Coyote Hills Restoration and Public Access Project Coyote Hills Regional Park C o n c e p t P l a n a n d S i t e P r o g r a m

Transcription

1 Coyote Hills Restoration and Public Access Project Coyote Hills Regional Park C o n c e p t P l a n a n d S i t e P r o g r a m Chris Barton Environmental Programs Manager Aquisition Stewardship Development Division 1 February 20, 2018

2 Presentation 1. Project Status 2. Review Concept Plan and Site Program Draft Land Use Unit and Facilities Map Amendment Draft Conceptual Site Plan Draft Trail Plan 2

3 Location: Coyote Hills Regional Park Coyote Hills Regional Park Location: Ward 5 (Wieskamp) Alameda County City of Fremont Year Opened: 1968 Total Acres: 1,274 Recent Additions: Patterson +296 Ac. (2014) Church +10 Ac. (2016) Highlights: Adjacent wildlife refuge, visitor center, camping, naturalist programs, picnicking, hiking and bicycling 3

4 Project Area Eden Landing Ecological Reserve Union City ACFCD (EBRPD Lease) EBRPD Project Area Don Edwards SF Bay National Wildlife Refuge EBRPD Union City Dumbarton Quarry (Future EBRPD Facilities) 4

5 History & Background Property Acquired (446 ac.) Land Use Plan (LUP) Adopted Alameda County Flood Control Lease (472 ac.) Other Acquisitions (56 ac.) Land Use Plan Amendment (LUPA), CEQA, Public Review Patterson Ranch Donation (296 ac.) Church Acquisition (10 ac.) 5

6 History & Background January 10, 2017 (Board Action) Professional Services Contract to Develop Public Access and Habitat at Patterson July 6, Board Executive Committee Update #1 August 15, Community Workshop #1 November 2, 2017 Board Executive Committee Update #2 November 13, 2017 Community Workshop #2 February 20, Board Review of Concept Plan and Site Program 6

7 Interpretation Staging/ Parking Trails Climate Change Urban Agriculture Public Access Project Goals and Objectives Wetlands Public Access Restoration Upland Habitat Wildlife Protected Species Weed Control Policy Framework: EBRPD o Master Plan o Coyote Hills Land Use Plan o Ordinance 38 Baylands Ecosystem Habitat Goals Update (2015) California State Wildlife Action Plan City of Fremont ogeneral Plan oclimate Action Plan obicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans Alameda County obicycle and Pedestrian Plan owater District Urban Water Management Plan oflood Control and Water Conservation District ABAG Bay Trail Plan 7

8 Project Goals and Objectives Staging/ Parking Trails Climate Change Interpretation Urban Agriculture Public Access Wetlands Public Access Restoration Upland Habitat Wildlife Protected Species Weed Control Urban Agriculture Goals Provide opportunities to continue organic farming, seek synergistic partnerships between agriculture, restoration and climate smart features. 8

9 Project Goals and Objectives Interpretation Staging/ Parking Trails Climate Change Urban Agriculture Public Access Wetlands Restoration Public Access Upland Habitat Wildlife Protected Species Weed Control Public Access Goals Develop a more prominent park entrance 9

10 Project Goals and Objectives Interpretation Staging/ Parking Trails Climate Change Urban Agriculture Public Access Wetlands Restoration Public Access Upland Habitat Wildlife Protected Species Weed Control Public Access Goals: Develop staging/parking, trails and connections, habitat buffers, Climate Smart Park interpretive exhibits 10

11 Project Goals and Objectives Interpretation Climate Change Wetlands Upland Habitat Restoration Goals Restore and enhance riparian, wetland and grassland habitats. Design habitats to increase plant and animal diversity. Staging/ Parking Urban Agriculture Public Access Wildlife Trails Restoration Public Access Protected Species Weed Control 11

12 Outreach and Public Participation Project Initiation January-August 2017 (~8 Mo) COMPLETE Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Constraints 2. Program Formulation: September-January 2018 (~5 Mo) 1. Project Initiation Board Exec Committee Workshop #1 (Aug 15) Other Stakeholders 3. Draft LUPA, CEQA February-June 2018 (~5 Mo) 4. Rev and Approve Summer

13 Outreach and Public Participation 1. Project Initiation January-August 2017 (~8 Mo) COMPLETE Program Formulation: September-January 2018 (~5 Mo) 3. Draft LUPA, CEQA February-June 2018 (~5 Mo) 4. Rev and Approve Summer 2018 Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Constraints 1. Project Initiation Board Exec Committee Workshop #1 (Aug 15) Other Stakeholders Concepts and Schematic Designs 2. Program Formulation Board Exec Committee Workshop #2 (Nov 13) Other Stakeholders Board of Directors Site Program, Project Description 13

14 Outreach and Public Participation 1. Project Initiation January-August 2017 (~8 Mo) COMPLETE Program Formulation: September-January 2018 (~5 Mo) 3. Draft LUPA, CEQA January-May 2018 (~5 Mo) 4. Rev and Approve Summer 2018 Site Program, Project Description 3. Draft Land Use Plan Amendment and Environmental Effects (CEQA) CEQA NOP and Scoping Meeting Park Advisory Committee 45-Day Review/Comment Period Board Exec Committee #3 4. Project Review and Approval Board of Directors Restoration and Public Access Project Adopted Development Plan LUPA, CEQA Site Program, Project Description 14

15 Public Outreach and Participation Plan 1. Workshop Participation Workshop #1 (Constraints and Opportunities): 45 Workshop #2 (Concept Options): Outreach Notification in 4 languages (English, Spanish, Hindi, Mandarin) Public affairs direct contacts Direct stakeholder contact. 50 s, 30 phone conversations, 6 meetings Mailing list: 1,321 contacts Ohlone Tribe: 90 contacts List (interested parties): 43 contacts Agencies: 30 contacts Website. Project information posted to web 3. Stakeholders a. Perry Farms b. Friends of Coyote Hills c. City of Fremont d. Fremont Unified School District e. Tri-City Ecology f. Native American Representatives g. Citizens to Complete the Refuge h. Alameda County Mosquito and Vector Control i. Alameda County Flood Control District j. Alameda County Resource Conservation District k. USFWS l. CDFW m. South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project 15

16 1. Expand existing Oak grove at site entry 2. Provide elevated bird observation platforms 3. Keep parking on the south side of Patterson Ranch Road 4. Use the hilly area (west of study area) for a higher elevation trail to get better views 5. Provide a community garden and farm stand 6. Provide a better information kiosk 7. Provide water stations 8. Fix problem with traffic stacking 9. Provide areas for willow expansion 10. Area on north side for habitat is okay 11. Consider viability of agriculture as it relates to Sea Level Rise, Feedback From Workshop #1 Focus: Constraints and Opportunities 12. What does a picnic area include? (tables, BBQs, trash, etc. but no play structures) 13. Parking should be spread out north and south 14. Trails should be wide enough for multi-use 15. Balance public access. 16. The existing gravel parking lot is too close to the road 17. Parking should be free 18. There should be safety speed bumps or other traffic slowing along Patterson Ranch Road 19. Highlight the park entrance 20. Fix traffic back up issues 21. In north area, limit trails and provide raised viewing platforms 22. Avoid human remains or other sensitive cultural resources 16

17 1. Expand existing Oak grove at site entry 2. Provide elevated bird observation platforms 3. Keep parking on the south side of Patterson Ranch Road 4. Use the hilly area (west of study area) for a higher elevation trail to get better views 5. Provide a community garden and farm stand 6. Provide a better information kiosk 7. Provide water stations 8. Fix problem with traffic stacking 9. Provide areas for willow expansion 10. Area on north side for habitat is okay 11. Consider viability of agriculture as it relates to Sea Level Rise, Feedback From Workshop #1 Focus: Constraints and Opportunities 12. What does a picnic area include? (tables, BBQs, trash, etc. but no play structures) 13. Parking should be spread out north and south 14. Trails should be wide enough for multi-use 15. Balance public access. 16. The existing gravel parking lot is too close to the road 17. Parking should be free 18. There should be safety speed bumps or other traffic slowing along Patterson Ranch Road 19. Highlight the park entrance 20. Fix traffic back up issues 21. In north area, limit trails and provide raised viewing platforms 22. Remove contractors residence, protect cultural resources and habitat 17

18 1. Like the idea of more shared use paths. 2. Better connection to City park site. 3. Ag option is okay only if there is a willing operator. 4. Climate Smart option was the most favorable. 5. Protect the site s cultural resources. 6. Provide new trails, avoid redundant trails. 7. Support for Bay Trail bridge across Alameda Creek. 8. Parking should be near entry to Paseo Padre. 9. Prefer parking away from Paseo Padre. 10. Mr. Perry (current farm tenant) insights on agriculture. 11. Irrigation infrastructure should be included in plan, in addition to well repair. 12. The farming operation already does Climate Smart farming, such as composting and winter cover crop. Feedback From Workshop #2 Focus: Concept Options 13. Crop rotation is important in the ag area. 14. There is a deer problem, a double fence to preclude deer for, ag area should be considered. 15. Preference for option with more habitat restoration 16. Habitat is preferred over agriculture. 17. Interest in keeping meadow wet (as well as oak savannah) in northern area vs. mowed native hay. 18. Stop light is needed at Paseo Padre Pkwy. and Patterson Ranch Rd. 19. Install a park entry gate closer to Paseo Padre Pkwy. 20. Park entrance sign needed near Paseo Padre Pkwy. 21. Paved trails will be easier for people with disabilities to use. 22. Definite interest in climate smart farming 18

19 Current Land Use Unit and Facilities Map Glider Area Dairy Glen Recreation Unit 19

20 Current Land Use Unit and Facilities Map Project Area Glider Area Dairy Glen Recreation Unit 20

21 Current Land Use Unit and Facilities Map Project Area North: Habitat Glider Area Dairy Glen Recreation Unit 21

22 Current Land Use Unit and Facilities Map Project Area Central: Agriculture Glider Area Dairy Glen Recreation Unit 22

23 Current Land Use Unit and Facilities Map South: Flood Control Glider Area Dairy Glen Recreation Unit 23

24 Draft Land Use Unit and Facilities Map Amendment (~121 ac.) Project Area Patterson Ranch Road (~7 ac.) (~249 ac.; 81%) Glider Area Dairy Glen Recreation Unit (~29 ac.) (~50 ac.) (~99 ac.) (~7 ac.; 2%) (~50 ac.; 16%) 24

25 Draft Conceptual Site Plan (Preferred Option) Future school, city park Park Entry, Safety, Bus, Aesthetics LEGEND: Parking (98 car), Picnic, Restrooms (~3.5 mi) (~0.4 mi) Farm Stand, 20 Car Lot, Park Entry County Flood Control Line P Project (~58 ac.) (~46 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~27 ac.) To Dumbarton Quarry 25

26 Contractor s Residence 26

27 Parking Concept 27

28 Draft Conceptual Site Plan (Preferred Option) LEGEND: (~3.5 mi) (~0.4 mi) (~58 ac.) (~46 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~27 ac.) 28

29 Draft Conceptual Site Plan (Preferred Option) LEGEND: (~3.5 mi) (~0.4 mi) (~58 ac.) (~46 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~27 ac.) 29

30 Draft Conceptual Site Plan (Preferred Option) LEGEND: (~3.5 mi) (~0.4 mi) (~58 ac.) (~46 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~27 ac.) Coyote Hills Restoration and Public Access Project 30

31 Draft Conceptual Site Plan (Preferred Option) LEGEND: (~3.5 mi) (~0.4 mi) (~58 ac.) (~46 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~27 ac.) 31

32 Draft Conceptual Site Plan (Preferred Option) LEGEND: (~3.5 mi) (~0.4 mi) (~58 ac.) (~46 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~59 ac.) (~27 ac.) 32

33 Draft Trail Plan SUMMARY: ~3.9 Mi- New Trails Hiking: ~0.4 mi Multi-Use: ~3.5 mi ~1.6 Mi- Improved Existing Trails 33

34 Next Steps 1. Project Initiation January-August 2017 (~8 Mo) COMPLETE Complete Program Formulation: September-January 2018 (~5 Mo) 3. Draft LUPA, CEQA January-May 2018 (~5 Mo) 4. Rev and Approve Summer Winter/Spring Draft LUPA, CEQA, Draft Dev Plan; Park Advisory Com Summer 2018 (Board Action) Review and Consider LUP Amendment, Dev Plan, Environmental Effects/CEQA 34

35 Board Action 1. Approve Conceptual Site Plan and Site Program Draft Land Use Units and Facilities Map Amendment Draft Conceptual Site Plan Draft Trail Plan 2. Authorize Staff to Proceed with Land Use Plan Amendment and CEQA 35

36 36 [end] [End]

37 11 Landscape Units 37

38 3 Program Options UNIT PROGRAM OPTIONS MAP KEY OPTION 1: MORE WETLAND HABITAT More areas of seasonal wetlands and riparian enhancement and expansion with agriculture mowing native grasses for OPTION 2: MORE CLIMATE SMART FARMING More areas of trees for absorbing CO2, with agricultural fields available for demonstration concepts such as OPTION 3: MORE AGRICULTURE More crop areas and management of grasslands for hay production hay compost and low till management of crop residue 1 Wet meadow, Seasonal wetland, Coastal Prairie, 1. Wet meadow, Oak savanna 1. Mowed native hay 2 Mixed Riparian Forest, Willow Thicket 2. Mixed Riparian Forest, Willow Thicket 2. Mixed Riparian Forest, Willow Thicket 3 Wet meadow, Seasonal wetland, Coastal prairie, Willow Thicket 3. Willow Thicket, Oak Savanna 3. Wet meadow, Mowed native hay 4 Oak savanna 4. Oak Savanna 4. Oak Savanna, Mowed native hay 5 Agricultural crops 5. Climate Smart Agricultural crops 5. Agricultural crops 6 Farm Stand, Oak savanna 6. Farm Stand, Oak Savanna 6. Farm Stand, Oak savanna 7 Coastal prairie 7. Climate Smart Agricultural crops, Managed CA Annual grasslands 7. Agricultural crops, Managed CA Annual grasslands 8 Coastal prairie 8. Managed CA Annual grasslands 8. Agricultural crops, Mowed native hay 9 Wet meadow / Irrigated seasonal wetlands with Cottonwoods 9. Wet meadow / Irrigated Seasonal Wetlands with Cottonwoods 9. Wet meadow / Irrigated Seasonal wetlands with Cottonwoods 10 Willow Thicket 10. Willow Thicket 10. Willow Thicket 11 County of Alameda Public Works Agency 11. County of Alameda Public Works Agency 11. County of Alameda Public Works Agency 38

39 3 Program Options PROGRAM OPTIONS OPTION 1: OPTION 2: OPTION 3: OPTION 1: MORE WETLAND HABITAT Kiosk, 100 Car Staging w/overflow OPTION 2: MORE CLIMATE SMART FARMING OPTION 3: MORE AGRICULTURE ORIENTED Kiosk, 100 Car Staging 1 Wet meadow, Seasonal wetland, Coastal Prairie, 2 Mixed Riparian Forest, Willow Thicket 3 Wet meadow, Seasonal wetland, Coastal prairie, Willow Thicket 4 Oak savanna 5 Agricultural crops 6 Farm Stand, Oak savanna 7 Coastal prairie 8 Coastal prairie 9 Wet meadow / Irrigated seasonal wetlands with Cottonwoo ds 10 Willow Thicket 11 County of Alameda Public Works Agency Wet meadow, Oak savanna Mixed Riparian Forest, Willow Thicket Willow Thicket, Oak Savanna Oak Savanna Climate Smart Agricultural crops Farm Stand, Oak Savanna Climate Smart Agricultural crops, Managed CA Annual grasslands Managed CA Annual grasslands Wet meadow / Irrigated Seasonal Wetlands with Cottonwoo ds Willow Thicket County of Alameda Public Works Agency Mowed hay Mixed Riparian Forest, Willow Thicket Wet meadow, Mowed hay Oak Savanna, Mowed hay Agricultural crops Farm Stand, Oak Savanna Agricultural crops, Managed CA Annual grasslands Field crops, Mowed Hay Wet meadow / Irrigated Seasonal wetlands with Cottonwoods Willow Thicket County of Alameda Public Works Agency 39

40 Excerpts from Alameda Creek Watershed Historical Ecology (SF Estuary Institute, 2013) 40 [End]

41 Milk House 41

42 Agricultural Residue 42

43 Location Coyote Hills Regional Park 43

44 Budget/Project Cost Total Project Cost Depends on The Scope of Work Hard Costs: Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate: $4-5M (staging area, habitat north of Patterson Ranch Road, trails, entry relocation, soil remediation, utilities) Soft Costs: Phase 1: $350,000 (Actual) planning, design development through CEQA Phase 2: $ M (Estimate) project design, engineering, weeding, permitting, construction management, bio monitoring, environmental compliance, contingency Estimated Total Project Cost: $ M (Hard Costs + Soft Cost) 44