Loading...
2006-06-07 ARRA PacketAGENDA Regular Meeting of the Governing Body of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority + ** ~**• ***. Alameda City HIall Council Chamber, Room 390 2263 Santa Clara Avenue Alameda, CA 94501 . ROLL CALL 2. CONSENT CALENDAR Wednesday, June 7, 2006 Meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted, approved or adopted by one motion unless a request for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the Board or a member of the public. 2 -A. Approval of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 5, 2006. 2 -B. Recom mendation to Approve Subleases at Alameda Point. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3 -A. Certification of Golf Course EIR and Authorization to Proceed with Negotiations with Port of Oakland and Army Corps of Engineers. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4 -A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) (Any person may address the governing body in regard to any matter over which the governing body has jurisdiction that is not on the agenda.) 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY 7. ADJOURNMENT ARRA Agenda — June 7, 2006 Page 2 This meeting will be cablecast live on channel 15. Notes: ▪ Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the ARRA Secretary at 749 -5800 at least 72 hours before the meeting to request an interpreter. ▪ Accessible seating for persons with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs) is available. Minutes of the meeting are available in enlarged print. Audio tapes of the meeting are available for review at the ARRA offices upon request. APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday. April 5, 2006 The meeting convened at 7:28 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Beverly Johnson, Chair of Alameda Doug deHaan, Boardmember, City of Alameda Frank Matarrese, Boardmember, City of Alameda Marie Gilmore, Boardmember, City of Alameda Tony Daysog, Boardmember, City of Alameda 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2 -A. Approval of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 1, 2006. 2-B. Recommendation to Approve Sublease at Alameda Point. Approval of the consent calendar was motioned by Member Matarrese, seconded by Member dellaan and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes — 5; Noes — 0; Abstentions — 0. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3 -A. Security of Historic Buildings at Alameda Point. Leslie Little, Development Services Director, gave an overview of the security of the Historic buildings. When asked by Member deHaan what other kinds of security mechanisms are currently in place, Ms. Little explained that the buildings are examined throughout the day and management has a staff person that patrols the buildings daily, with approx. 12 — 15 calls to APD per year. There are also motion sensors currently in place. Member deHaan asked whether the building security was a high priority for the APD. Lt. Mark Landes stated that the APD would respond to any call for service as expeditiously as possible — and in terms of priority, if they received a motion sensor alarm indicating that there was an active burglary or vandalism in progress, it would be considered a `priority one' response and someone would be sent immediately. There were two speakers on this item: 1) Elizabeth Krase, on behalf of AAPS. Ms. Krase thanked the Board for considering this additional improvement to the security of historic buildings. She reminded the Board of the Navy and the City's agreement to securely maintain the buildings. Ms. Krase also expressed further improvements that still need to be done, including increased police patrol, repair of broken windows, etc. Page 2 2) Christopher Buckley, Alameda resident, asked whether the APD has been asked to make a comprehensive recommendation on a good overall security program would be, with a cost estimate. He discussed that it could be determined that an ideal program may be too expensive, but expressed concern about the amount of valuable items in the buildings that have not yet been stolen -- infrastructure, wiring, plumbing, HVAC — which, if stolen, could make rehabilitation a lot more expensive. Discussed the motion detector range on the larger buildings, suggesting additional motion detectors be added (if the range was not sufficient with one). Member deHaan discussed the option of a security patrol service for key periods of time. Mike Hampen, PM Realty Group, explained that there was a security service in place at Alameda Point right when the base closed, but the Navy was paying for it under the Cooperative Services Agreement. Once the agreement was terminated, a study was done on retaining the security patrol service, and it was found to be too cost prohibitive. The Board accepted staff's recommendation to purchase four new alarm systems for building security, with a request for a status report after the summer. 3 -B. Recommendation to Approve a 20 -year Lease with the Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD). Ms. Little brought this item back to the Board, providing additional clarification and risk assessment of the lease, as requested by the Board. She also presented a spreadsheet that shows how the lease will be managed -- including the technical requirements, major repairs and improvements, etc., and places all of ARRA's obligations in an anticipatory - framed format. The lease is in excess of $40 million over a period of 20 years — with approximately $16 million in revenue in the bottom line. Ms Little explained that the ARRA has been given an advance of funds by MARAD to perform dredging, which is an ARRA obligation (that MARAD has already paid for). Chair Johnson asked for verification that the insurance provisions relating to Trident were not included in this MARAD lease. Ms. Little explained that there is still major insurance provisions that are required by the Navy of any subcontractor included in the lease, but the reference to Trident has been removed. Member Gilmore discussed the issue about fencing and relocating the Hornet. Nanette Banks, Development Services Dept., responded that we would work with MARAD on an interim fencing layout to meet security purposes. Regarding the Hornet, there is nothing in the MARAD lease that obligates the ARRA regarding relocation of the Hornet. Member deHaan had concerns regarding the 20 -year lease, wondering why there was no discussion of a shorter lease period. Ms. Banks explained that the 20 -year term was initially negotiated by the developer; and when the ARRA selected the developer, they proposed a long - term lease with MARAD to establish it as an anchor tenant at Alameda Point. Member deHaan Page 3 discussed the option of reducing the term to 10- years, and if that would affect the deal structure, suggesting consideration of using the piers /space for other activity. Leslie Little further explained that discussions with the Master Developer about contemplating other uses for the piers (and future redevelopment) arrived at a consensus that the MARAD lease structure and revenue is more than what we're going to see from other users that we might be able to find for these piers -- and in fact, MARAD is paying a premium rate — and there are no other significant economic opportunities for the use of the piers. Member deHaan also asked about the funding for the maintenance of the piers. Ms. Little stated that the lease include $75,000/yr. for the first 10 years for pier maintenance. There was one speaker on this item, Bill Smith, who discussed various topics. Approval of the MARAD lease was motioned by Member Daysog, seconded by Member Matarrese and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes -- 4; Noes -- 0; Abstentions — 1 (Member deHaan). 3 -C. ARRA Budget Transition Planning Workshop. Leslie Little and Nanette Banks, Finance & Administration Div. Mgr., gave a power point presentation of the ARRA Budget and cash flow which forecasts the expenses for ARRA lease revenues for the next 10 years. This cash flow is net of the MARAD lease approved tonight. Ms. Little summarized that we began with more than what was forecasted, so the fund balance is $5.1 million. Consistent with the management practices established last spring, this year we've actually been able to take in enough revenue to cover our expenditures. There is a projected fund balance of $5.1M going into '06-'07. Staff is maintained at the same level and the general fund municipal service fee remains constant (contribution of $2.1114). We did begin a partial payment on the S14M bond obligation at Alameda Point, approx. $350,000. ARRA debt obligations that are not scheduled in the cash flow include : the General Fund loan to ARRA, General Fund loan to APIP ($1.4M), the lease revenue bond payments, (these obligations will be assumed by the developer moving forward); and the $250,000 Citywide Development Fund (CDF). Chair Johnson expressed concern about the `negative' dollar amounts beginning in 2011. Board members also discussed various "what-if" scenarios, including if the master developer does not elect to proceed, etc. Member Daysog requested cost of a "zero- zero" budget, starting in '07- ' 08, in anticipation of a `worse -case' scenario and how to minimize every cost. Chair Johnson asked if we have a surplus because we now have the bond money. Ms. Banks explained that one of the reasons we have a surplus is, historically, the Navy paid $9M/year through the Cooperative Services Agreement. The expenses went through the roof when we transitioned off of the Cooperative Services Agreement. In response to Chair Johnson's question Page 4 about what happened to the bond money, Ms. Banks stated that the bond money paid for all pre - development activities at Alameda Point. Member Matarrese complimented the DSD team on the best clarity of the budget that he's seen — and wanted to provide the report/spreadsheet to the public. Member Daysog requested, for a future budget workshop, to iron out the discussion point regarding what is the appropriate amount that the Developer should be paying us. There was one speaker slip, Bill Smith, who discussed various topics. 3 -D. Update on Alameda Point Navy Negotiations and Land Use Planning. Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, gave a power point presentation update of the status of the Navy Negotiations. She presented an overview of the ARRA's two primary responsibilities: 1) to get an executed Term Sheet with the Navy regarding the conveyance of the base, and 2) to prepare a preliminary development concept. Ms. Potter stated that we continue to work with the navy on the Term Sheet and the negotiation of the terms of the conveyance. There are several key issues outstanding, the two major ones: 1) environmental remediation responsibilities and, 2) the extent of the environmental guarantee — because of the way the deal is structured and the privatized clean -up we are interested in assuming as part of the early transfer. As the issues are worked out, they will be memorialized in a Terre Sheet and the Term Sheet will then become the document that will form the basis of the developer's decision to elect to proceed or not. The second commitment was the PDC, which was completed and accepted by the ARRA Board at its February 1st meeting. In March, a request was presented to the Board to approve a grant that received from the MTC — a stationary planning grant for transit- oriented development. Implementation of the grant has begun as part of the Next Steps of the PDC. Ms. Potter clarified for Member Matarrese that the proposal to privatize the clean -up for the Phase I footprint meant that clean -up responsibilities would transfer to the ARRA and on to the Developer. There was one speaker, Bill Smith, who spoke about various topics. Member deHaan reminded Mr. Smith to stay on topic when addressing the Board and refrain from discussing topics over and above the item at hand. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4 -A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. Page 5 Member Matarrese stated that the meeting was tomorrow night (4/6) and will have a report at the next ARRA Board meeting. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) One speaker, Bill Smith, spoke about various topics. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 9:27 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Interoffice Memorandum June 7, 2006 TO: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Debra Kurita, Executive Director SUB,: Recommendation to Approve Sublease(s) at Alameda Point. Background At the December 2004 ARRA Board Meeting, the ARRA elected to review and approve all subleases at Alameda Point. Discussion Attachment "A" describes the business terms for the proposed sublease(s). Fiscal Impact The rent for GFC MOVING AND STORAGE is $ 120,000 annually or $0.22 per sq foot. GFC is a moving company and will lease a portion of Building 170 for storage. Building 170 is a large, unimproved warehouse space in marginal condition. The total rent for HESCO is $40,908 annually or 50.25 per sq foot. Hesco will use Building 113 for non- destructive testing and metal work. Building 113 is a large basic industrial space in marginal condition. The rent for ALAMEDA CIVIC LIGHT OPERA has been waived for the use of new space in Building 91. The Alameda Civic Light Opera also utilizes 2761 ft2 in Building 35. Building 91 is one of the first buildings scheduled for demolition in the Alameda Point development Master Plan. Recommendation Approve the proposed sublease(s). By: Respec `u ly submitted, eslie Litt e Development Services Director Nanette Banks Finance & Administration Manager Attachment A G:1Comdev\Base Reused: Redevp \ARRA \STAFFREP12006106 Junei2 -B. Sublease Approval.doc Dedicated to Excellence, Connnitted to Service ATTACHMENT "A" PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS TENANT BUILDING Type of Company /Activity SIZE (SF) TERM RENT GFC Moving & Storage Bldg 170 Moving Company 44,000 60 months $10,0001mo. HESCO Bldg 113 Metal Work 13,115 24 months $3,409 /mo. ACLO Bldg 91 Civic Light Opera 10,000 12 months 50.00 /mo 8 Q 0 SECOND ST:'s C z THIRD c t3. P1 Z 0 W c v _ di FER" Y PINT 0 ORION ST. 0 tnu) z S KYHAWK ST. H 13-i311' 1 1S NIdW B A Y V I E W n SANTA CLARA AVE.> C n 0 n0 14t+ City of Alameda Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority June 7, 2006 To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: Debra Kurita Executive Director 3 -A Re: Certification of Golf Course EIR and Authorization to Proceed with Negotiations with Port of Oakland and Army Corps of Engineers BACKGROUND Following the ARRA Board's April 2004 direction to continue with the EIR and permitting process for the golf course project, the ARRA issued a Draft Environmental Impact Report on the proposed Alameda Point Golf Course and Hotel project in July of 2004 for a 45 -day review period. The EIR Certification action allows the ARRA to explore the feasibility of acquiring dredged materials from the Port of Oakland as they become available. If they can be obtained, dredge materials can be dewatered and stockpiled on the site until market conditions improve enough to make the golf course project economically feasible. The Planning Board held a public hearing on the DEIR on August 23, 2004. A significant amount of time has now passed since the EIR was first issued. Subsequent to the distribution of the DEIR and as part of its comments on the DEIR, the Navy revealed that its consultants had discovered what they believed to be seasonal wetlands on Installation Restoration Site 1, which is the western part of the proposed golf course site. The presence of wetlands is significant new information. It required new research, data collection and recirculation of the Biological Resources chapter and related portions of the DEIR. The Revisions to the DEIR were circulated for a 45 -day review period beginning March 1, 2005 and concluding on April 15, 2005. DISCUSSION Several agencies commented on the revised document. The Response to Comments Document was mailed to those agencies that commented to allow them a 10 -day review before the certification of the Final EIR is considered. Comments received on both the DEIR and Revisions to the DEIR and responses to each comment are included in the Document. The entire EIR consists of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), the Revisions to the DEIR, and this Response to Comment document. Together, these documents constitute the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service Honorable Chair and Members of Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority June 7, 2006 Page 2 The Draft EIR and Revisions examined the potential impacts to the environment that may result from implementation of the project and its three feasible alternatives, including a No Project Alternative. A description of the proposed project, alternatives evaluated, and probable environmental effects are summarized as follows. Alameda Point Golf Course The proposed project is an 18 -hole links -style golf course, public open space with associated facilities, and a nine -hole executive (short) course on approximately 215 acres at Alameda Point. If developed, the project will provide public access to the shoreline via a public park operated by the City of Alameda and an extension of the San Francisco Bay Trail. The site contains portions of the abandoned Alameda Naval Station airfield, guard tower, and several small support structures, all of which are proposed to be demolished. Runway pavement may be left in place or processed and recycled. Approximately 2,000,000 cubic yards of dredged material from the nearby Oakland Estuary (part of the Port of Oakland's 50 -Foot Dredge Project that was evaluated in a EIR certified in 1999), the Seaplane Lagoon at Alameda Point, Port of San Francisco dredge areas, or other areas in the Bay would be used to cap the existing fill material at the site and to construct topographic relief and drainage for the golf course on the existing flat site. It is anticipated that construction of the golf course, structures and road system would begin only after market conditions improve and financing becomes available. The golf course is targeted to meet the market for high quality, daily fee golf facilities. The golf course is planned to accommodate both regular golfing seven days a week and tournament events. The clubhouse, with a pro -shop, is proposed to be an approximately 25,000 square -foot structure, which is envisioned to rise up to 30 feet in height. The clubhouse may be a separate structure or may be attached to a hotel. Various attendant facilities, such as golf cart storage and maintenance facilities also would be constructed. Restrooms, rain shelters and irrigation and utility systems are included as part of the concept for the project. The project is proposed to include a hotel /conference center occupying approximately 300,000 square feet with up to 300 rooms. The hotel, clubhouse and public parking area are envisioned to be located in the west central portion of the site. The hotel could be up to three stories and obtain a maximum height of 40 feet. The hotel was not analyzed in the DEIR beyond the program level. Additional permitting and environmental clearance will be required in the future, as feasibility for the hotel is determined. The attached site plan has a placeholder location for both the clubhouse and hotel. A temporary clubhouse structure may be provided at this location. A new two-lane road connecting to Main Street is proposed to provide access to the golf course and hotel /conference center. Parking for up to 200 vehicles for golfers would be provided at the clubhouse, and 560 spaces at the hotel /conference center /restaurant (including 500 spaces for the hotel and 60 spaces for the restaurant). Other project facilities analyzed include a domestic water supply and irrigation system, water recycling system with an open pond, utilities, lighting, and fencing along the Alameda National Wildlife Refuge to prevent public access to the California least tem colony. Shoreline Access Extensive review by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission's Design Review Board and staff, as well as a series of meetings with interested parties such as Alamedans for Parks and Trails, Bike Alameda, East Bay Regional Parks, League of Women Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service G:\Comdev \Base Reuse& Redevp \ARRA\STAFFREP\2006\05 June\3 A GC ELR,doc Honorable Chair and Members of Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority June 7, 2006 Page 3 Voters, and Bay Trail staff over the course of three years resulted in the current shoreline access design for the site. Associated project elements are the development of public access lands along the water's edge, parking and amenities (Attachment 1 — Fig. 3 -2, Project Site Plan in the DER). The southwestern corner of the project is the site of the larger park, and the ultimate destination of the roadway, which now follows the southern boundary of the site. The southern park site is six acres in size, to the high tide line, with a beach that appears at low tides. A public access trail for hikers and bicyclists will be located along the water's edge and through a portion of the golf course, as shown in the site plan. The section of trail that follows the estuary provides 2,450 linear feet of shoreline access. The trail has been designed within a 40 -foot right -of -way throughout the golf course, affording bay views and shoreline access, interspersed with the golf course in a manner that allows golfers to come to the water's edge to play and take advantage of the views as well. Distances between golf tees, fairways, and trails meet established safety standards for separation between uses. The trail width is 18 feet: 12 feet of asphalt plus a three -foot wide decomposed granite jogging path on each side. Parking and staging for the trail is proposed to be provided jointly with the parking at the golf course clubhouse and hotel complex, with additional parking at the point park. The trail connects the two parks and view areas, and the northwest comer of the proposed Alameda National Wildlife Refuge where seasonal access to a trail around the Refuge would be provided by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. A return loop follows the southern border between the golf course and the refuge back to the eastern entrance to the golf course. At least 41 acres of the golf course will be developed as native species grasslands as part of the plan to protect the California least tern, an endangered species, which nests in the adjacent refuge. The trail is buffered from the active play areas of the golf course by these swaths of grass, which also provide visual open space along the trail. The trail, proposed to be a link to the regional Bay Trail system, would connect to the existing Bay Trail in the City of Alameda, allowing access around the perimeter of the former base, through central Alameda, and onto Bay Farm Island across the bike bridge that was constructed by the city in the early 19901s. This trail section ultimately links to the Martin Luther King Regional Shoreline in Oakland. The proposed Bay Trail along the north and west waterfront would be 8,350 feet in length, including spurs. Of this amount, 5,800 feet are directly along the water's edge. The Bay is visible from virtually every point on the trail. The return loop of the trail around the southern and eastern portion of the golf course would be 8,500 feet, making a total loop trail length of 16,850 linear feet (not including the interior trail along the road to the Hotel complex). Water Access The plan provides for two parks with direct points of access to the water. They are located to allow maximum public access by foot or bicycle and focus on views of major interest: the San Francisco skyline, the larger San Francisco Bay, the Bay Bridge, Treasure Island, and the Estuary and Port of Oakland operations with the East Bay Hills beyond. As illustrated on the conceptual park plans shown in Attachment 2 (Fig. 3 -6, Esplanade and Vista Point Park in the DEIR), the southernmost access park is located at the border of the Wildlife Refuge and will provide a seasonal link to the Refuge, which will be open to the public September through mid - April. This park will include a picnic pavilion, a shoreline walking /viewing area, large amounts of open grass, and parking. Vehicles would access the park from the east. This park includes a small beach area with a footpath. The beach is intended as a quiet, passive park area. The Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service G:1Coi idev\Base Reuse& Redevp \ARRA \STAFFREP\2006\06 Junel3 -A GC EIR.doc Honorable Chair and Members of Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority June 7, 2006 Page 4 second water access park is located at the northwestern point of the golf course, in the Point Park. Three spurs of the trail lead from a small grassy park to the water's edge. The park area would provide interpretive information about the views from the site, the history of the site and the trail network. Picnic areas, views and the link to the regional trail system would make this site an attraction for bikers and hikers as well as hotel guests. It is proposed that the spurs to the shoreline at this area be pedestrian access only, with bikes walked, to prevent interference with golf play and carts, as well as preserving the quiet character of the point. Entitlements The project falls within the 100' shoreline band of Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) jurisdiction and thus requires a permit. Staff has completed pre - application review by the BCDC Design Review Board, which will allow the City to submit the application for full project approval by BCDC. The permit application cannot be considered by the BCDC board until the project EIR is certified. Additional approvals will be required from the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the US Army Corps of Engineers for dredge material dewatering and construction adjacent to the Estuary. Planning Permits The General Plan designation for the site is Open Space. An amendment to the General Plan to designate the shoreline trail as the Bay Trail will be required. A use permit to operate the dewatering portion of the project is also required for the receipt of dredge materials. Future actions required: A re- zoning from the current M -2 -G (General Industrial (Manufacturing) with a Special Government Combining) to 0 (open Space) zoning would be required for the development of the golf course and hotel facility; however, it would not be required for constructing the de- watering facility and stockpiling of dredge material. While a golf course is a permitted use in the 0 District, the concessionaire activities (clubhouse, etc.) require a Conditional Use Permit, as would the hotel /conference facility. It is anticipated that rezoning for the golf course project will be part of the Alameda Point entitlement process. Design Review is also required, but would be conducted at a later date. Significant Environmental Issues Evaluated in the EIR Table 2 -1 in the Draft EIR and Table 2 -1 contained in the Revisions to the DEIR summarize the environmental impacts of the project and indicate their relative levels of significance. The impact areas evaluated include visual resources, water resources, historic and cultural resources, biological resources, geology and soils, utilities, transportation and circulation, air quality, noise, hazardous materials, land use, and public services and recreation. Impacts in the following areas would be considered significant without the implementation of mitigation measures: visual resources, water resources, historic and cultural resources, biological resources, geology and soils, utilities, transportation and circulation, air quality, noise, and hazardous materials. Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service G:1Comdev \Base Reuse& Redevp \ARRA \STAFFREP12006\O6 June\3 -A GC EIR.doe Honorable Chair and Members of Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority June 7, 2006 Page 5 With the application of mitigation measures, there will be no significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project. Alternatives to the Project An EIR must analyze a reasonable range of alternatives. The EIR examines the following three alternatives to the project: A. The No Project Alternative, which would entail no development on the Project site. B. The No Hotel Alternative, which proposes construction of the golf course facility and clubhouse, but no hotel or conference center. C. The Maximum Waterfront Access Alternative, which would locate the trail along the entire edge of the project site. Environmentally Superior Alternative CEQA requires the identification of an environmentally superior alternative other than the "No Project" alternative. Based on analysis in Chapter 6 of the DEIR, the No Hotel Alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to certifying the golf course and hotel project EIR. With a certified EIR, staff can begin exploring the feasibility of accepting dredge materials in exchange for a tipping fee. The goal is to negotiate a tipping fee that covers the cost of handing the dredge materials and preparing the site for a future golf course. Any proposal to accept dredge materials in exchange for a tipping fee would first require approval of the ARRA Board. RECOMMENDATION Certify the EIR as complete, and direct staff to begin negotiations with the Port of Oakland and Army Corps of Engineers to accept dredge materials on the site. Res e f4llysubmitted, e • ie Little Dev - . . rent S er es Director By: D e ot. r Base Reuse and Community Development Manager Attachments: 1. Golf Course Site Plan 2. Esplanade and Vista Point Park FEIR under separate cover Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service G:\Comdev\Base Reuse. Redevp \ARRA\STAFFREP\2006106 June\; -A GC EIR.doc = • '•• . 4 • •,' • • •,,••• ••••I Tc Vis La loitIE Obsffvation Areas wiLmvn Bon:cites Landniark Depicted City tto Explore Low- ing pret Signage ACHMENT 2 Park Boundaly 'ptanacle w/ 13cliches & fetes( )pus rrancisco aier d ti A Picnic Art.211. Pavilion Resroom nay Trail — Parking Loo 19 Spaces Esp anade Park A Ae: .Esulanade and Vista Point Park