~MMENDATIQN in the operational review report, NGF Consulting presented three alternatives for the future operation of Chuck Corica Golf Complex. These were; Continue "As Is" --City manages and maintains Chuck Corica: • Full Service Management Contract--private for-fee manager • Operating Lease -private operator funds improvements and operations: NGF Consulting concluded that, ultimately, a combination of factors -flat revenues, rapidly rising labor costs, continued transfers out of the Golf Fund, and the lack of any capital National Galf 1=aundation Consulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson ~ Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Galf Complex - 3 improvement funding--will result in the continued depletion of the operating reserve for Chuck Corica, as well as an ever-deteriorating product, After creating various cash flow models for Chuck Corica, we also concluded that "cessation of some, or even all, of ff~e fransfers, while a necessary component of any potential economic recovery, is likely fa ultimately prove insufficient if the goal for the Golf Fund is to generate enough revenue to be sustain operations for tl~e long term and fund necessary capital improvements". Based on~NGF Consulting's financial analyses of the various opera#ional alternatives far the future of Chuck Corica Golf Complex, we concluded that a lease agreemen# is the best solution for the City if it wants tv stem the f nancial downturn, and preserve the golf facility asset for future generations. The lease would shift the burden of risk to the private operator, provide a guaranteed net cash flow to the City, and provide a means to part'raily or fully fund needed facility improvements that the City would not otherwise be able to fund under the current operating scenario or with a management company, Also, a properly constructed lease agreement can provide the necessary protection for tl?e municipality and the golf facility asset wit~i regard to lessee controls, reports, maintenance specifications, capital improvement provisions, and preservation of affordable resident green fees. However, as we noted in the original report, the lease must be viewed as an attractive opportunity for the bidder, in terms of upside revenue potential and freedom to run the golf facility without unreasonable restrictions regarding fees or institutionalized "sacred cows". NGF Consulting believes that Chuck Corica, which generated $4.4 million in revenue in FY ~OOfi-Ol, and $5 million as recently as 2003-04, would be very attractive to potential suitors if fhe City is realistic in its expectations. National Golf Foundation Consulting, lnc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -~ Chuck Corica Golf Complex -- 4 Revenue Enhancement /Cost Reduction Opportunities Under Continued Self- Operation In follow up to previous report, NGF Consulting was asked to look at specific courses of action that the City might be able to take that would change our initial conclusion that continued self operation of Chuck Corica Golf Complex was not viable, As a result, we explored additional potential revenue enhancement opportunities, such as increased green feeslsurcharges, sales of on-course adver#ising, and leasing of the Mif Albright. Additionally, we considered possible cuts in expenses, including staff reductions, and decreasing the managed turf area. Below we summarize our findings. PQTENTIAL REVENUE ENHANCEMENTS Sales of on-facility advertising revenues -NGF research through the years has consistently shown that on-course advertising revenue, especially at standard priced public golf facilities, rarely exceeds $2D,OOD per year. Additionally, compensation is often in the form of in-kind trade; far instance, the advertiser would pay for tee markers. Surcharges dedicated to Improvement Fundlather fee increases - As nv#ed in the operational review, NGF Consulting believes that Chuck Corlca is generally priced appropriately, given its pricelvalue proposition relative to its chief competitors. Due to oversupply issues detailed in the report, facility loyalty is typically much lower in today's golf climate, and demand for golf at individual golf courses is very elastic. In other words, raising fees significantly enough to make the necessary improvements at Chuck Corica would put the facility at serious risk of losing market share and revenues; therefore, NGF Consulting does not think this is a viable option. Transferring surcharge revenues already being collected about $151,5D0 in FY 06-07} to a golf course improvement fund would not be sufficient, on its own, to meet the fiscal and improvement challenges NGF Consulting has noted for Chuck Corica. Lease the Mif Albright acreage -- It is NGF Consulting's understanding that, based on current zoning, the Mif Albright acreage would be available only for a recreations! use should the City decide to close the golf course, as NGF has recommended. Based on NGF interviews with area realtors and the leasing agent for Alameda Point, the City should expect to generate no more than $5D,000 annually for a ground lease of raw land at this site. However, based vn the losses the course is currently generating, and the fact that it is irrigated with potable, not recycled, water nunlike the Earl Fry and Jack Clark}, NGFC believes that a lease remains the most economic option for this site. Current water restrictions are likely to result in further deterioration of the golf course product, and thus further reductions in revenue. Rezone and lease Mif Albright for HotellConference Center w! ,recreational component -- NGF Consulting and FRA believe that a potential use of the Mif Albright site that would be highly synergistic with golf would be a lodginglresodlconference center type faciii#y with complementary recreational amenities As we understand it, this type of use may not be currently permitted. However, if the site were to be re-zoned for a hotellconference center, the site would not only generate a higher lease payment to the City than with a pure recreational Nations! Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex -- 5 use, but the operator would have a vested interest in the improvement of the golf facility and would likely contribute some capital to the restoration. If a potential resort hotel operator did their due diligence and saw sufficient potential in the site, they would likely prefer tv operate the golf facility themselves, and might even fully fund the renovation of Chuck Corica, including some or all of the elements of the Master Plan that will be presented in the next section of this report. Either way, a successful lodging component would be a significant demand driver for the golf course, Please refer to Appendix A far a description of one possible conceptual idea for the site #hat NGF and FRA have put together}. PDTENTIAL EXPENSE REDUCTIONS Staffing reductions - In the course of our operational review, NGF Consulting did not observe any obvious areas where Chuck Corica could significantly cut labor without negatively affecting operations. The maintenance function had lost two full-time positions in recent years and it was our opinion that further cuts would be detrimental. On the administrative and pro shop sides, full-time staffing did not appear high and, in fact, the facility has been operating without a General ManagerlDirector of Golf. It was inconclusive whetherthere was too much part-time staff, but any cuts here would likely be offset when a GM I DOG was hired, which would be necessary if the City were to continue operating Chuck Corica. Acreage reductions - As we noted in our original report, the annual cost savings associated with reducing the maintainable acreage of the South Course is estimated to be about $4D,D00, due to less turf care and irrigation repairs, and reduced water and electricity. The annual cos# savings associated with reducing the maintainable acreage of the North Course is estimated to be about $20,OOD. coN~LUSION Based on our research, NGF Consulting stands by its initial expert opinion from the operational review of Chuck Corica that the City cannot continue to self-operate the golf facility in the fang term. The revenue generationlexpense reduction opportunities that we have discussed simply da not change the bottom line enough to alter the equation. Additional net revenues generated by implementing any or all of these opportunities might be enough tv pay for the salary of a qualified General Managerl Director of Galf andlvr perhaps fund improvements on a piecemeal basis, a strategy which we have concluded in this and the previous repvr# would not be successful. As reported to NGF Consulting, the unrestricted fund balance had fallen tv just under $1.16 million through May, 2008 --about one-third of what it was just three years ago. Despite an increase of about 10,00 rounds in FY 2DDfi-07, Chuck Corica experienced a net loss of nearly $631,D00; net losses through May of FY Dl-D8 totaled just under $99fi,0oD. Meanwhile, labor expenses continue to increase, golf market dynamics remain the same, and economic factors that affect golf demand, such as the rapidly rising cost of living, have worsened. National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex -- 6 Chuck Corica Master Plan The Master Plan prepared for the City takes into account the previous operational review and assessment by NGF Consulting and Forrest Richardson & Associates, combining recommendations from that undertaking with approaches and recommendations developed during the master planning work. Additional influences included identified site constraints, potential funding mechanisms and probable phasing for improvements. Recommended priorities and sequencing for implementing the Master Plan are based on the collective research performed. It should be noted that conditions at the golf facility are continually changing, Even in the time since the completion of the operational review and assessment, specific areas of concern have changed with several continuing tv deteriorate. one such example is the primary irrigation lake at the Earl Fry Course, This lake is now fully compromised at its shoreline and is in need of priority attention, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Master Plan is recommended tv be implemented in a sequence of eight ~6} logical Phases. Phasing makes land available for re-use at the far southern tip of the site, the northwest corner and, ultimately, at the gateway to the site -the land occupied by the existing Mif Albright Course. Golf hales are redistributed from these re-use areas to areas shown on the Master Plan, thus enabling the residual land tv be put to productive use by the City for potential revenue generation. The primary deviation from previous approaches suggested in the September 2D07 Study is the prioritization of improvements to the Earl Fry Course in favor of improvements to the Jack Clark Course. Among the influences in this decision were: interviews with potential private operators who concluded that there was presently too much golf at Chuck Corica to manage optimally) successfully in this market; the value in focusing attention to the northern areas of the property where there will be the most likely positive affect to the value of any land that might effectively be made available for reuse; continued deterioration of Chuck Corica conditions and .finances; and, the possibility that a convention centerlhotellhealth club use might be permitted on the Mif Albright site, which we recommend closing at or before the commencement of the Master Plan so that lease opportunities can be explored. The eight Ii8} recommended phases and summaries areas follows: Phase I; Close Mif Albright, Repair Practice Range Surfaces and Netting This phase establishes minimum repairs to the existing practice range. Included are repairs tv netting and artificial turfsurfaces. It is intended that the practice range remain open except for isolated times in which repairs call for temporary closure. In addition, the phase includes an allowance to raze the abandoned fire training tower at the main entrance. This phase has a duration of 3-4 months. Phase II; Configure Temporary South Course ~3 greens This phase establishes three temporary greens at the Jack Clark Course, permitting this course to remain open as an 18-hole, par-67 layout during Phase 11! work. This Phase does not intend National Galf Foundation Consulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson ~ Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 7 closure of the Jack Clark Course as the temporary greens will be established while the course is open for play. The phase has a duration of 1-2 months, though Phases I and II can happen concurrently. During this time period, we would also expect that planning, engineering, etc for the Phase III renovation see below} would be undenrvay. Phase III: Renovate & Upgrade North Course This phase provides quality upgrades in the form of remodeling, reconfiguration and refurbishment of Alameda's original golf course established in 1921, now known as the Eari Fry Course. During this phase the Jack Clark Course remains open in a temporarily configured par- 67 layout and would constitute the City's only 18-hole golf course for a period of approximately 12 months. During this phase, planninglengineering, etc. for Phases IV and V should be unden~ray. At the conclusion of Phases I, II and III, the improvements realized will be repairs to the practice range, razing of the abandoned fire tower, full rehabilitation of the Earl Fry Golf Course and an upgraded entryway to the golf facility phase III upgrades are limited to signage and landscaping at the existing entryway}, it is anticipated that the Jack Clark Course will close immediately after the re-opening of the Earl Fry Course. Phase IV: Close South Course far Fill Importation This phase allows for importation of clean f II materia! soil} to the area of the Jack Clark Course. This clean fill material will be placed for the purpose of eventually rebuilding the Jack Clark Course in its entirety. A plan far placement of fill is included in the design work for Phase III. Phase V: Build New Mif Albright Teaching Facility This phase, which can occur concurrently witr Phase IV, establishes a replacement facility for the existing Mif Albright 9-hole, par-3 course. The replacement facility, in the configuration shown for Phase V, is a 3-hole teaching "loop" comprised of ~twv par-4s and a par-3 gulf hole. The tees, greens and bunkers can be used as a 3-hole loop or as individual teaching areas depending vn the type of learning desired. The area may also be set up as amini-practice range for small groups. Additionally, the loop may be used by the public for a nominal fee. elf is impor#anf to Hole fhaf the pafenfia! use of fhe currenf Mif Albright site is critical fo many aspecfs of the Masfer Plan, not fhe leasf of which is fhe phasing. Specifically, if the hofel/conference center use is permifted, draws interesfed surfors, and is frnancra!!y feasible for fhe developer, if is possible that fhe entire projecf could be undertaken in one phase}. Phase Vl: Relocate Maintenance Facility !Build New Green This phase calls for the relocation of the existing maintenance and communications facilities to the eastern edge of the golf course facility property. The new maintenance and communications site will be accessed off of Harbor Bay Parkway and will be better positioned for ingresslegress access to the golf course~s~ and will contribute to a better quality golf experience by being located on the perimeter of the golf facility as apposed to in the center of golf holes. alt is assumed fhaf the completion of subsequenf phases, ouflined below, will be contingent an facfors such as available funding, markef conditions, and play levels/ demand}. Phase Vll: Build New 9~hole South Course This phase establishes a nine new holes on the former grounds of the Jack Clark Course. These nine holes, at 3,200 yards, par-35, will allow the Chuck Corica Galf Complex tv operate as a 2l-hale facility with an additional 3-hole learning center, National Golf Foundation Consulting, inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -- Chuck Corica Galf Complex - 6 Phase VIII; Build Remaining 8-holes of 18-hole South Course This phase establishes the remaining 6-holes required to bring the total number of golf holes to 36. Following this phase the configuration of the full golf complex may be operated as ~a}two 18-hole courses, fib} a 2l-hole operation with ane 9-hole course, or (c} one 18-hole and two 9- hole loops. The Mif Albright name will be attached to one component of the south area with the Earl Fry name attached to the north course and the Jack Clark name reserved fvrthe remaining course. Following Phase VIII, the City will have rebuilt the Chuck Corica Golf Complex, establishing a golf asset that is positioned for the future and flexible for a variety of operational configurations. Additional sources of revenue are maximized from re-use land areas made available through the re-building process. The completed guff complex will offer unique and distinctive gaff experiences. The Earl Fry Course will be marketed as the "Championship Course," complete with a pedigree IinkEng it to the classic era from which its design originates. These 18 holes will form the foundation for the golf experience at Chuck Corica -the Earl Fry will be the flagship course of~the facility, and will be the sought-after course. ft is expected that there will be significant price differential between the Earl Fry and the Jack Clark, and between residents and non-residents. The goal is to have the Earl Fry, in particular, be of such a quality that non-resident green fees will be high enough to essentially "subsidize" green fees far residents, a common model among higher-end municipal golf courses such as at Torrey Pines, where the 2008 U.S. Open was recently held}, The 18 holes tv the south will form an alternative golf experience -less length, less time and less intimidation. However, with multiple tee options, the challenge can be as intense as that offered by its sister course to the north. ay integrating returning loops to the southern 18 holes, management options abound for how the City operates the full facility. As noted, these options include; combining the longer nine ~of the south course with the 18 holes of the Earl Fry; operating the south as two 9~hofe courses; or, operating the south as ane 18-hale course of just under 6,D00 yards, par-68. MASTER PLAN Approach The Master Plan is a "road map" for recommended improvemen#s. The plan is organized to depict the full extent of improvements at the facility, but it is intentionally flexible in terms of how these improvements will be implemented. For example, the complete Master Plan could be undertaken at once. However, such an approach would require complete closure, full funding and the most intensive in#erruption of the City's offering of golf recreation. At the other end of the spectrum, adrawn-out approach to implement improvements over several years would allow same golf facilities tv remain open during the work and would not require full funding all at ane time. It would also allow for expansion as funding becomes available and market demand justifies. The downside of the drawn-out approach is slow realization of an increase in the asset and associated new revenues or benefits. The f nal approach to be selected by the City will be dependent an several lac#ors, Funding, impacts to operational budgets, closure of golf facilities and seasonal influences to golf construction windows are ail such examples. A recommended "Phasing Sequence" is outlined for consideration. Specific notes and comments on the rationale for this sequence accompanies National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan --Chuck Corica Golf Campiex - 9 the narra#ive for each sequence of phases. Some phases are essential to be carried out in a specifc sequence while others may be interchanged or deferred. These factors are also outlined. 0 b ject'rves The primary objective of the Master Plan is #o establish a program for improvements, and to associate the improvements with a specific improvement of the golf facility asset. The City enjoys an asset in the Chuck Corica Golf Complex, but that asset has been significantly reduced in value as conditions have not kept pace with competitive facilities. Further affecting the asset has been deferred capital improvements to many systems and infrastructures. The result is a combination of conditions that cannot be effectively managed because the cost to overcome the eroding systems is too costly and simply not within the City's means at this time. As noted throughout the previously completed operational review and assessment, the physical facility suffers many areas of poor condition. The assessment demonstrates that nearly ail of the areas of pour condition are spiraling downward as time marches on. This trend is confirmed based on recent work tv develop the Master Plan when more review of the course conditions were made by the master plan team. The writing on the wall is that a majority of the golf facility needs to be rebuilt. Areas that may not need full replacement are still in need of significant refurbishing. The Master Plan segments these components, taking full advantage of areas that can be corrected without full replacement. Of utmost impression to golfers, and ultimately the key to marketability of a golf course, is creating a positive golf experience. This objective involved many facets: aesthetics, conditions, interest, uniqueness, and good pace-vf-play. For every aspect listed there are numerous others as there is nv limit to how a golf course is judged. Ultimately, it is the combinative of elements that make a golf course appealing and will give it a higher for lower} value. The combination of positives and negatives make up the golf experience, a term used to def ne the overall sum of parts of the golf course. The golf experience is directly relative to the value of the golf course. Legacy ~ History The City of Alameda enjoys one of the few golf course facilities at which both William P. Bell and his son, William F. Bell, both contributed to the design. The Bells are significant in the development of golf in the Western U.S., having left their mark on numerous courses throughout California and neighboring states. At Alameda, the Bells completed work after WWII, transforming the City's single 1 S-hole course into a 36-hole facility. The original design of the North Course ~nvw known as the Earl Fry Course} is attributed to William J. Locke. I nformation that fellows has been extracted from the operational Review & Assessment prepared in September 2447. appendix B contains a full discussion of Alameda golf history and the Bell legacy. The legacy of design at the golf courses is remarkable. The North Course may well be the last course designed ~remvdeled} by 1Nlliam P. Bell on which construction began before his death in ~ 953. The origin of the North Course, having been remodeled significantly by Bell, is a significant legacy that should be preserved. While Desmond Muirhead's work to the North Course was also significant, budgets at the time this work was implemented did not allow for massive undertaking beyond lake work and some mounding. The Master Plan recognizes the Bell work as being the most significant and the most recognizable in the existing course. This is the work that should be upheld where practical. National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex - ~ d Unfortunately, the South Course was remodeled by Robert Muir Graves and also was not fully funded. Accounts indicate that the work of Graves was to be implemented in phases, but that most work was never completed, Much of the Bell work was eradicated and is no longer recognizable. The Master Plan favors the Bell work North Course} as being worthy of some degree of restoration and preservation, but concludes that the South Course is best as a fully re-designed golf course pursuant to the recommended sequencing and theme. The Golf Experience The Master Plan prepared for the Chuck Corica Golf Complex strives to create a positive and memorable golf experience at every opportunity. In drawing from the legacy of the Alameda community and the original "Alameda Municipal Golf Course," the recommendations for improvement begin with a return tv a more classic style at the Earl Fry Course. The aesthetics and "feel" of the Earl Fry Course will be one of a parkland golf course that has an ambiance of "walking back in time." The features and feel of the course after upgrades will be that of a traditional course of the "Golden Age" era of golf courses, a period generally set from the 1910 to 1935. During this period golf courses were largely built by rudimentary equipment and were set into the land. As the Earl Fry Course is largely flat, tremendous attention was paid to the greens during its heyday. Greens were large, undulating and guarded by bunkers with lacy edges during this era. Water features were largely functional in nature, often used to drain wet areas. The work outlined at the Earl Fry Course is intended to faithfully restore elements of the original Bell designed} course, incorporating Bell design philosophies to a new and improved design as if Bell were directing the work in this modern remake. A description of the "new" Earl Fry Caurse following implementation of the Master Plan reads as follows. The Earl Fry Course is a step back in time.. In its classic parkland setting, the course is reminiscent of the Golden Age of golf - a time when bunkers were rugged and their use was sparingly. The course draws from the design philosophy of William Park Bell and his son, William F. Bell. The Beiis, noted California pioneers of golf architecture, believed in strategic holes with tempting routes to overcome hazards. A round at the Earl Fry is like looking through the history pages of golf in Alameda. The feel of the Jack Clark Course is intentionally different from the pure and classic feel to be established at the Earl Fry Course. In contrast, the Jack Clark design approach is to create bold landforms across the landscape of the southern property. Through the phase of importing clean fill material, the southern land will become a series of rises with flowing hills and ridges. What are now low areas collecting water unable to drain, will became swales between higher ground. Importantly, the land will drain positively to designated water features and drainage ditches. Even though gulf holes an the southern area are likely to be completed at different times abased on sequence in phasing}, the style and appearance of the Jack Clary and Mif Albright golf courseslholes are one and the same. The spirit of the entire southern area of the golf complex is more windswept and less parkland. Fairways roll in and out between ridges and low hills, and trees appear in clusters with open areas and long views. National Galf Foundation Consulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Pian -- Chuck Corica Golf Complex -11 A description of the new 18 holes to the south ~bvth the Jack Clark Course and Mif Albright, regardless of haw the 18 holes are configured} following full implementation of the Master Plan reads as follows: Meandering through a landscape of windswept nature, these 18 holes form an intricate and demanding test of golf. From flowing hills to lowland lagoons, the fairways meander and the greens are nestled. Unlike its sister course to the north, the golf here is more open. Views are long, fairways rise and fall, and the trek is a return to the bayside terrain of days gone bye. The course is not long, the walk is comfortable and the time invested is rewarded, The sum of parts at the Chuck Corica Golf Complex is two distinct courses -- one with classic bones and the charm of yesteryear. The complement is a mare passive course with native landscaping, flowing features and "found" appearance as if the site were undisturbed from its natural state. Master Plan Phasing Sequence In terms of phasing sequence and options, the Master Plan remains flexible yet embraces a logical sequence. The sequence presented allows improvements to be made in phases, based on variables such as funding sources and golf demand. The phases recommended are "I" through "Viii," and are displayed in Appendix C to this report. The reuse potential of the Mif Albright acreage represents the most logical resource for funding to accomplish the improvements presented. By replacing the Mif Albright facility with an improved and more useful facility, the City is able to plan and implement a reuse of the existing acreage of the Mif Albright Course that may have potential to direct revenue tv the City. This may ultimately pave the way for funding all or part of the full complement of improvements contained within the Master Plan of the golf facility. The realization to open the existing Mif Albright area for reuse is among factors that suggest an approach to focus on upgrades to the Earl Fry (North) Course as a priority over upgrades to the Jack Clark (South) Course area. By upgrading the northern portion of the golf complex, the City realizes a benefit of improving conditions at the primary entry to the property as well as focusing on a quality refurbishment and remodel of the Earl Fry Course. Acceleration of upgrades to the North Course becomes prudent to increase the value of the Mif Albright land for any potential reuse. Additional factors contributing to the approach of focusing resources to the Earl Fry (North) Course include: 1. Deteriorating conditions at the Jack Clark Course with a solution path that is best met through importation of clean fil! material over a period of time. 2. Poor conditions of the Mif Albright Course, which is in need of significant improvement and will likely remain amoney-losing proposition even if improved. 3. Gonf guration of the Mif Albright Course, which dues not permit the comparatively large area tv be set-up for a variety of uses ~i.e., it is a 9-hole, par-3 course and cannot be easily re-configured for varying golf learning programs.} National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan --Chuck Corica Galf Campiex --12 4. A relatively new irrigation system at the Earl Fry Course, enabling investment dollars spent on the Earl Fry to make a larger impact on establishing afirst-rate and quality golf experience for the City of Alameda. 5. Current and expected market conditions may not support an immediate investment in, ar continued operating of, a 45-hole golf facility. The rationale to devise the Phasing Sequence was to think beyond the improvements and program that currently exist. By focusing on a quality golf experience with less total golf holes, the City realizes a more sound approach than working blindly to replace at all costs what exists today. Flexibility will be the key to the future of golf in Alameda, both in golf course offering, marketability and operations. The model to re-build what was planned and designed several decades ago is not ideally suited to today's golfer nor the realities of operating within a highly competitive region for public access golf. while improvements to the existing clubhouse area and uses, such as a new banquet facility or other improvements, are much needed, such impravements have the most potential to be realized under a plan where signifcant additional revenue is generated to fund the impravements. Improvements and additions to the aging and il!-suited existing structures clubhouse, restaurant, cart storage and meeting space} are not likely via a makeshift or parkial rehabilitation to the existing structures. The City of Alameda, in order to compete with area facilities, needs a dramatic change and the positive resulting consequence of such change. While it is possible to retrofit the existing buildings, such an undertaking that does not establish fully modern and new facilities is very likely to be a waste of effort and resources. This fact, combined with the reaiiza#ion that improved clubhouse facilities are best associated with a corresponding improvement in the golf courses}, suggests that clubhouse facilities only be improved when they can be adequately funded for full replacement with modern, state-of the-art new buildings. A private operator, in the short term, would likely study the banquet market and seek most cost effective way possible to meet market banquet need. Due to this and other reasons, including the fact that there is a food & beverage lessee in place, NGF Consulting has made no assumptions regarding the expansion of current banquet facilities, though we have allocated space for a temporary facility. Note is made that the range services and teaching buildings are not anticipated to be replaced in a rebuilding of clubhouse, restaurant, cart storage and banquet facilities, Existing buildings at the practice range would be integrated to new development plans. Phase I: Repair Practice Range Surfaces and Netting • Estimated Duration: 3-4 months. • Probable investment Cost: $~ 52,040. • Primary Benefits: Minimal repairs are made to the revenue-producing practice range. This phase establishes minimum repairs tv the existing practice range. Included are repairs to netting and artificial turf surfaces. It is intended that the practice range remain open except for isolated times in which repairs call for temporary closure. In addition, the phase includes an allowance to raze the abandoned f re training tower at the main entrance. National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson 8~ Assoc, Master Plan-- Chuck Corica Galf Complex-13 Phase II: Configure Temporary South Course (3 greens) • Estimated Duration:1-2 months. • Probable Investment Cost: $30,000. Primary Benefits: This work enables Phase .Ili to commence. This phase establishes three temporary greens at the Jack Clark Course, permitting this course to remain open as an 18-hole, par-fi7 layout during Phase III work. This Phase does not intend closure of the Jack Clark Course as the temporary greens will be established while the course is open for play. Phase ill: Renovate & Upgrade North Course • Es#imated Duration: Approximately 10 months. • Probable Investment Cost: $4.6 million. • Primary Benefits: The City establishes a high quality 18-hole golf course, returning the "point of pride" to the City's golf operation. This phase provides quality upgrades in the farm of remodeling, reconfguration and refurbishment of Alameda's original golf course established in 1927, now known as the Earl Fry Course. During this phase the Jack Clark Course remains open in a temporarily configured par- 6l layout and would constitute the City's only 18-hole golf course for a period of approximately 10 months. At the conclusion of this phase (inclusive of Phases I and I I) the improvements realized will be repairs to the practice range, razing of the abandoned fire tower, full rehabilitation of the Earl Fry Gotf Course and an upgraded entryway to the golf facility. It is anticipated that the Jack Clark Course will close immediately after the re-opening of the Earl Fry Course. Entryway to Golf Facility With the removal of the abandoned fire training tower, the gateway to the golf facility is enhanced with new s'rgnage and landscaping as part of this phase. Routing Adjustments The Earl Fry Course is remodeled to reflect new golf holes among many preserved holes that will be upgraded from existing holes. The course is transformed through rerouting of existing Hole Nos. 3,10,11,14,16 and 18; and, the elimination of existing Hole Nos. 4, 9,15 and 1l. Existing Hole Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 1, 8,12, and 13 are adjusted with a combination of tee, fain~vay and green modifications. Entirely new holes include new Hvle Nos. 6 and 7 {using area from the existing Jack Clark Course}, and Hale Nos. 11,16 and 17. The improvements reflect slightly more yardage, yielding a course measuring fi,100 yards from the back tees and playing to spar-~2, The front nine par is 3l; the back nine par is 35. The front nine has a single par-3 while the back nine features three par-3s. The routing adjustment has been configured tv meet several objectives, including good pace-of-play, varying direction, returning nines, balanced yardage between the nines, a variety of hazards and distinctive holes. Safety to adjoining holes and property has been carefully planned to minimize conflicts. More room is afforded to the 18-hole course by bringing new land into the plan from the south course's existing Hole Nos.11 through 14. National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Carica Galf Complex -14 Arbor Care Significant quantities of trees at the Earl Fry Course hand north areas} are in poor health, have exposed roots at the surface or have been planted too close to one another. The Master Plan provides for apprvpria#e tree removal, root removal, and tree replacement in isolated locales. A specific arbor care plan will be developed as part of the re-design work tv the golf course. Typically, such plans are prepared using detailed GPS surveys integrated to the full construction documents prepared for construction. The Master Plan anticipates associated work to prune certain trees tv remain. Primary Irrigation Lake The primary irrigation lagoon at the Earl Fry Course is caving in at the edges and has caused significant issues with the irrigation system. In the work outlined in the Master Plan, the primary irrigation lagoon is re-built entirely to a new shape and depth, and with a reinforced shoreline. The probable cost estimate prepared anticipates re-lining the lake bottom, establishing a new pumphvuse, installing a new intake for the irrigation system and adding aforced-air aeration system. The specific type of lining and shoreline stabilization is to be determined based on further study and engineering. The probable cast assumes an HDPE or similar lining with a rock-filled gabion mattresses at the edge slopes. Drainage Drainage at the Earl Fry Course is compromised as a result of a flat site and soils that do not adequately allow water tv percolate downward into subsoils. The drainage approach for the course is to improve existing lagoons and sloughs to serve in dewatering areas, and to install a network of drain lines that connect to vaults where forced pumping can exit collected water to lagoons and sloughs. The Master Plan allows far nine strategically located vaults that sit approximately 4-5 feet below grade. These vaults become the low points to which drain lines feed water. At each vault a submerged pump activa#es when water is present, forcing the collected water to nearby sloughs, drainage ditches or lagoons. Features expanded, new and re-built} are drained internally and connect to the system described. Tees New tee surfaces will be created out of existing tees. All tees are scheduled to be fully re- surfaced with new turf. Tees are designed in a classic rectangular form, aligned to the ideal target and landing areas. Greens Greens are expanded in the case of existing green sites reused for the transformed course. Large, undulating greens are a hallmark of classic courses and are integrated to the Earl Fry design. New greens are formed from existing fill in areas of new greens. The greens, when completed, form a collection of interesting putting surfaces based on classic-era style and design. For example, multiple level surfaces will grace a few greens and a "punchbowl" style green will be at new Hole No. fi. A punchbowl green is a largely depressed putting surface, often partially hidden from the fairway. The concept for green development is to use existing greens and to reestablish the Bell style of greens that is found on courses of the Gulden Age X1910-1935.} Bell was known for "potato chip" formed greens --large surfaces with flowing gradients to adjoining mounds. Bunkers are greens were formed into these mounds as if dug out from the forms after the land was formed. The plan calls for six ~6} new greens and twelve X12} expanded greens on the reconfigured course. National Golf Fvundativn Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Galf Complex -15 Bunkers The Master Plan shows 28 total bunkers. Each is a fully rebuilt or new bunker with new drainage and sand. This quantity is nearl~r the same as the existing course, but bunkers shown on the Master Plan include a variety of greenside and fairway bunkers with placement more strategic than present. The current course suffers from "military placement," a left and right cadence that becomes predictable to the golfer. The design aesthetic for new bunkers is to farm edges that are intentionally left somewhat natural in appearance at the back edges. Bunkers are set into the grade as opposed tv being perched, or elevated, above the fairways. Careful placement minimizes the need for over- bunkering or a reliance on complicated drainage. In essence, bunkers have been in#entionally omitted from problem areas of drainage. VII<a#er Hazards The site is crisscrossed by a network of drainage sloughs ~canals~, ditches and lagoons. While these can become tiresome, the Master Plan organizes the way the golf course interacts with these features. A combination of elimination, redirection, and new strategy will allow a predominance of the existing waterways to remain, and will articulate tv the golf experience in a much better manner. Water hazards come into play at eight holes: Nos. 4, 5, 7, 12,14,15,16 and 18. While water is present at some other holes, it is not inherent to the strategy and will not be a common hazard. Water hazards are currently present on nine hales of the existing course, with several other areas of potential impact. Reconfiguration of water hazards is in the form of canal edge clean-up and rebuilding the main irrigation lagoon knew Hole Nos.1 and 18.E New Hole Nos.1 2,14,16, and 18 will constitute the most dramatic changes with diverse water hazards. At No. 12, the golfer must negotiate a lay- up of exact length in order to fall short of the canal. At Hole No. 14, the new green location requires exact alignment and rewards the tee shot played nearer to the canal from the tee. At No.16, a short par-3 is virtually an island sitting in the crook of the primary drainage "rive' that runs through the course. And, at Nv.18, the hole winds in between the two lobes of the main lake with a fairway that feels as if it is a narrowing peninsula. Cart Paths The Master Plan depicts a full cart path system with all new concrete paths. The plan integrates path alignment to the strategy sv that impacts to visibility and play are minimized, while allowing access by carts. Irrigation The Master Plan assumes a re-built irrigation system with new controls and heads to form a perimeter system whereby non-managed areas can be omitted from regular irrigation schedules. It is assumed that the in-place main lines will remain for 75°/Q of the system, with some new main lines necessary to allow for rerouting and remodeling. Lateral fines will be preserved where practical. The approach to irrigation is #o retain cerkain components based on a full design process where the maximum benefit can be gained using the established budget. Ample budget has been anticipated based on known conditions and a review of the system as it was installed within the past decade. National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan --Chuck Corica Golf Complex - ~ 6 Turfgrass Turrgrass is intended to be retained at greens and augmented with a blend of bentgrass selected based on compatibility to existing green turf. Tees and surrounds of greens, as well as new fairway areas, will be replanted by seed using a blend of ryegrass selected based on the microclimate of this area of Alameda. Water Use Water use, following re-building work, will be reduced and made more efficient. The irrigation system will be upgraded with greater control and integrated monitoring beyond that currently afforded to the course. Management will be able to control water use in greater detail. This, combined with a reduction in managed #urf area Eby an estimated 35 acres} will translate to a better conditioned course with fewer wet spots and dry areas, and better irrigation coverage. Restroom 1 Sewer Upgrades No in-depth study or engineering has been completed to conf rm general assumptions that existing restrovm facilities at the Earl Fry Course are in need of improvement. It has been noted by staff that the sewer lines andlor connections are in need of repair, The plan tv upgrade the Earl Fry Course includes some potential rerouting of existing small sewer lines. The Probable Cost included with the Master Plan allows for restroomisewer upgrades totaling $5D,DD0. Course signage & Furnishings The Master Plan, in budget allowance, provides for improved and new tee signage and course furnishings such as benches, markers and on-course signage. The look and feel is intended to recapture the classic-era feel of the facility, establishing finishing touch details on the overall course rehabilitation. Phase 111: Close South Course for Fill importation • ~ Estimated Duration: ~ ~ months for longer}, • Probable Investment Cost: -D-. • Probable Revenue: $~,DDD,DDD. • Primary Benefits: This work enables the City to realize a revenue source and establish both a differentiation and soils benefit to the south course area. This phase permits the City to solicit clean fill material (soils) to be imported to the Chuck Corica Golf Complex south course area (existing Jack Clark Course) for the purpose of raising grades, establishing new features and generating revenue. Excavation companies in the Bay Area are readily available to contract with land owners willing to receive f it material. These contractors will pay to f nd close proximity land areas #v haul fill material. The current rate at the time of this Master Plan Report is approximately $~.DD per cubic yard ~c.y.} paid to the receiving land owner by the excavationlhauling contractors. The Master Plan team estimates that an impvr#ation volume of ~ ,DDD,DDO c.y. of clean f II material would be benefcial for the reasons stated. Additional material beyond this volume could be handled based on further study. Essential to this phase is adequate planning and design to delineate areas and volumes desired at the south course area. Careful planning in placement ~e.g., a "Placement Plan"}will allow the City to additionally realize the benefit of not having to further re-loco#e Shaul again} imported fill material at such time as it becomes feasible tv construct new golf holes at the south course area ~i.e., subsequent Phases V, VII, and VIII.} National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan --Chuck Gorica Golf Complex -17 The importation of clean fill material is generally subject to a contract establishing the time, frequency, rate paid and testing of deliveries made to the receiving party's property. The City, through such contracting, would be protec#ed as tv the type of material and safeguards against any environmentally unsuitable materials brought onto the Chuck Corica site. Phase V: Build New ~{ifAibright Teaching Facility • Estimated Duration: 6 months. • Probable Investment Cost; $960,000 ~$30D,DOD per hale plus designlengineering fees}. • Primary Benefits; This work establishes a replacement facility forthe existing Mif Albright facility. This phase replaces the existing Mif Albright 9-hole par-3 course with a flexible~use teaching area comprises a 3-hole, regulation length "loop." This 3-hole loop consists of two par-4 holes and one par-3 hole. Multiple tees and fairway areas allow the #acility to beset-up in various configurations, including: • Stand-alone 3-hole practice "loop" • Short game stations at three separate green areas bunker, chipping and pitch} • "Mini" driving range area • "Wee Links Course" with miniature par-5s, 4s and 3s • Simultaneous use, such as short game at the north and separate short game lessons at the south Tees, bunkers, rough, fairways and greens at the new Mif Albright Teaching Area have been planned to allow flexible use and, at the same time, serve as a regulation length loop of three golf holes. The yardages are as follows: • No. 1, 350-yards par-4 X260 yards to 385 yards} • No. 2, 90-yards, par-3 ~l0 yards to 110 yards} • No. 3, 304-yards, par-4 X195 yards to 345 yards} In its configuration as amini-course, it might be set to play far young children as a par-5, par~3, and par-4 "loop" where a variety of shuts can be learned and practiced. The intent of the replacement facility is to provide the City with a more useful learning center than is afforded with a stand-alone 9-hole, short par-3 course operation. White stand-alone short courses can be useful and appealing, they are difficult to make profitable and can be a drain on resources with regard to maintenance and care. Vvith nine separate greens and tees, hazards and regular mowing and irrigation, a short 9-hole course takes a comparatively high percentage of maintenance, It is not practical to simply use a ration of acres tv acres when comparing the required maintenance of a short 9-hole par-3 course to that of a regulation 9-hale course, At the existing Mif Albright Course the additional issue of use is a factor. New golfers -~- kids, adults and seniors ---- rarely want to continue to use short courses once they "graduate" to a level where they can play a longer course. While the occasional round is often desirable on a learning course, the new golfer who masters the game will become .less enticed by the very short course, especially when it is not in ideal condition, may not have "regulation" sized greens National Galf Foundation Consulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson 8~ Assac, Master Plan --Chuck Corica Golf Complex --18 and may not offer yardages that allow a variety of shots to be played, Alternatively, the 3-hole loop as planned is less intensive with regard to maintenance and has a long term use as an integral part of a completed south course for the City. This phase assumes same degree of imported fill has been brought to the south course areas. Additionally, this work would draw from the Earl Fry Course irrigation system with potential retroftting to a south course Jack Clark Course} system pending development of more new golf holes at the south area. Phase Ill: Relocate Maintenance Facility 1 Build New Green • Estimated Duration:l2 months. • Probable Investment Cost: $2,060,000 x$1,500,000 for maintenance; $500,000 for relocation of the communications facilities; and $60,000 to build a new green for Hole No. 17}, • Primary Benefi#s. This work replaces the aging maintenance facility, establishes a new state-of the ar# facility, relocates "back-of house" facilities away from the center of the City's "crown jewel" golf course, and creates a better No.17 green with associated challenge along the waterway. This phase relocates the existing maintenance facilities, establishing a new facility along Harbor Bay Parkway. The new facility covers approximately 3.5 acres and would house all existing maintenance facilities, fuel, and the communications buildingltower that currently shares area with the maintenance yard. Maintenance facilities are ideally located proximate to the full golf course facility. While having a facility yard} atone end, or non-central, can function, it poses inefficiencies to crews accessing those distal areas. The new location is situated #o be efficient in terms of access to the Earl Fry Course and future south course areas. ingress and egress to the new facility is much better than the existing condition of having deliveries and employees access the facility from an elevated roadway, traveling through the active play areas of the Earl Fry Course, and with staging of debris, equipment and activity literally in the midst of an active golf course. The newly planned facility has good access from Harbor Bay Parkway and does not require travel through the course. Access to and from the existing facility, for example, is via aright-in, right-out traffic requirement, yet this is rarefy observed. This is a potentially hazardous condition and is mitigated with the new facility where .grades would likely permit turns into and exiting to be both right and left. The new facility will be screened and out of sight, compared to the existing facility where buildings, storage and equipment are on display to golfers on several holes. The new No. 17 green is situated along the canal (drainageway) and lengthens the hole by approximately 60 yards. The new green would feature a surface directly on the precipice of the canal, and would offer a new challenge to the risk-taking golfer who might boldly attempt to reach a left and back positioned hole. Phase Vll: Build Mew 9~hale South Course • Estimated Durativn:10 months for longer}. • Probable Investment Cost: $3,000,000 ~$300,D00 per hole plus designlengineeringlirrigation designlconstruction management fees}. National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan --Chuck Carica Galf Complex -- ~ 9 « Primary Benefits: This work establishes a new 9-hole course. This phase may be viewed as a replacement for the Jack Clark Course in the form of a 9-hole stand-alone course. Alternatively, Phase VII may be looked at as an adjunct 9-hole course to be operated with the Earl Fry Course, offering a 27-hole golf facility for the City. While there are options to phasing, the phasing sequence presented within the Master Plan calls for the nine holes in this phase to be the regulation length nine holes as shown on the south area. These holes, depicted as 1-9 of the south area, comprise a 3,200-yard, par-35 course with tee flexibility ranging from 2,245-yards to 3,225-yards. vVith its new landscape of imported fill and undulating fairways, the presentation of the new south course is more apes than the more parkland Earl Fry ~norkh} Course. See subsequent description.} In following the phasing sequence presented, the interior of the completed twelve holes these nine holes along with the Phase V work to establish the new Mif Albright Learning Facility} allow for further clean fill importation if desired by the City, dependent on the logistics of importation with an open for use golf facility. Phase ~IlI: Build Remaining 6-holes of 9 8-hole South Course « Estimated Durativn:1 D months for longer}. • Probable Investment Cost: $2,000,000 x$300,000 per hole plus designlengineeringlirrigation designlconstructivn management fees}. « Primary Benefts: This work completes the full re-building and improvements envisioned by the Master Plan, 36-holes in total with flexible configurations. This phase is the culmination of improvements envisioned by the Master Pian relative to golf ~i.e., golf holes, maintenance and practice area} improvements. The asset, following this phase, is established as a 36-hole facility with flexible operating configurations. The remaining six holes covered by this phase are precision in length. These holes, when combined with the Mif Albright 3-hole, forma 9-holes with a yardage range of 1,565-yards to 2,450-yards playing to a par-33. This length of course is referred tv as a "Precision" course or an "Executive Course." The completed Chuck Corica Golf Complex may be operated in the following configurations: • Earl Fry 18-hole + 9-hole Regulation Course + 9-hole Precision-length Course « Earl Fry 18-hole + 18-hole Precision Course • 27-hole Regulation ~3 nines} + 9-hole Precision Course • 27-hole Regulation ~3 nines} + 2 short practice loops beach of varying holes} Narrative of improvements: Ears Fr~r Course ~Hoie-b~-Hoie~ Hale Na.1, 375-35a-3D5 Yards, Park The ideal opening hale is straightforward and presents isolated trouble for the golfer. With an expanded fairway and a new bunker complex to help guide the golfer, this park sets the stage for the "new" Earl Fry Course. At the "Alameda Municipal Gvlf Course" as played in the early 195os, this hale was played as No. 17, also apar-4. The fairway will be widened to assist in forgiving most first-tee shots. The existing waterway that partially crosses the fairway is reinstalled underground and will no longer come into play. National Golf Foundation Cansulting,lnc, and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 20 The nominal length does not overtax the golfer, yet yardage has been maintained in order to effectively load the starting hol~with two groups and allow for proper pace management. The green is expanded and re-bunkered at the left. A band of non-managed turf native area} is established between the cart path and the entry read at the left. A similar non-managed area is immediately right of the tees and along the slough for a few hundred feet. Play is retained along the general alignment of the existing golf hole with appropriate buffers to the entry road to the golf complex. • Rebuilt tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fairway drainage • Fairway smoothing isolated locations} • Expand maintained fairway; remove selected trees • New fairway bunker complex ~2 bunkers} • New cart path • Expanded green • New bunker at green cleft} • Establish non-managed native} areas at edges Hose No~ 2, 5g5-4B0-385 Yards, Par~5 New Hole No. ~ was originally played as the No.18, a par-5 of the same length shown in the Master Pian. This relatively short par-5 is lengthened slightly from the existing yardage. This is accomplished through the demolition of the old fire training tower, a task integrated #o the Phase I work list. New tees will be established in the area of the old fire tower. This accommodates the yardage adjustment and also angles the tee shots away from the adjacent roadway to reduce the occurrences of errant balls. Tee relocation also allows for the future realignment of the drainage slough from the south. This slough will align between the back of the No.1 green and the new No. 2 tees. Carts will eventually crass the slough along the north side of the entry road bridge. The desig n strategy of No. 2 is focused on placement of the second shat, or long approach to the green in the case of the longer player. The hole will not have any bunkers, but short and right of the green area a mound will stand guard. This mound will partially conceal the green if tee shuts are to the right. The mound will serve as a focal point for the approach, and will defend direct-line second shots to the green. The strategy suggests that the second shot be played to the left where the improved fairway is widened and receptive. The green is slightly expanded from the existing size and shape. • Rebuilt tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fairway drainage • Float fairway ~isoiated locations} • Expand maintained fairway; remove selected trees • Establish new mound right and short of green • New cart path • Expand green • Establish non-managed native} areas at left edge National Gvlf Foundation Consulting, inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golt Complex - 21 Hale No. 3, 400-3B0-310 Yards, Par-4 This hole is approximately in the alignment of the original Nv.1 hole. The realignment serves to eiirninate the dog-leg and associated conflicts with errant balls of the existing hole around the Grand View Pavilion located on Island Drive. Additionally, realignment permits re-use of the land at the corner of Island Drive and Doolittle Drive by removing from the routing the No. 4 hole, a par-3. The approximate land area available for re-use is 6.d acres and is adjoining the existing Grand Pavilion and parking area accessed from Island Drive. The new Na. 3 hole is a~ medium-length par-4 with a bunker defining the tee shot. This lone bunker is set at X40 yards from the regular #ees, setting up a choice for the better player to play slightly left or to #ry and bypass the bunker for a more direct route tv the green. The green is expanded and remodeled using the site of the existing No. 4 green. The green is L-shaped with a rise toward the back and right. A single bunker sits at the lower left of the "new" green. A band of native grass flanks the left of the hole, yet plenty fairway and rough width has been retained through the length of the hole. The hole shares rough with Hole No.15 right of the landing area. • Realigned hole to improve safety to ad}oining uses • Rebuilt tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fairway drainage • Expand maintained fairway; remove selected trees • Fairway smoothing fall areas} • New fairway bunker and mound • New cart path • Expanded green brings lagoon into play at right} • Rebuilt bunker a# green aback} • Establish non-managed native} areas at left of lagoon, around tees and to right Hale No. 4, 3g5-345-23D Yards, Par-4 This par-4, although a similar length to the previous hole, is a different experience by way of the water and strategy of the tee shot and approach. By removing selected trees and widening the fairway, the lagoons are brought more into the strategy and yet the hole becomes more forgiving for the player of lesser ability. Placement of the tee shot sets up different angles to the enlarged green, and brings the edges of the lagoons into "tempting" range of better players. The green is expanded to the right, bringing the lagoon into play at the approach. Hole location will be as key to strategy as the enlarged green will require different approach shots depending vn hole location. • Rebuilt tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New cart and walking bridge • New fairway drainage • Fairway smoothing isolated locations} • New fairway bunker and mound • New cart path • Expanded green from existing No. 4} • New bunker at green ~Ivwer left} • Establish non-managed native}areas at left edge and in key locations to right National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson ~ Assac. Master Plan - Chucl< Corica Galf Complex - 22 Hale No. 5, 5~o~5Da-3g5 Yards, Par-5 New Hole No. 5 was originally played as No, 3, a par-5 of shorter length tv the current No, fi. This bending hole plays left along a stand of trees and a drainage ditch as the fairway nears the green. The hole is left mostly intact, with adjustments to the tee locations, fairway, green and bunkering. The tees are shifted slightly uphill from their present location. The fairway mounds are removed with this material being used tv shape features elsewhere on the remodeled course. The green is expanded with a new bunker set short and a new bunker at the front. The green is reshaped to be a Ivng green from front to back, An attempt to reach the green in two shots must negotiate the short bunker and avoid the drainage ditch water hazard} to the left. Trees are thinned and removed in selected areas. The fairway is widened and brought closer to the left edges and water hazard. • Relocated and rebuilt tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fairway drainage • Float fairway ~isvlated locations} and eliminate fairway mounds • Expand maintained fairway; remove selected trees • Establish new bunker and mound short of green • New cart path • Expand green • New bunker at green flower right} • Establish non-managed native} areas at left and right edges Hole No. fi, 3~D-30Q-Z55 Yards, Par-4 For the Earl Fry Course, Hole Nv. fi is a new hole created from the existing alignment of the No. ~ 2 Hoie at the Jack Clark Course. This new use brings into play the interesting rise in elevation at this area of the properly. The new area of the Earl Fry Course Hole Nos. 6 and 7} also allows yardage to be increased appropriately to reflect a more challenging "championship" length. In increasing yardage, however, flexible tee locations and sizes permit a wide range of yardages. Vl~ith new tees set lower than the fairway landing area, play at this short par-4 is uphill to a crowned fairway bordered by trees. The fairway is intentionally wide to promote placement choice at the tee shat. The entrance to the green is narrow at the front. The green is a new green, rebuilt from the location of the existing Nv.12 green of the Jack Clark Course. The conceptual green design is a "punchbowl" with a lowered surface set into a string of mounds and ridges. From the fairway only the top portion of the flagstick will be visible from any angle. The hole allows for long tee shots or more carefully placed lay-up tee shots to precise locations where the best visibility to the green can be achieved. • New hale created from existing Jack Clark Course No. ~ 2} • New tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fairway drainage • Fairway smoothing fall areas} • Expand maintained fairway; remove and thin selected trees • New cart path • New green ~"punchbowl" design} • Establish non-managed native} areas at all edges National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan - Chuck Carica Golf Complex - 23 Hale N8.7, 41 a-390w~oa Yards, Par-4 New Hole No. 7 utilizes the area currently played as No.13 of the Jack Clark Course. This new hole for the Earl Fry Course is a rebuilt version of the 13th at the Jack Clark Course with a new green shifted significantly away from Harbor Bay Parkway. A new fairway bunker encourages play away from the roadway and tree removal along the right toward the new green area} opens the play alignment further away from Harbor Bay Parkway. This medium length par-4 plays from the tee to a slightly crowned fairway with an approach that is significantly downhill to a green set along the drainage ditch water hazard.} The trees at the right will affect play from the preferred #ee shot position, which is toward the right. From the right of the fairway away from the roadway} the green is more receptive, easier to hold and less influenced by the water hazard that runs diagonally at the right hand below} the new green. The angle from the right also is less encumbered by the greenside bunker set at the left and front of the green. • New hole created from existing area at the Jack Clark Course Na. ~ 3} New tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fairway drainage • Fairway smoothing ~a11 areas} • Expand maintained fairway; remove and thin selected trees • New cart path • New green and greenside bunker • Establish non-managed native} areas at all edges Hole No. ~, 215-194-139 Yards, Par-3 New Hole No. 8 is the single par-3 on the front outward} nine of the "new" Earl Fry Course. The "new" green is currently home to the No. 11 green. This green will be expanded and remodeled to accommodate the new hole. Play is across the existing drainage ditch from elevated tees. As opposed to the wedged-in nature of the previous area where Hole Nos. 11 and 14 of the Jack Clark Course and Hole No. 11 of the Earl Fry Course were located, the new par-3 will sit within an open area with improved aesthetics. The green is very large with multiple hole locations across two distinct levels. A large "Sahara" type bunker is nestled into the right edge of the green, creating a C-shaped form with guarded hole placement locations. The hole has extremely flexible yardage from 150- to 215-yards. • New hole created from existing area a# the Jack Clark Course Nos. 11 and • No.14 tees • New tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fairway drainage • Fairway and approach smoothing fall areas} • Remove and thin selected trees • New cart path • Expand green; two levels • New bunker at green fright} • Establish non-managed native}areas at all edges National Galf Foundation Consulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson & Assoc, Master Plan --Chuck Corica Gaff Complex - 24 Hole NQ. g, 3~4-36a-3a5 Yards, Par-4 The closing hole tv the front outward} nine is a remodeled version of the existing No,1 ~ Hole. This par-4 will play to a wide fairway, split by a pronounced mound and bunker, Thee new bunkers site at the left of the reshaped green. The "new" green is elongated, The riskier route is to the left of the fairway bunker. This trims yardage from the hole but brings into play the trio of greenside bunkers. The less risky route is to the right of the fairway bunker. As with other areas of the course, non-managed turf native areas} are established surrounding the improved rough and fairway areas. • Rebuilt tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fairway drainage • Fairway smoothing isolated locations} • Expand maintained fairway; remove selected trees • New fairway bunker and mound; creates split fairway • New cart path • Expanded green • Three new bunkers at green fat left} • Establish non-managed native}areas at edges Hole Na. ~ 0, 4~D-3T5w3t q Yards, Par-4 This hole is approximately in the alignment of the original Nv.14 hole of the Alameda Municipal Golf Course layout. Adjustments include a major reworking of the main irrigation lake that crosses the new No.18 fairway. This lake was not a part of the original Alameda Municipal design, but is necessary to serve the modern irrigation system. The new No.1 ~ Hole is a straight-a-way par-4. Play is to a generally wide fairway with an approach to the existing green at No. 13, slightly remodeled with a rebuilt greenside bunker. • Rebuilt tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fairway drainage • Expand maintained fairway; remove selected trees • Fairway smoothing fall areas} • Remodeled lake shared with No. 18} • New cart path • Expanded green • Rebuilt bunker at green front right} • Establish non-managed native} areas right of tee area Hole Na. ~ 1, ~5D-z~Q-1fi~ Yards, Par-3 This 'rs a new hole, created in the area of the existing No. 9 fairway. The lake that currently guards the No. 9 green is removed filled}, with the area used to collect drainage and house the drainage sumps described with the Drainage section. The new No. 11 Hole is the longest of the par-3s at the Earl Fry Course. The green is shown as a "Biarritz," a classic green style where the forward and rear portions are raised compared to a lower, center section, The center portion of a Biarritz green is typically well below the raised "decks" by as much as 5-1 d feet. The Biarritz green affords interesting strategy, creating tee shat decisions that are dependent on hole location. often, such greens encourage run-upshots as apposed to aerial approaches. National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -- Chuck Carica Golf Complex - 25 The history of the Biarritz is as follows from On Course, A Dictionary of Galf Course Terms}: "Name bestowed to an typically penal and long par-3 hole, usually playing over a perilous hazard and seemingly impossible to reach from the tee; the name comes from a hole golf which course architect C.B Macdonald saw at Biarritz, France at the Biarritz la Phare Course built by Willie Dunn X1888}; the original hole did not last long as it was too hard far the times; about three years after the course was opened a hotel was built on the cliff and the tee moved thus changing the angle of play and the length of the hole fit f Wally ended up 110 yards, but was originally 220 yards}; the hole was the No. 3 hale and was called the "Chasm" in reference to play from an 80-foot high cliff over a portion of the Bay of Biscay to a 50-foot cliff beyond; Macdonald remained intrigued by the origina[ hole and finally built a ground level version at Piping Rock's No. 9; from then on, Macdonald, Seth Rayner and Charles Banks built one such hole on every full course they completed. Each "Biarritz Hole,n as they called them, was between 220 to 245 yards in length and extremely penal. Yale's Nv. 9 is a very literal version and plays over water; the great 15th at Cypress Point was perhaps the best "Biarritz" ever routed by Raynor and finally modified by Alister MacKenzie in the eventual design and building; a common characteristic of a Biarritz Hole is a very deep swale Hof turf crossing in front of the green, or crossing within the green itself." The Biarritz at the Earl Fry is not intended to play penal in nature, but rather as an extension of the classic style embraced by the original 1920s era layout. While no Biarritz was a part of the original Alameda Municipal Course, the integration of this type of hole will create another dimension to marketing and awareness. No public course in the area can beast a classic hole of this type. At the right of the green are bumps and hollows, an area of rough left intentionally with small hills to guard the right side. This area will be tied #o the drainage area flow area mentioned above. • New hole created from existing Nv. 9 area} • New tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fairway drainage • Fairway smoothing fall areas} • Remove and thin selected trees to accommodate new hole and green area • Remove existing lake • New cart.path • New green ~"Biarritz" design} • Area of bumps and hollows at right of green and approach • Establish non-managed native} areas at all edges HQIe No. 12, 3$4-354-27D Yards, Par-4 This hole used the existing No.10 green with new tees, aligned at a dog-leg angle to the existing fairway and green. The fairway area is significantly widened. The hole offers arisk- reward decision from the tee as the canal drainage ditch crossing the fairway does so at the yardage of a typical landing area. Bold players may attempt to out-drive the canal, setting up a shorter approach. Lay-upshots from the tee will leave atwo- or three-club extra approach yardage. There are nv bunkers designed into the new hole. National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forres# Richardson $~ Assoc. . Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 2fi • Rebuilt tees ~3 separate surfaces in a new area} • Realigned fairway, using the general area of the existing No.10 fairway • New fairway drainage • Expand maintained fairway; remove selected trees protect oaks at left} • Fairway smoothing fall areas} • New cart path • Expanded green • Establish non-managed native} areas around tees and along left of hole Hole No. ~3, 2D4~17Q-~40 Yards, Par~3 This hole is a renovated hole from existing Hole No. 7. Tees and bunkers are rebuilt with nominal adjustments to the elevated green. Study of the ~ 939 aerial shows this green site as being original with similar bunkering. This par-3 is medium length compared to others. of note is that each par-3 has been configured with a different direction and varying lengths. • Rebuilt tees ~2 primary surfaces} • • New fairway drainage • • Fairway smaathing fall areas} • ~ New cart path • ~ Slightly expanded green • ~ Rebuilt bunkers at green • ~ Establish non-managed native}areas behind back tee and around green area Hole No. ~ 4, 43~-~9g~3~ ~ Yards, Par-4 This remodeled hale from existing No. 8 calls for a new green, shifted along the drainage canal. While the existing hole uses the canal as a hazard, tree growth hand planting} has gradually caused the edge of the canal to become detached from the improved fairway. Play on the existing hole is well away from the cans! and therefore the canal does not pose the strategy brought into the mind of the golfer when the tees were moved tv the west side of the canal. By making the adjustments shown and described, the hole becomes a "Boundary Hale" where play is across a diagonal hazard the canal} and then directly along the canal for the remainder of the journey to the green. The more parallel the approach, the less threatening the canal at the green. However, the tee shot that is played well away from the canal will impose an angle toward the green that will bring the flanking canal into play. This becomes the strategy and the concept of the hole: to bring thought into the placement of each shot as the golfer gets nearer tv the green. Plenty of bail-out room is available to the right of the green #or the player who is more conservative in their approach to the now-guarded putting surface. A Zone "pot" bunker sits at the right edge of the green as an obstacle to shots left short ar right. • Rebuilt tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fainNay drainage • Float fairway isolated locations} • Expand maintained fairway; remove selected trees toward left, along canal} • Remove canal "road", allowing fairway to border canal • New cart path • New green along canal edge bail-out area at right} National Golf Foundation Consulting, inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan - Chuclc Corica Golf Complex - 2l • New "pot" bunker at right of green • Establish non-managed ~nat'lve} areas at right and along hole Hale No. 15, 5~5-51525 Yards, Par-5 This "new" hole is a combination of existing Hole Nos.14 and 15, The new hole is similar to the original hole, ~a par-5 that followed the waterway edge to create what 'rs known as a "Cape" Hale, By combining these two existing holes a long par-5 is created, eliminating the lake that now forms Hale No. 15. This lake is deteriorating with significant sloughing occurring along all edges and at the green, Metal bulkheads installed at the green are rusting and will not last. This lake is decorative and not a functional lake for irrigation purposes. The decision to fill-in this lake is based on several factors, including the poor conditions of the edges, poor water quality from a lack of circulation and the extreme penal nature of the water hazard a# the current par-3, No. 15. Because the lake is not integral to the irrigation system, it offers a advantage to the full remodeling by allowing excavated cart path debris and other unsuitable materials organics and soils} generated from the work at the Earl Fry Course to be buried beneath layers of compacted soils. In essence, the existing lake will serve as a needed fill area far materials generated from the remodeling work. The new No.15 hole will generally play to a yardage of 520 yards as the back tee is intended for only occasional use. A fairway bunker is added at the left. Trees are selectively removed along the right, opening views to the waterway. As the fairway gets nearer to the green, trees are removed, allowing the fairway to extend nearly to the edge of the waterway, The green is remodeled from the existing green at No.15. • New par-5 hole created from existing Nos.1 and 15 • Rebuilt tees ~3 separate surfaces} • New fairway drainage • Float fairway isolated locations} • Expand maintained fairway; remove selected trees toward left, along waterway} • Create fairwaylapproach at existing lake Ito be filled and developed to fairway} • Establish new fairway bunker • New cart path • Expanded green from existing No.15 green} • New bunkers at green • Establish non-managed native} areas Hole Na.1 fi, ~ 54-1 d~4•~ 20 Yards, Par-3 This is a new hole created within the crook of the primary waterway drainage canal} that runs through the Earl Fry Course. In the original layout of the course, this area was used for tees, as is the present case. In developing a new plan for the course, this area has been utilized to form a "signature" par-3 with an island-like setting. By forming a new green within the oxbow of the waterway, the golfer is given a short, but demanding, shot to a large green with multiple hole locations. The hole length can vary from 100 yards to more than 160 yards depending on tee and hole placements. • New par-3 hole created using existing landfvrms • Rebuilt tees ~3 separate levels vn a single tee feature} • New fairway drainage National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson ~ Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 28 • Ffvat fairway areas • Remove selected trees at green area • Lower existing No.16tee area; plant with native grasses • New cart path . • New green • Establish non-managed (native} areas Hole IWa, ~?', 375-355-285, Par-4 This hole is created ever two phases (Phase Ifl and Phase VI.} In Phase fll the Earl Fry Course is rebuilt, creating No.1l as a short par 4 playing roughly 300 yards to a green positioned along the existing maintenancelcommunica#ionsfacllities. Following Phase VI the green is relocated along the watenNay (canal} to for the final envisioned hole. The hole is a slight dog-leg right tv an elevated green guarded by the canal set along the back left. The fairway bends around a lone bunker with trees left in place at both sides. The ideal tee shot is ane played left of center as this sets up a more favorable approach angle to the green. • New par-4 hole created using existing fairway areas • Rebuilt tees (3 separate surfaces) • New fairway drainage • Float fairway areas • Remove selected trees • New cart path • New green • Establish non-managed (native} areas surrounding hole • Phase Vl establishes a f nal green location (with relocated maintenance facility} Hole IVc. ~8, 52D-~95~43D, Par«5 The finishing hole is defined through the rebuilding and redesign of the primary irrigation lake. The new lake creates a divided hole with the drive landing area separated by across-stream of water connecting the two main Ivbes of the lake system. Long hitters will be tempted to try and carry a ball across the narrow cross-stream in order to set up a shorter approach. The hole dog- legs tothe left, playing to a green created out of the area currently occupied by the No. 18 green, although substantially enlarged, re-shaped and re-bunkered. The new 18th is intentionally on the short side, promoting bold attempts to reach the green area in two on the final hale. • Rebuilt tees (3 separate surfaces} • Realigned fairway, using the general area of the existing Nos.1l and 18 holes • Rebuilt lake (defines fairway} • New fairway drainage and surface • Remove selected trees • New cart path • Expandedlremodeled green (from existing No. 18} • New bunker complex at green area • Establish non-managed (native} areas National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson ~ Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex -- 29 Narrative of Improvements to South Course vVhat were once great territorial views across the bays in this area of Alameda are now primarily secluded views to within the golf courses. The once tremendous orientation of the original golf course against the water is long gene in favor of airport expansion and a nearby solid waste landfill. The original Alameda Municipal Golf Course could be classified as a links course, built on the shores of a natural waterway with open views and vulnerable to wind. From On Course: A Dictlorrary of Golf Course Terms Forrest Richardsonl0f Course Publishing 1999}: Links, A seaside golf course constructed on a natural sandy landscape that has been shaped by the wind and receding tides from the ~Id English "lincas", meaning the plural of a ridge, a Scottish term to mean the undulating sandy ground near a shore }; also used more generally as a synonym fora "seaside golf course" The movement to plant trees was apparently to thwart windy conditions, yet it is the wind that provides much interest to the game of golf.lndeed, wind is an inherent part of the game in its birthplace, the British Isles. The presence of wind is a hallmark of many of the greatest courses in the world. As pointed out in the operational study, there is a benefit to buffering the course from roadways and off site uses, such as the airport, buildings and neighborhood. However, trees have also caused significant maintenance issues and many are in decline due #o the high water table and root bound growth. Trees have been embraced in the Master Plan at the Early Fry Course. The parkland setting of the Earl Fry is preserved, yet selective removal will create a healthier condition to specimens that are presently in gaud shape. In contrast, the approach to design at the south course area is intentionally more open, more windswept and more indigenous to the Bay Farm island landscape prior to full development. The design intent at the south course area is to form large, undulating landforms with the impor#ed fill material brought into the site. Fairways will wind between and ever these landforms, each perhaps 15 tv Z5 feet above existing grades. Drainage will occur between and below the landforms with positive flows to low points, canals and new ponds. Examples of the look and feel of the proposed south courses} accompany the Master Plan report. The intent of the south course is to offer a different golf experience to the north course, This diversifies the City's asset in golf operations, allowing marketing and operations to present the south cvurse~s} as a different golf experience. The existing "habitat" area shown vn the Master Plan remains and is not developed with new golf holes}, National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 30 Capital Improvement Master Plan Chuck Corica Golf Complex Capital Improvement Master Plan Year ~ _~_r_. Year ~ __~~_. Year 3 _____ Year 4 Year 5 ___-..._ Totals Earl Fry Mobilization l Genera! Conditions $30,000 $D $0 $D $D $30,000 DesignlManagement Costs $550,000 $D $D $D $D $550,000 Dema 1 Clearing 1 LayoutlTrees $D $407,000 $D $D $D $40l,DDD Grading! Irrig. Lake I Drainage $D $690,000 $0 $0 $~ $690,000 Greens l Tees 1 Bunkers $D $75$,000 $D $D $0 $758,000 Irrigation l Cart Paths $0 $1,914,000 $D $0 $0 $1,914,000 Grassing 1 Misc. $D $265,500 $D $0 $D $265,500 Total Earl Fry $580,000 $4,034,500 $0 $0 $0 $4,694,500 Jack ClarklMif Albright 3 Temp Greens $30,000 $0 $D $D $D $30,000 New Mif Albright ~3 Holes} $D $450,000 $450,000 $D $D $900,000 New 9-Hale J. Clark $D $500,000 $2,500,000 $D $D $3,000,000 Final fi Holes J. Clark ~TBD} $D $0 $D $0 $0 $0 Total JC -Mif $30,000 $950,000 $2,950,OOfl $0 $0 $3,930,000 Other Mobilization 1 General Conditions $5,000 $D $0 $0 $D $5,000 Demo of Old Fire Tower ~Haufing} $150,000 $D $0 $0 $D $15,000 Range Netting Repairs ~Allawance} $12,000 $0 $0 $0 $D $12,000 Range Artificial Turf Repairs Partial} $120,000 $0 $0 $D $D $120,000 Maintenance Fac. Relocation $0 $0 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $D $2,000,000 Total Other $952,000 $0 $1,000,000 $9,000,000 $0 $2,952,000 Total ALL $897,000 $4,984 500 $3,950,000 $9 000,000 $0 $10,839,500 National Golf Foundation Consul#ing, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Carica Golf Complex - 31 Projected Economic Performance for the Chuck Corica Golf Complex Based on our analysis of the Chuck Corica Golf Complex, the market in which it operates, and the implementa#ion of the Master Plan, NGF Consulting has prepared aten-year financial pro forma for the facility under the assumption that the City leases the golf course property to an independent lessee. Funding of the recommended capital improvements is expected to be part of a negotiation process between the two parties, The City will retain same control with respect to approval of resident fees, and compliance with maintenance standards and capital improvement requirements. IMPLEMENTATIaN OF MASTER PLAN The assumptions for our projections relating to the implementation of the master plan imply that the facility will be leased to a private operator, whether in context of a hotellresort operator or a golf operator. This plan assumes that the City can attract a lessee, that the facility would be more efficiently and professionally operated by a private golf course opera#ar, and that the NGF Consulting Master Plan will be implemented. We would expect significantly lower operating expenses, better course maintenance, and improved marketing. In NGF Consulting's previous Operational 14eview and Recammenda~r'ons for the Cr`#y of Alameda, we presented the highlights of several examples of operating leases entered into between public entities and private operators. This includes the lease between American Gvlf Corporation and the City of San Leandro far the operation of Monarch Bay. These leases include minimum guaranteed rent, plus a percentage of gross revenue. The payment is equal to the higher of these two figures. They also include capital improvement provisions, and stipulations for maintenance standards. For our purposes, we have assumed very conservative minimum guaranteed rent and percentage rent terms. For instance, the Monarch Bay lease had a guaranteed minimum rent of between $550,000 and $fi25,000, and percentage rent of 25°lo of gross revenue from green fees, golf cart rentals and driving range fees, as well as 5°/0 of other revenue centers. This was in addition to $10+ million in capital improvements required of the lessee. However, this lease was entered in#o at a time when the regional golf market was much stronger, and the current lessee may be seeking to re-negotiate the terms of the lease has is the operator of Metropolitan Golf Links with its landlord, the Port of Oaklandj. Also, the lease shaven between the CitylCounty of San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and the lessee for Crystal Springs was re-negotiated in 2003 "because of declining economy and golf market". In today's market climate, both parties are likely tv enter negotiations with realistic expectations. NGF Consulting has made a series of assumptions for the cash flow models prepared for Chuck Corica and the master plan implementation. The base assumptions for the projections are listed below. National Golf Foundation Consulting, inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan --Chuck Corica Galf Complex -- 32 General Assumptions • Market conditions remain the same, in terms of golf facility inventory, population, and general economic health. • General maintenance conditions of Chuck Corica are similar to current standards through Year 2 of the projections, and then increase beginning in Year 3 when the new and improved Earl Fry course is re-opened after renovation. • Either FY2DDD or FY201 D could be considered as year 1 of the pro forma. FY 2006-D1 actual results were used as a basis for many of the projections, though some preliminary 2DQ1-08 figures were used as a basis. The 2DD7-08 budget was used for vVages & Benefits expense, • All personnel would be employees of the private operator. • There would be no transfers to the General Fund other than lease payments. • Any remaining Unrestricted Fund Balance would be available to the City for whatever use they deemed most appropriate, including contributing toward facility improvements. • The current restaurant lessee will remain in place for all five years shown. Because of the uncertainty over whether the current operator would be bought vuf of his contract if a lessee for the golf facility took over operations, NGF Consulting has not assumed additional banquet facilities in this scenario. • The pro forma does not include any City expenses that may be associated with contract administration, oversight, or compliance, as we assume that these responsibilities will be absorbed by current City employees, including the acting General Manager far Chuck Corica, whose responsibilities will shift from day-to-day oversight of Chuck Corica operations to oversight of the contract and ensuring compliance, • The lessee will provide all maintenance and other equipment, as well as furnishings for the clubhouse, etc, vUe have not assumed any income to the City for the disposition of current assets. • We have assumed that the Mif Albright will be closed as part of the lease deal, as we do not believe that a private operator would project a positive net cash flow for this course, The closing might also present the City with an upside revenue opportunity if an alternative recreation use could be found perhaps via a ground lease}. Magyar Lease Terms • Lease term is assumed to be 3D years, with renewal option provisions. • There will be a guaranteed minimum rent, plus stipulated percentage of various revenue centers Ito exclude F&B, at least while current contractor is at Chuck Corica}. We assume that the minimum annual rent will be $5DO,DOD minimum requirement as per the City of Alameda} for the first ten years of the lease, For simplicity purposes, we have assumed the percentage rent to be 10% of all gross revenues. The payment is equal to the higher ofthe minimum orthis percentage rent. National Golf Foundation Consuitir~g, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex -- 33 Lessee will be responsible for stipulated capital improvements; term will include stipulation regarding timing of completion. Necessary improvements, over and above normal maintenance, beyond Year 5 are assumed to be funded out of a Capital Improvement Set-Aside Fund, equivalent to 1 °/° of gross revenues in first four years, and 3°/° in subsequent years. The City is also assumed to contribute to a Capital Fund, at 5°/° of the yearly lease payment from the operator. • There will be same provision regarding City approval of resident fees only, • There will be provisions regarding agreed upon maintenance standards and compliance. • The lessee will own all revenues to the site, including any revenue generated from the importation of fill material in Phase 1V. Basis for Projections Rounds Played • Beginning in Year 1, we have projected a schedule of total rounds for the Earl Fry course of 41,000 rounds, reflecting eight months of operation before closure in March for the 12-month renovation. Earl Fry will re-open in March of Year 2 and host an estimated 70,000 to 75,000 rounds per year at stabilization, which is projected to occur in Year 5. The Jack Clark course will see an increase in rounds beginning in March of Year 1, reflecting its position as the only 18-holes of golf at Chuck Corica during the Earl Fry renovation, when the Earl Fry re-opens in March of Year 2, rounds on the Jack Clark course will decline as this course is closed for its renovation. Eventually, the Jack Clark Course will re-open as a 3-hole Mif Albright replacement in Year 3 and then a regulation 9-hole course in Year 4. NGF Consulting has assumed that the final sr`x holes of the Jack Clark wit! be completed after the fr`ve year period shown, depending an markef conditions, golf demand, and funding availability. • overall, rounds totals reflect: ^ The discontinuation of new monthly tickets; existing ticket holders will be grandfathered in. vVe project the number of ticket holders to decline by 20°/° per year ever the five-year period, and to decline to zero by Year 1 ~. ^ A higher differential in pricing between resident and non-resident rounds, and between the North and South courses. ^ A significant reduction in the number of Complementary rounds. Revenues • Average revenues per round were derived for all revenue centers, based on actual results from FY2007 and FY2008 partial year}. These numbers were then used as the basis for future projections. • Early Fry green fee revenue per round reflects an actual blended average of green fees across all categories. Upon reopening, the improved course is projected to average $30 per round in green fee revenue; average green fee revenue per round is projected to increase by 5.0% per year thereafter. Rates at Earl Fry reflect a higher quality golf National Galf Foundation Consulting, inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc, Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 3~ experience and a more favorable mix of rounds fewer monthly ticket rounds, fewer comp rounds, discount rounds steered toward the South cvurse~. Jack Clark green fee revenue per round also representing a weighted average of all green fees} in Year 1 reflects slightly lower average fees due to the use of three temporary greens. Uvhen Jack Clark reopens in Year 4, average green fees reflect its 9- hofestatus and are projected to increase by 5.0% annually thereafter. Part of what is now the Jack Clark course will become the 3-hole replacement for the Mif Albright with average fees reflecting a desire to keep charges for this course below $5.00 per round and allow far a higher volume of complimentary and discount rounds. The basis for card revenue per round was the average number far the previous five-year period, plus l°I° to reflect the increase in price from $14 to $15. Average cart revenue per round is projected to grow 3°/° annually. • Monthly ticket revenue, which is expressed as a function of total rounds, decreases by 20% per year to reflect the elimination of new tickets, and declines to zero by Year ~ 0. Shop revenue per round was based on 06-07 actual result, and grows at 5°/° per year after year 1 to reflect more aggressive merchandising. • Driving range revenue per round was based on a very consis#ent five-year average of about $3 per round, with a decline in Year 1 of the master plan tv reflect the reconstruction of the range. After re-opening, NGF has projected driving range revenue tv be $3.~5 per round with 3% annual growth thereafter. • Lesson revenue per round increases to $2 per round in Year 2, reflecting an aggressive programming component and improvements to the range. Annual growth thereafter is assumed at 5°/°. • initial 'Other' revenue gift certificates, lockerlreservativnfeec, rentals, etc.} was based on a five-year average of $0.35, growing at 3°/° per year. tither revenue also includes fill revenue and the Golf Enterprise Fund's reserve carry over ~+ $1.0 million}. Base year Gross Food & Beverage was assumed to be $1.3 million, based on actual results on FY 2001. Annual growth was assumed at 3%. Cperating Expenses • Expenses were based on actual FY 2005-06 results for the City, and grouped into `Labor' and `Non-Labor' categories for simplicity. Labor expense under private operation is projected to be 75°/° of what the City paid the cast full year of operation ~FY2007}. Fvr the first eight months of Year 1 in the master plan, Chuck Corica will have 35 hoses in operation, declining to 18 hales in most of Year 2, 21 holes in most of Year 3 and 30 total holes for the Year 3 through Year 5 period. Total Labor expense has been adjusted to reflect both the quantity of holes for the five years shown, and the expected higher maintenance standards of the new Earl Fry Course; the estimates grow at an annual rate 4% per year after Year 3. • Non-labor expenses are projected at 85°/° of the corresponding City cyst, and grow at 3% annually. These estimates are also adjusted further to reflect the actual number of National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Galf Complex -- 35 holes open at any given time in the foe-year master plan period, and the expected higher quality standards of the renovated golf courses. Cost of Goods Sold is included in non~labor expenses. • Non-labor expenses do not include income or property taxes, but do include depreciation. • A Contingency line item, equivalent to 5°/° of total labor and non-labor expenses, is included. • In an effort to estimate the cost of capital the selected lessee may have to complete the master plan project, NGF Consulting has assumed some basic inputs for the structure of debt, including 6°/° for 20 years for each phase as it is commenced, By Year 4 of the master plan our estimate is the Chuck Corica lessee will incur approximately $944,000 in debt service expenses, or roughly 23°/° of total operating revenue. Paymenfis to ! from City • Annual rent tv City is projected to be either a guaranteed minimum rent of $500,000 City-stipulated minimums annually for the frst ten years, or a percentage rent equal to 10% of al! gross revenues, whichever is higher. • City will continue to receive 8°/° of gross revenues from restaurant lessee. • City will continue to pay existing debt service. CASH FLOW STATEMENT NGF Consulting has utilized the previously mentioned assumptions to create the cash flow statements that fellow. Each category of revenue has been fisted separately, and all figures have been rounded tv the nearest $100 for simplicity. National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan --Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 3~ a V ~S a ~~ G tis f~C W a 'o a U (~ .v L U V r DDD^ O [V~DNOD^I~N~17tflf~ I O rODD ~,^^u7 ~ ~ M 1~ D w ~ l"71~pfc'70N~-Q»Q co~t~io~~nio~ ~ r b9 4f} Erg b9 E~3 63 ill {~} D ~` lp } 1~ N O i~3 ifl ~ ?+DO^ o D ~tiosr7u7c~Dr ~- NOODco ~ c c a c~ N ~o^o ~00~7 ~ v a c Nti~uiv~t~tnioco tR b9 Cf? Efl ift Efl E~3 Ef} `r h N D ~ 69 ~ r ~ mooo o oNr•ti~ntiaocoMr• N 1000 0 ND'~t~'r-flOoDSD~~-- r ~OOt,C~ ~ N DID ~i7Dc'7c7NDG0 ~ dg 69 69 EA Eft H4 h9 ~` } l~ N O {~} ~yg ~ r GO Eft C C C I~000 D Q)~117l+?LC?0?hl[3NI"~ D NQ}(~ ~„DDD D NNNCaNcDI~l~~O~ it7 °-aa D D ~O°O ~ ~ CO(p~~OC7MN^1~ ~r~}ffliflt~lif}dgb~} O LL ~ ti N 0 ~tf} N I W~2 r ~It ~ r G) C7 movo oD D a r~~u~c~v~c~c~~-v wtnu7r ~ r~ tt v oa o ~, O ~ ,~ ~ , ~b9EF}EREft(flf~34~ }'ti N D {ftffl O r~ O ER t~00D 0 MO~D'~tl7~l~?NQ~O D `O O D D I~ I~ COQ (D t~ c~ 117 M f"! ~ 1~ ~q C) O lt7 ~ 1A '~ ~ (+7 ~t O C~7 C~7 N O ti ift ER E19 ~ tfY ~ 4'9 t~ N ~` ~ N D ~ b9 ~ I r '~ F- U I ~ ~ ~ d . ? N: = E ~ J .W ~ O D O D Z O D Gl7 ~ ~ Gl7 lf7 r 0.~ LC W N~ ~ODO O ~ OOfD~Q]r'~NCrJ N N ~ ~ J ~ ti N ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~I p i p W :~ W W ~ LL I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ a . ~ .~ 0 a w ~ 4 ~ v C ~ ~ a c ~_ J' M^OV ~O o D o ~ Z ^OOoatir7lnar•1n lnDu7c~rOra~MV a v ~n d~ •+~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ '~ I mD lt7 N uJ ~"D[~~r[''7['7NO1~ ~Q' r ~ ~.~c ~ ... o c aV a D . ~:l ~„ v r~ ~ ]. ~r~ra~s+~~s~r~rEfrr~~r 0 ~ ~ I~r J 4 ~ ~ ~~~+t~ ~°~ Z~I W ~ ~, r~r p H WV~ Q a() la ~ ~~t ~ i J V V M ~ r UD ~ I ~ C NDOD O DQ0117SCQ117D~D~ ~I i ~ t- to ~~ aye C M ~ V ~ ADD 1~D0 ~" N' t O O ti vDDN"~GDND['7GD Os~D~rNt'}fVO~D ~y~~d3Ef?Ef}~EHEAEf} 117 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I c 0 + ~ 0 V , V ~ V w C ~ ~~~~U W LL ~ W rooD D vooNr7~nornu~~r ti ~ a ~ M E°p~ G. ~ `DD ~pOD D O C?117DGpoDl~l17N[+?!D QyGDD['~T-NNt-DfD ^ ~ ~ °'~ N E aoE• ~~u ~ ~r~~~r~~Etr~r~r~ ~~ : o ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, v~ ~ U ~ C _ L L ~ ~' ~ W ~ W d'Ct~(h r 117r•Ll7ticDC'7N~DU7 O ~] ~ f!1 01 1!7 [D 1 0 cD N aD ~' o~ O I~ D N (D LD N ['7 ['7 ~ ~ M - M - 0 D Q / U "~ = ~ a W M Iii ~"^ ~ ~ tiu~ - w ~ GO Cf] I ~ r ID N r r ~} ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~s~ M r ~ ~ U O , r ~, ~, ~ f ~ N ~ ~ I ,. i a~ ~ ~ y C ~ r~ N ~ y ~ ~ °n~ ~ ~ V W~~ c N oc om v U i ~ L ? ~ (' o t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N y N~ V ~ ~ ~ p1 G ny ._ D ~ F' ~ N ~ C G3 ~ N L LL LL Il m ~. ro V~ Y . y ~., ~ p p~ LL O 'DLL C C C~t ~ ~ ~ ~ro~4~ a ~rv~~or.5~r~ o ~ti o~ N ~ ~ X Q ~ ~a CE ~o ~U P~ ro ~~ y '~. 0 ~U 1L v ~ ~ CL ~U ~I G ~ d, a ~` N ~ C ~ a~ U c Q '~ C C a w 0 (7 c c~ Z D O D O D o O D 0 ADO ooooa ~d'N NaDC01~ ~ ~till~ ~~CC~~N .. M 11~ b~} d? mooooovvo ~ooooovoo IpOON1~SDrt~7pD `r'cODO~shN~~~ ~i7 u7 ~ ~t N N ~i I~ri ~} ~} GOODDODQOD ~,vDOD000o ~G7NI~>17~rD OD ~'~~r~-DOcDd~~ M 'tit tt pct N O [''] N ~ ~ C C -- ooDOOOOv ~, voooaooo ' aeo 1~ v0?r I~r~1~N ~ m ~ N~N~]~N~ M W ~ C D r ~ ~ ~ ~ caooooooao moo^^ovoo ~ o~ D C7 C~ 00 ^ '~ +D ~~'7~NNL~~N4tY ~D~D[O7t~N~i~D ~ ~ ~t7ODODODp O L,^ODODOD D ~ v u7 M ~- C7 D N ~7 ~ I~ D o0 r CA e- r 0~ H H i`7 ~ ~ 'U. ~+~ ~ ad~vDOO^ooO C E ~ Z ~v~c°~°o°o~°~ d mo~~rc~ric~mao~, a Q d ~Dr Duerr C7 r V F, ~ O~ M M N r D = .z~ D N ~~ - p W ~ J r~r 6~ LL ~ g: u. t~ W~ _ =r~oD^oooooi ~ ~ rc N ,.vooD000O~ c~.` D C c a~Q ~r~~rao~vaoaorci:, ~ v _ 'D (j d o ~ °~ aO~c~vrO~~uo7~~noir, y ~L ~ 1L ~ ,R + U W N N In OD j ~~J:WU~~~V ~ ~ dU a~ r7~-~O ~ 1 ca a C Noovo^voo~ ~- m ~ooDVOOVO! Mao a~ ~oc~a~r~caor~~~ dniomr:oc~c~c, y y N -~ C~ ~V ~ ~iDC+7~NN~DtQjDl • 0 0 V+ U r r ~J! ~ U w. C ~ I Ffl {!} ~~~ v~ ! W W ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~^DOVVOO~ a ~ ~oooooooa [+7 ~o(r p, IQ~rNOOcofD 1~ ~ ~cD1~117O'titc'~e~O1 ~O~cDI~~cDNc+7O' a a v E 'a~ ti c~ t-- N N e- X17 1ti E U ~. UN;~~~ d3 ~ ~`~g a~ W ~ W ~I Q1 r r O 'Cf '~ I.f) D ~"~ ~ cn aC N I~ aG co cn r7 11;D~?C'71t7opN~'~ mO~NN~`Nttf+7tQ OrNC'7~cDC'7~ c'~'~ N tt M r Qi ~ i C ~ N M 49 b~} .......__._..._......_ 0 .., .~ ~F.1 __, L a Y r d L ~ G Y~Wa ~Z ~ Q~ W ~ ~ a ~' " y N ~~ a2~W ~ ANN ~ +~ ~ ~ C 0. ~ N mr ~p c~ ~ rt E ~ o ~~ °' `° W w~~~~a N~a D ~c~U~'~~ ~ ~ o c D Z,.--~ !1J ~ ;~ C ,~ p y ~ J ~~I~~ONJOD o O ^ ^ O D voa~^o~t N f,~ Q r 0~ t- 'ti"' O f~ tt7 [q QI NNCpcDh N OD 117 r r ~Q CO !fl del f~} fA oou7oN N ooNahN N(~'~P'iG}h O '~' [D r- {~ ip DD InhtDLC}~ !' 1~'~rrN ti {f} H9 {~ iR ^ O In O ~fJ Y'} O D ~ o N fl0 C7 GO C7 N c*7 C'7 k17 +- a DO W (+') tf7 I17 N 1- ~D ~ r r '~ fp ~ ~ ~ ~ oo^no a oor7oM h oc~Inmo ~ ~O~-~~O N tD{'7rrM 1~ t-r~~~j e~ d} b4 {f} d4 Doooo 0 ovc~vc~r hTC'7~N O D +r- ~7 O N ~''! X17 117 'tit C~ 0`a N e~-r~~M ~ b9 d} ~ b4 DD~t7^It3 N ^ o N O N h GD h "~ ~- O N CD ~- ^ ~ ~"? RA Tr~C'700 OD rr~~{y ~ 69 59 if3 8g ^ou~oo ~ ^vMOc~ s~ rvu~car~ m aiM~7~~~ f7 1~ ['7 '~t 00 N '~ N +~- fi9 W N w O D O D O O oo~^ra~ co~Or r~ ~ [+? tD ~ co ~i +ri CD c7 [~ Cr? CO N ['7 N r E+9 h D rr~ N t- d9 b4 ~ iR oolnoN o aO~^~rN ~-OprOa tf! s~ C'7 N 1~ N ~* vt'7N[~G W r C7 r d'} ~O D ~ w oDVOa a oo~D~co ~7OCQORD O r' '~ I!j to h C'~ NQ)MC7 W r ~ N t` b9 00 D rr~ cti ~ ~~ ~ W N y W ~ K W ~ N p ~ ~ W ~ w .~~Na~ N ~ °' °' p o J 'C ~ d a~~~~~m W~zUUp Z U qD a~ yl ~x Q~ ~a C N ~ L 0 r~ C7 ~4 ~U li V ~ ~ ~t ~~ i C ~ ma 7 N ~ro ~~ a U c a m '~ C 3 0 LL C 0 .Z ooco^m rou7ou~i ~ O ~ M 1~ ~ O N O N ~ b9 ~ d3 d9 mocaom ~°oM~c~a movc~~a ~ 1t~ h N '~ b9 H9 ~ ~ aaohoti ~ONC~tDr! m O op ~ hi (D O N bq E9 ~ ~ aaa o ° ~ ~ o M ODD ~ p^Ci D ~ ~7(G^ r W~~ b9~~ D t i9 b m^~vti ~oc~vM d O ~ D ~ `r u7LDDr bq d9 l~7 tD bg fly N D N O ~ O O O N O ~^~no a O N D N N ~ NcDD r N ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ W. i ~a p ~Dcov ml CE ~ ' ~^n0 ~otiv 1~! tii o Q v a H dono ~-~n~nv til o! ~ G ~ p Z, ~W 4 ~3 1fl ~ ~! LL~ W N v , ~ ~. C tr7DNO NI V o ~al aci ca~ ~o°,~o ~~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ° m ~~~° ~I Y ~, ~ ~ a w~~ ~Q t :(~ L ~ L C ~ d~ a 4 o i ~U `~ M ~ i V (~ ~ i I ' C N 0{DO i sDi Ir ~_I M~ a~i ,w ^ino ,~^rnv Nl oi ~ O 0) N .V7 ^.I ~oa~o ~ ~ M D m! CD a~nD+~ O D V as~~ ~i C] I~~~-c~ I !~~~ `~~ W ~. ! W c r ~ l r ~ C' -p D lY7 E c3: a, b4 O ~ ~ D ~ r D w ~ oaoE'~ ro } ~ ° N ~ U~;~ u ~ ~ i ~I a l~ ~ ~ W~ W , I d m ~ ~ ~ C "~ •- ~ r+ a .~E Z ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ y UwV'aWO ., Y! ~ ._ ~~ Iwo y H Q1r~J~ Ta _~~ C L~ d ~azc~~-" W~~ NK~ ~ m~~. ~ Q~~~o w a ~ ~ 00D'~fD O ': 1L7r01D Df O vvo~N D 6f7 N} N r DD i otihco N 1L) C~7 r ~:ti C7 i~ It7tiN+D " j Op h GL7~~h ~ hM O ~!'$ t"7 d' t 7N~D t- id9 r t r N N I 69 'fit C7 bg ~ ^ I M ~ ~# ~ r i ~ ~ ~I ~ ~ W~ ' °o°oo ~° ~ cvv ~ oti~ooo ~°c~o Oc~~"~ N €i N~Me- c~ir ., w O ~ ~ V i w ~ ~~~ '~ ~ ~~P7~ D N ~ E:9 d'~ di •. ~ Eg to ~F} tA~ ~ ~i DDO ti N Q u~~rnu~ o~u~ ODO D '~ ~ Oh1~47 d" O w. !C~ 1~ DI N ~ D ~ CO ~ h '0 hM~on i w C1 ~~ D C7N~D~ r Eft !' ! tA '~ r ~" ~ i GF} '~ C'7 N3 t D i r {f} ~-~ 1~} ,~,,. N j Ug b9 bg~ ilk ; !R m I { ~i oDV v o W c; rn~-rnu~ olo oDD v ti ~ vhhaa ~iM O D O~ t'"3 r €1 N~ M r M! 00 ~u7Oi rD N ~! ~~ h !D 1- fR r, d' D D ~ Et} ~ M tf} D ~ tR i ~ ~: i ~ - - -- .~.... Q ! _ i ooo` h o ~~ u~~vsu~ o'o ooo# ti r ! ohhc0 'ctih 00oi M o i N~M~- r~~to ~ ~ S w i !~ ~ r { f} r O Erg ~ [~? if} ! b9 ff~i 8g d~ b9 ~} ~! ! DOO?NI 1AI D': N'~`DIl7Oi ODOfD 1+ ice' OhI~cD~t!~ D ^ v' N N N ~n c~ ~-- c~ ~n~iv}N m co~~ti~ C7 N f,D' ID Op h M D~; D ~- d9 r' ~ OD ~ #~ tf M #f~ m ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~I ~I i ~ ~ a~ ~ . i O D O Cd Y~ O i !!7 r 0 It7 O D O O O; oDO; ti h tD Q1 O! O n h CQ OI NlC?f+~~- ~i M~ ~iuiol r• ~ o co~~ti ~I ~' c']N~A; ~ N D nM~co '' ~' r rE9ri d'3 tg; d~ ti~ ff3 O' d9~ [ ~dg r' E~4 H~ Oi ~i CV ~ ' i ~: ! i O O D I N oov;w D w ^ `: !!7 r Q1 D o+: onns~ I!7 i u~i~ o D o ca ~a v N~~ ~-; ~ ~~ora ' N "~ N N o co~~ O ~ n ['~ ti1~ u7 C 7 ~Q i ~ r !!3 e-! a N i O~ ~~ f'7 . 00; M I i I . i ooo!m N o u~roo i cac+ I ODDI N voolw N v D Dhd9tR -n Nu7 h(~ h;ti O u7 i17 '~ 1~ d' a0 ~ N ! tt b9 5+~ tf~i N ! d'} In i~li Q1 d9 ~ ,~ : Eft ~~ Sf~! i 69 ~ i i i vvolen ^ o ~nDOO I !n;N ODD! w- D O Di 0 tD D O ~ O El9 if? [y9 t71 N O i N Ni 0D o~ v1 ca M ti' w oo' v e ~ N iD I Ob r D! n h~ r7 0 EFL iR {~} ; N i i r ! ! ~ p a ~- E ~ ' ~ c ~ ~ c ~ o c ~- C ~ ~ v _ ~ a Q Q ~] ~ K H N H ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ `m m 4 a ~ Q1 ~ O 'C7 d ~ C m O1 D) D1 ~ ~ ~ V .N y ~ C C C C ~ ~~ Q 41 "" W ~ C C C C ~ W ~ V L Z } i i LL L ~ m ° ~ W I ! ~ ! 1 W ~ U ,,,r W ° W ~ e-Nc"a~ d ~ u . ~a~H ~ a saccmm N ~U ~W ? ~ Z J U }}}} J ' ti~ ~~ ~I Nx Q~ ~a ao `~ U Pw [~ ~ ~~ N ,~ ~U LPL U ~ ~ C 'C ~U C C c~ N W C 0 :~ C Q a (7 C 0 Z ~inanciai Projections Results The results of NGF Consulting's cash flow model for the Chuck Corica Golf Complex, assuming the full master plan scenario show that total net facility income will be approximately $~ 3.5 million over the ten years shown, which will be split between the City and the lessee according to the negotiated contract terms. After all lease revenue is collected by the City, and debt service payments and capital improvement set asides are made, the City is projected tv net about $4.~ million over the ten years. From the lessee's perspective, total operational earnings less lease payments and debt service would project tv losses during three of the frst five years, including the income from fill importation and use of the gulf fund reserve carry-Over. During the first four years it is also expected that the lessee will invest some $ ~ 0.7 million into improving the property. NGF Consulting projects that the lessee, based on the assumed activity levels, operating expenses, lease terms, and debt assumptions, will net less than $4x0,000 total, after debt but before taxes and depreciation, during the first ten years of the contract term, National Golf foundation Consulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan --Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 4D Summary Conclusion Based an our research, NGF Consulting stands by its initial expert opinion from the operational review of Chuck Corica Golf Complex that the City cannot continue to self-operate the golf facility in the long term. The revenue generationlexpense reduction opportunities that we have discussed simply do not change the bottom line enough to alter the equation. As noted previously, a combination of factors -flat rounds and revenues, rapidly rising labor costs, continued transfers out of the Golf Fund, and the lack of any capital improvement funding--will ultimately result in the continued depletion of the operating reserWe for Chuck Corica, and the deterioration of the golf course asset. After performing financial analyses of the various operational alternatives for the future of Chuck Corica Golf Complex, we have concluded that a lease agreement is the best solution for the City if it wants to stem the financial downturn, and preserve the golf facility asset for future generations. The lease would shift the burden of risk to the private operator, provide a guaranteed net cash flaw to the City, and provide a means to partially or fully fund the recommended Master Plan. Also, a properly constructed lease agreement can provide the necessary protection for the municipality and the golf facility asset with regard to lessee controls, reports, maintenance specifications, capital improvement provisions, and preservation of resident green fee discounts. IVGF's recommended business mode! for this facility includes a green fee policy fhaf wi!! resulf in significantly higher paced non-resident green fees effectively subsr'dizing fhe lower residenf green fees, a scenario fhaf is common of many higher-end municipal facilifies. As we noted in the original report, the lease must be viewed as an attractive opportunity for the bidder, in terms of upside revenue potential and freedom to run the golf facility without unreasonable restrictions from the City. NGF Consulting believes that Chuck Corica, which generated $4.4 million in revenue in FY 200fi-Ol, and $5 million as recently as 200304, would be attractive to potential suitors if the Cify is realisfic in ifs expecfafions of financial return. As the cash flow model presen#ed above indicates, because of the large capital investment that will be required, the prospective lessee may find after running their own internal pro formas that Chuck Corica will not generate sufficient net cash flows after debt to justify funding all of the recommended improvements. If this should occur, it is passible that the lessee would ask that the City contribute toward the capital cost of the improvements for give some rent concessions to the lessee7, a situation that may not be financially feasible for the City. Alternatively, the lessee may seek to extend the period during which improvements are made, thus making the amortization of capital costs more manageable. This in turn, would delay the optimization of cash flaws at Chuck Corica Golf Complex. Uf course, none of this will be known until an RFP is issued, responses received, and negotiations begun. Because of this uncertainty, NGF Consulting recommends that the City seriously consider rezoning the Mif Albrigh# site and finding out if there is interest from f rms interested in developing a hotellconference center on this site. While we have observed that finding a private lessee for the golf course is the recommended option for continued operation of Chuck Corica Golf Complex, this course of action was considered optimal only because of the restrictions currently in place far the Mif Albright site. As we noted earlier in the repnrf, I~GF Consulting and FRA believe fhaf a pofenfial use of the 1V11f Albright site fhaf would be highly synergisfic with golf National Goif Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex -- ~1 would be alodging/resort/ conference center type facility wiffi complernenfary recreafional amenifies.lf ff~e Mif site were fo be re-zoned for a l~ofel/conference center reuse, flee site would not only generate a higher lease payment fo the Cify than with a pure recreafional use, but the operator would have a vested inferesf in the improvement of the golf facility and would likely contribute some, if not all, of the required capital for fne implementation of fl?e Master Plan. The developer would then operate the golf course themselves, and the lodginglconference center component's "captive audience" would become a significant demand driver for the golf course hand at the highest non-resident green fees}. Finally, this type of use on the site would generate additional tax revenue far the City. As reported to NGF Consulting, the unrestricted fund balance had fallen to just under $1.~6 million through May, 2DO8 ~-about one-third of what it was just three years ago. It is evident that the City needs to take immediate action if it wants Chuck Corica to remain a viable ongoing operation. Gbvivusly, it will take time to convert tv a lease operation plan for to rezone the Mif for other commercial use as discussed above}; the steps that must occur include. RFP preparation, receiving and evaluating responses, and negotiating with the prospective lessee, Therefore, NGF Consulting recommends that the City consider issuing an RF~IRFP to hire a qualified fee-based management company far the interim period. If an experienced operator with experience running municipal golf facilities can be retained far the short term, Chuck Corica should benefit from improved operations and significantly lower operating costs, thus reducing the hemorrhaging that is occurring presently. National Golf Foundation Consulting, lnc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Gvlf Comdex - 4~ Appendices National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and !=arrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex -- 43 APPENDIX A -DESCRIPTION OF RE-USE PLAN (CONCEPTUAL PLAN) The area of the existing Mif Albright site is conceptually depicted in the Master Plan documents to show a mixed use development consisting af; Health & Fitness Club I Day Spa; Banquet Facilities; a Boutique Hotel; Pro Shop & Grill; Putting Green & Wedding Venue ~vutdvor}; Cart Storage; Event Lawn and Tennis Center. The existing practice range buildings would remain in this conceptual plan. Entry Gateway -The conceptual entryway is a covered bridge that spans the newly aligned drainage canal. This new access to the golf and mixed use area forms a threshold for the guest. The roadway, conceptually shown as a median divided roadway, will cascade into the property, curving after the canal to allow vistas inward tv the various buildings and open spaces within the development. Health & Fitness Club l Day Spa -This facility is conceptually shown to include two primary buildings. one building would serve as a fitness club. The other building would house day spa facilities, small meeting rooms and a cafe. Two Glympic sized pools sit behind the buildings. Play areas, open space lawns and grounds will complement the area. Parking 'rs accommodated at the perimeter of the area, as is a perimeter drive that allows access to parking and the adjacent Tennis Center off the primary entry drive. Banquet Facilities - A large banquet facility with ballrooms}, meeting space and kitchen facilities sits across from the Health & Fitness Club. The relationship of these two spaces suggests drop-off and pick-up curbs may be shared and will have some type of pedestrian- friendly connection. The Health & Fitness Club I Day Spa and the Banquet Facility are intended to function as counterparts to an operation that shares parking and facilities. Cross-uses are intended to beneft both operations. Pro Shop ~ Grill -Shown a# the east end of the mixed use area is the core gulf facilities far the public. A proshap and grill anchor this space, opening to the practice putting green and providing a "hang-out" for the hotel guests. Putting Green & wedding Venue--Just east of the grill building is a formal putting green accessed by formal walks. Center to this green is a pavilion where small events weddings, parties and ceremonies} may be held. A pedestrian promenade connects the above described building areas, as dues a linear allotment of parking and vehicle access. Event Lawn - An open lawn for staging larger events is shown between the practice range and the mixed use area. . Tennis Center -Bordering the Health & Fitness Club I Day Spa area is a large tennis center comprised of outdoor shaded areas, restrovm facilities and nearby parking shared.}Thirteen tennis courts are shown with adjacent open space. A jogging trail and par course would circle traverse this area. fi125l2DD8National Galf Foundation Consulting, inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan --Chuck Cvrica Galf Cornplex - 44 APPENDIX B ~ HISTCRY ~F THE CHUCK C~RICA GOLF COMPLEX AND THE BELL LEGACY Fallowing is an excerpt from Alameda at Play - A Century of Public Parks and Recreation in a Bay Area City' Alameda Recreation and Park Department; by Woodruff Minor}; There had been attempts to organize a golf club in Alameda as early as 1901. The most ambitious of these unrealized schemes was the Encinal Golf and Gauntry Club, which proposed to build an 18-hole course at the western tip of Bay Farm Island in 1922. Two years cater, one of the club's promoters, Henry P. Martine, presented the City Council with a petition signed by several hundred Alamedans, requesting that the city establish a municipal golf course. The book's authors goon to explain haw a feasibility study was commissioned and then resulted in the City acquiring a site for the golf course in 1925. Barley was planted on the land to assist in leaching salts from the soil. A seven member Golf Commission was formed to guide the development. In Gctober 1925 the Commission considered golf course architects. The decision was to engage Vvilliam J. Locke of San Francisco to layout the course and supervise construction. Not much is known about Locke except #hat his role appeared to be design and construction related. Ultimately 118 acres was appropriated by the City of Alameda to fulf II the idea. The cost of the land was reported to be $125,920.16. The entire development cost was reported to be $2~O,fi10.26. The area now home to the courses was originally known as "Bay Farm Island." Historical accounts note that the land was "wasted farmland" and subject to high tidewaters. to develop an 18-hole municipal golf course. Locke's plan was for a fi,281-yard course of 18-holes. The course was completed in 1921 after roughly two years of construction work, Accounts explain that eucalyptus trees were soon planted to shield the course from winds. Poor soils explain the choice of eucalyptus, which dv moderately well in salty soils. At opening in 1921 the facility consisted of one 18-hole course know as the Alameda Municipal Galf Course. Earl Fry, now the namesake for the original north}course, was appointed the first golf professional shortly after the course opened. Fry remained the head professional until his death in 19fi4. After WWII the city began planning for expansion ofthe gulf course into two courses. Property was acquired south of the original course. Uviliiam Park "Billy" Bell was contracted by the city to design the second course and figure out how to integrate the existing course. According to accounts, Bell worked with his son, William F. Bell to design the second course measuring 6,325-yards, par-72. The elder Bell passed away in 1953, leaving the business to his son, Some changes were necessary on the original course to attain one central location for a new clubhouse. It is believed that the Bells made significant changes to the North Course and completed planning on the South Course prior to William P. Bell's death. The integration of the South Course to the new clubhouse area was most likely left to the younger Bell to implement. Nine holes of the new South Course opened for play in 1956, three years after the death of William P. Bell. 612512a08National Galf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 45 An account of the Bell legacy in golf course architecture is taken from a variety of sources, including Bunkers, Pits & Oti~erHazards Eby Forrest Richardson and Mark Fine; John Wiley & Sons 2005}. Following is an edited history of the Bells from these sources, of which the compilation is published here with permission of the authors: Born in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, William Park "Billy" Bell was often described as quiet, pleasant and unassuming. Growing up working the f elds of eastern Pennsylvania, Bell gained valuable knowledge of soils, drainage and plants. He studied agriculture at Duff s Business College in Pittsburg before moving to California in 1911, Upon his arrival on the west coast, Bell took the job of caddie master at Annandale Country Club in Pasadena, California, eventually rising to supervise maintenance and remodeling of the course by golf architect William "Willie" Watson. Bell continued to work for Watson as the construction superintendent at several new courses in Southern California before setting out on his own in 192D. Ever the student, Bell traveled back to Pennsylvania in '1922 and studied many of the great classics such as Oakmont, Merlon and Pine Valley. Once back in California, his knowledge of both the design and maintenance sides of a gulf course led to increased business and a fruit€ui partnership with Captain George C. Thomas. Thomas came from a wealthy Philadelphia family, was a founding member of Pine Valley, and was known tv not charge a fee for his golf course design services. He was also an author, writing several books on rose breeding and one of the great early books on golf course design, Golf Architecture in America, Its Strategy and Construction. Bell, who was an accomplished artist, was responsible for the illustrations used in the book. Often called "the bunker man" for the unique and majestic bunkers he crafted with the more famous Thomas, Bell showcased his own talents by cleverly engineering and cons#ructing their world class golf courses on very difficult sites. Effective drainage in the canyons of Southern California was not an easy task due to the infrequent but torrential winter rains experienced by the region. Bell was able to incorporate drainage features throughout their courses that not only served an essential engineering purpose, but appeared natural to the eye and created strategic in#erest for the golfer. The collaboration between Thomas and Bell produced some of the country's must illustrious golf course designs including Ojai Valley Inn & C.C., Bel-Air C.C., Riviera C.C., and the redesign of the North Course at Los Angeles C.C. The pair also designed and built the highly acclaimed 3fi holes at Fox Hills C.C. which, unfortunately, are nv longer in existence. Befl went on to design many great gulf courses on his own including Stanford University Golf Course, San Diego C.C., La Jofla C.C. and Tijuana C.C. formerly known as Agua Caliente}. He also had plans to build a never before heard of 18- hole "executive" course and a 9-hole "beginner" course in addition to the two public courses he had already completed at Sunset Hills in Los Angeles. Unfortunately, the Great Depression halted efforts tv complete this grand golf complex and post-World War II urban growth claimed the entire project. fi12512008Natianal Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 46 The Great Depression slowed golf course construction throughout the country. During this time Bell worked on remodeling projects at many Southern Galifornia courses and, to ensure a continuing source of income, accepted the position of operations manager at the Sunset Hills golf complex. When the effects of the Great Depression eventually started to subside, Bell teamed with a new design partner, famed golf course architect A.W. Tillinghast. Together they oversaw the rebuilding of a number of Southern California courses that were damaged or destroyed by the barrage of flooding in the winter of 1936. Uvith the onset of World War II, Bell served as a turf consultant to the U.S. Army Carps of Engineers and was awarded a commendation by the Southern California PGA for his efforts to build golf courses for wounded servicemen. Following the war, Tillinghast retired and Bell continued to design courses in throughout the west. Initially, the majority of his efforts were directed at rebuilding and redesigning courses that had been left unmaintained for years because of economic hard times and war. In 1948, bell's son, William Francis Bell "Billy Bell, Jr."graduated from the University of Southern California and joined him in the design business. Together they dominated the golf course building and remodeling market in the Western United States and Hawaii. Bell Sr., along with the likes of Donald Ross, Robert Trent Jones, Sr., and Perry Maxwell, was a founding member of the American Society of Golf Course Architects, serving a term as president in 1952. Gnly a short time later, in Gctvber of 1953, vVilliam P. Bell suffered a massive heart attack and passed away at the age of 67 in Pasadena, the same town where he had begun his career in golf. Following his father's death, Belf Jr, continued the successful golf course architecture practice and retained the company name of Vvilfiam P. Bell and Son in his father's honor. Bell Jr. went on to become an extremely prolific golf course designer in his own right during the 1950s,1960s and 1970s. His designed and remodeled more than 20o golf courses during his career and, like his father, completed the majority of his work in the Western United States. While the design aesthetic of golf courses built after World War II had changed significantly from the "Golden Age of Design" that Bell Sr. worked in, Bell Jr.'s work integrated many of the distinguishable features employed by his father. Gvurses like Bermuda Dunes C.C., Papago Gvlf Course, Sandpiper Galf Course, and the two courses at Industry Hills demonstrated an ability tv create lasting designs that have challenged generations of golfers. However, it is Torrey Pines, site of the 2008 U.S. Gpen, in La Jolla, California that is Bell Jr.'s most recognizable design. Preliminary work on the design of Torrey Pines had been started by Bell Sr., but it was Bell Jr. who brought the final design of bath the North and South courses to fruition. Like his father, Be[I Jr. was a member of the American Society of Golf Course Architects and in 1957 served the society as its president, the youngest to serve in that capacity at the time. It has been noted that Bell Jr, was well liked by his peers for his big smile and easy-going manner. Bell Jr. passed away in 1984, 612512008National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan - Chuck Corica Golf Complex -- 47 also in Pasadena and also from a heart attack, just as his father had 31 years earlier. Notable Courses by William Park "Billy" Bell • San Diego C.C. -San Diego, California X1921} • Ojai Valley Inn & C.C. -Ojai, California X1925}with George Thomas • Riviera C.C. -Pacific Palisades, California X1927} with George Thomas 1948 U.S. Open ^ 1983 & 1995 PGA Championship ^ PGA~TOUR Nissan Open • Bel-Air C.C. -- Los Angeles, California X1927} with George Thomas ^ 1976 U.S. Amateur ^ 2004 u.s. Senior Amateur • La Jolla C.C. - La Jolla, California X1927} • Los Angeles C.C. North Course redesign X1928}with George Thomas • Arizona Biltmore G.C. Adobe Course -Phoenix, Arizona X1928} • Tijuana C.C. -Tijuana, Mexico X1928} formerly known as Agua Caliente • Randolph Park G.C. -Tucson, Arizona ~193Q} ^ Farmer home of the PGA TOUR Tucson Open and LPGA PINGIVVeIch's Championship • Stanford University G.C. -Palo Alto, California X1930} • Tucson C.C. -Tucson, Arizona X1949} Notable Gourses by William Francis Befl "Billy Bell, Jr." • Torrey Pines Municipal G.C. - La Jolla, California X1957} ^ 2DD6 U.S. Open ^ PGA Taur Buick Open • Bermuda Dunes C.C. -Bermuda Dunes, California X1960} ^ PGA TOUR Bob Hope Chrysler Classic • Papagv G.C. -Phoenix, Arizona X1963} ^ 1971 U.S. Amateur Public Links • Columbia-Edgewater C.C. remodel -Portland, Oregon X1970} • Sandpiper G.C. -Santa Barbara, California X1972} ^ 1996 PGA TOUR Qualifying School Fina! Stage • Industry Hills Eisenhower Course-Industry Hills, California X1979} The Bell plan far Alameda continued their legacy of ingenuity and innovation in the field of golf course design. The senior Bell was known for his solid designs and bunker flair. The younger Bell, by this time, was taking over the business. Their designs throughout the Western United States cover the gamut of course types, including resorts, daily-fee public facilities, private clubs, intimate executive layouts, and major championship venues. For Alameda the pair developed a plan to make changes subtle re-routing and some improvements} to the original course, and to create a new 18-hole course the south course.} In doing so, the Bells helped establish Alameda as one of the few municipalities at the time with two 18-hole courses. 512512a48Natianal Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc, and E=orrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Carica Golf Complex ~- 4$ Problems encountered during construction were reported to stem from city-authorized dumping prior tv the land being shaped into a gulf course. This dumping added to the obstacles posed by high salts and the poorly draining sites. Despite these issues, the two courses the changed original and the new, South Course} eventually opened to success and remained popular throughout their early years. In transforming the facility into two courses, the clubhouse was relocated to its present location where it served both courses from a central point. This clubhouse remains today. Following the Bells' work, the City sought to improve the North Course in the mid 196Ds. Accounts show that the North Course had become plagued, with poor turf conditions and was in need of many upgrades to keep pace with a growing golf market in the region. It is very likely that contributing factors to the decline were drainage, the presence of landfill areas and poor topsoil management as the new course was constructed. The City looked to noted golf course architect and planner, Desmond Muirhead, for this work. In addition tv adding several water features, Muirhead adjusted holes and added material on fairways, creating mounding far interest and to assist drainage in areas. Reportedly, tees, bunkers and greens were rebuilt and a new irrigation system was installed. The nor#h course re-opened in 19fi7 to much acclaim. Muirhead's reputation, combined with his creative work for Alameda, gained recognition for the course, especially the combination of holes with new water features lagoons}. Robert Muir Graves, a noted California golf course architect, redesigned portions of the South Course in 1918. Graves also made some adjustments #v the North Course and assisted with the design of the Mif Albright par-3 layout. 6125124D8National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan - Chuck Corica Golf Complex ~- 49 APPENDIX C --PHASING SEQUENCE EXHIBITS 512512oD8National Golf Foundation Consulting, inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Pian - Chuck Corica Goif Complex - 5~ s z a a r i i ih .~ b q i i i M cx Q x w a a ~, a H ~ ~ ~ a U ~ z ~v W a Q ~ a ~ w ~ .~, o d a ~ a . ~ ~, ~ w o C `' ' ~ ~ a ,. `~ ~, ~, r..r ~ ; ° ~ ~ ,~ o w a V ,~; ~ n ~ a V ~ ~ ~ ~s. ~ ~ ~, ~ U ~, .s r ~'~ u G ~n i~ < i~ ~_ w X C s. W p a { W h r F ~l ~ 1~ F~ N v r D Y O {L ~I ~i ~ ~yy i .. a `,~ ~ ~ ~ { ~ `. a ~.. ~._ .: w a a 0 p W y w a d o c ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ L% ~ ~ ~ r V x V x x a z 0 ,~ Q 0 ~ ;~ H ~~ a a ~~ o a a ;~ r-~ ; a '6 a a Q ,~ . a I~ . , a, h~ a 4' G ~n n " ~ n ~F ` ~. t: ~ N ~ ~i y I~ ~ ~ w ~ ^ ~~ 6 C 6 4 F ~ ~ Y p x o a ` ±~ G F` 4 ~ n~ ~ ~r Q =, V 1 ~ 1 "1 4 x Q z v u C ac" ~- ~ c .tl '~L a 'i! .. „. '.Ei i ~~~ w a a a V ~ ~ w Q W U [ ~ ~ W a ~ ~, ~- ~ ~ z W ,~ -' V" F ~' ~ z ~ c ~ d ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ U w x ., V ~ x ~ ~ r ~~.y` 0 z a IA ~a 0 a .o ,o a 'a u G N VI P ~ L: W Y r G u N ~ D { n ~ ~~ . ^ r ~_~ W a y F ` H `. 6 r ~ 0 lF ~~ G N ~. d n `' 1 ti C r z z u v G y, ~ G L V - Zcm 'rt 0. 4~ G ~e N ~ ~ l! ~, ~ ~ L Ci ~i N ~ !:. ~ 4 i ~ M V. ~ n M1 u r ~ 0 '~ 0 r 0 V. 1~ u u C y, aG~ u u Z G a 'd 0. ~ W a a 0 V ~ Q i ~ w a W a ~ ~1 ;~ G r } ~ ~ ~ ~y ~yII h~ ~.'- V V V .n F. x .., . ,~~ . c.~ ~ , a V w ,d .Q ~a a o a o 1 i~ .b .© ~I ~ O D I" ~ i ~o a 5 L~ C q u ~ ~ u K ~ 7 ~_ L y ~ ~ c. M n F ~ F A r ~ .5• 17 ~ n y w w ~ o r A e~ 1 C L r~ .: a ~., n W a a ~ ~' a o ~ ~ d ~ ~ v .... ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G ~ ~ 1 "~ °~ ~ "~ d (~ ~ ~ a~ o Q c x ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o '~ ~ u ~ ~~ , ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ o ~ hil ~ ~ v (~ C w ~J , N .a ~~/ L,.i V a ~ v w ~ x~ ~ ao c '~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r~ ~ V o; ~' ~ ~/ a ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ .~ O ~ y ~, v] ~, ... C G ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ° ' ~ n~ W ~ W A4 P. 0. V W ~ ~ x r ~ V 0 G 0 0 xa D ~~ 0 N . ~ U 4 N N ~ Q F u df ~ z ~ 4 y~ ~ ~ O ~ { W n -r C V ~ ~ D u ~ u N a lJ ~ C ~ pr ~'i L' ~, ~ H h ~ ~~^ tih V r M 1' n r ~. ~, Y M n u i! C y, y C .Y u u zcp 'r V. 0 ,p .Q i D d O a .v 0 0 a .N O ~~ G ~~~ ~ S ~, L T ~~ 4 H ~ u a u • w ~~ w ~ A 4 N U ~ O ^ ~I C C h~ w ryp :+ n V' v i. 1 4 APPENDIX D ~ SCORECARDS Alameda North Course (Phase III) Hole Par Back Regular Forward 1 4 375 350 305 2 5 505 480 385 3 4 400 380 310 4 4 395 345 230 5 5 520 500 420 6 4 320 300 255 7 4 410 390 300 8 3 215 190 130 9 4 390 360 305 OUT 37 3530 3295 2640 10 4 420 375 310 11 3 250 220 165 12 4 380 350 270 13 3 200 170 140 14 4 430 390 310 15 5 575 515 425 16 3 150 140 120 17 4 315 295 225 18 5 520 495 430 IN 35 3240 2950 2395 TOTAL 72 6770 6245 5035 National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Ricf~ardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex -fit Alameda North Course (Phase VII) Hole Par Back Regular Forward 1 4 375 350 305 2 5 505 480 385 3 4 400 380 310 4 4 395 345 230 5 5 520 500 420 6 4 320 300 255 7 4 410 390 300 8 3 215 190 130 9 4 390 360 305 OUT 37 3530 3295 2640 10 4 420 375 310 11 3 250 220 165 12 4 380 350 270 13 3 200 170 140 14 4 430 390 310 15 5 575 515 425 16 3 150 140 120 17 4 375 355 285 18 5 520 495. 430 IN 35 3300 3010 2455 TOTAL 72 6830 6305 5095 National Galf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -- Chuck Carica Gvff Complex - 63 Alameda South Course Phase Vll~} Hole Par Back Regular_ Forward Family 1 4 385 370 300 260 2 5 550 530 455 410 3 4 440 410 350 310 4 4 405 375 315 285 5 3 170 150 110 95 6 4 340 310 260 240 7 3 110 100 80 65 8 4 440 415 365 335 9 4 385 355 285 245 OUT 35 3225 3015 2520 2245 10 4 375 350 280 250 11 3 110 90 80 70 12 3 145 125 105 80 13 4 310 275 235 195 14 4 380 340 290 270 15 4 260 240 205 170 16 4 365 335 260 225 17 3 160 135 120 110 18 4 345 300 235 195 IN 33 2450 2190 1810 1565 TOTAL 68 5675 5205 4330 3810 National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson ~ Assoc. Master Pian -Chuck Corica Golf Complex - 64 APPENDIX E - PRQBABLE COST ESTIMATES City of Alameda Probable Cost Estimate for Practice Range 8 Entry Work (Phase I) Quantl Unit Cost 1.0 Mobilization l General Conditions 1 LS $5,DD0 $S,DDD.DD 2.a Demo of Old Fire Tower Hauling} 1 LS $15,DOD $15,ODD.OD 3.D Range Netting Repairs Allowance} 1 LS $12,DDD $12,DDO.D0 4,0 Range Artificial Turf Repairs Partial} 15,ODD SF $8 $12D,ODD.DD Total Of Probable Cost Estimate Base 1Norky $~52,DOD.40 National Golf Foundation C.ansulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson & Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex-65 City of Alameda Probable Cost Estimate for Earl Fry Course Remodeling Phase Illy Quanti Unit 1.0 Mobilization I General Conditions 1 L5 $3D,DDO.DD 2.0 Demo 1 Clearing I Layout 2.1 Cart Path Removal bury on site 2.2 Miscellaneous Demo 2.3 Staking (GPS~ 3.0 Tree RemovallPruninglReplacement 3.1 Tree and Root Removal 3.2 Tree Pruning 3.3 Tree Replacement 4.0 Grading 5.0 Primary Irrigation Lake 5.1 Reshape New Lake, Install Shoreline and Lining 5.2 New Pumphouse and Cannectivns 5.3 New Intake , 5.4 Aeration System fi.0 Drainage fi.1 Install Culvert at Hole Na. 1 Slough fi.2 New Fairway Drainage Boxes and Pump System 6.3 New Drain Lines From Features 6.4 Features Drainage 6.5 Stough Edge and Clean-up l.0 Greens 7.1 RenovatelExpand Existing Greens 7.2 Build New Greens 8.0 Tees 9.0 Bunkers 10,0 Irrigation 10.1 Reconfigure System (laterals and edges 1 D.2 Non-managed Turf AreaslDrip 10.3 New Pump Station ~ 1.0 Ca rt Paths 11.1 New Path System (6 ft,7 11.2 Curbing and Pull-outs 11.3 New Bridge (Hole No. 4} 12.0 Grassing ~ 2.1 Sod at Features 12.2 Sod Allowance ~General7 12.3 Grassing Allowance 12.4 Native Seed Areas 13.0 Miscellaneous 13.1 RestroomlSewer Upgrade (1 Location 13.2 Course Signage 13.3 Course Furnishings 13.4 Entry Signage Total Dt Probable Cost Estimate Base Wvrky C. $3D,ODD.DD 4D,ODD LF $O.BD $32,ODD.00 1 LS $10,DOD.OD $1D,ODD.DO 1 LS $S,DOD.DO $5,ODD.DD 1 LS $300,DOD.OD $3DD,DOD.DO 1 LS $25, OOD.00 $25, 000.00 1 DD EA $35D.DO $35, DOD. DD 30,DOD CY $2.D0 $fiD,DOD.00 1 LS $2DD,ODO.DO $20D,DOD.DO 1 LS $4D,DDD. DD $4D, DOD. DD 1 LS $1D,ODD.OD $1D,D00.00 1 LS $18,DOD.OD $18,ODO.DO 2D0 LF $6D.DO $12,DOO.DO 9 EA $2D,OOa.OD $18D,DOD.DO 4D,QOD LF $3.5D $14D,ODD.DO (Incl. wl Feature s Construction} $Q,OQ 1 L5 $3D,ODD.OD $3D,DOD.00 12 EA $1fi,ODD.DO $192,QD0.00 ' fi EA $45,DDO.OD $2lD,DOD.DO 16O,OOD SF $D.BD $128,DOD.DD 28 EA $fi,DDD.DD $168,DOD.DD ~ LS $1,1DO,DDO.DQ $1,10D,ODD.DO 1 LS $15D,DD0. DD $150, DDD. OD 1 EA $12D,DDO.DQ $12D,OOO.DD 22,000 LF $1~.D0 $374,DDD.DO 1 LS $50, DDD. OD $5D, DOD. DD 1 LS $12D,ODD.DO $12D,DOD.DD (incl. wl Features Construction? $O.DD 75,000 SF $0.5D $37,5DD.D0 30 AC $fiDD.DD $18,DDD.DO 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,DDD.DD 1 LS $50,DOD.DD $50,OOO.DD 1 L5 $40, ODD, DD $4D, ova. DD 1 LS $25,OOD.DO $25,ODD.DD 1 LS $8D, DDD. 00 $8D, ODD. DD $4,064,500,00 National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc, and Forrest Richardson 8~ Assoc. Master Plan -Chuck Corica Golf Complex - fifi City of Alameda Probable Cost Estimate for Earl Fry Course Remodeling Phase III Quanti Unit Cam, 94.0 DesignlManagementCosu 14.1 Civil Engineering 1 LS $fiD,DD0.D0 $60,ODD.DO 14 2 Golf Course Architecture 1 ~S $35D,DDD.DD $350,DDD.DD Incl. south course preliminary fill design 14.3 Irrigation DesignlStaking 1 LS $55,DDO.DO $55,DOD.DD 14.4 Construction Management 1D M05 $8,5DD.DD $85,ODD.OD Total Probable Cost For All Work $4,fi94,500.00 Probable cyst estimate does not reflect environmental mitigation, hearings, and legal representation. Site work, such as utilities, are not assumed a part of the required work. Unforeseen conditions cannot be estimated until detailed engineering is perfam~ed. Grave-in labor and casts, including water during grow-in, are not included. This estimate is based on the Master Plan prepared as of .tune 9th, 2QD8 using industry-available unit costs and allowances far comparable golf course construction work. National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. and Forrest Richardson & Assoc, Master Plan ~-Chuck Corica Galf Complex - 67