San Leandro Marina Alts Study_Final

Home

4. Alternatives to ensure that the project is self-sustaining and to ensure that there would not be a need for future maintenance dredging. Nature Park Alternative The Nature Park alternative will require authorizations similar to those required under the Aquatic Park Alternative for the dredging and placement of the high marsh islands and the installation of the boardwalk, vista point and interpretive centers. The pedestrian bridges and boardwalks would also require authorization from BCDC most likely under a Coastal Development Permit. This Alternative is anticipated to only require permits for construction. And similar to the Aquatic Park Alternative, it is possible that the resource agencies may require monitoring to ensure the Marina Park is self-sustaining. Issues and Constraints Each alternative has its own constraints based on activity. The rating of constraints indicates that there are no significant differences between the three alternatives. However, this should be tempered depending upon which agency presents the greatest permitting constraint. For example, BCDC may pose the greatest constraint in terms of approval process because of the Design Review Board requirement. But USFWS (and possibly CDFG) may present the greatest constraint related to competing policies regarding restoration and public access. If the site is expected to provide suitable habitat for federally listed species such as California clapper rail or salt marsh harvest mouse, USFWS approval may be contingent on reducing or eliminating public access. The rating of the alternatives based on permitting constraints would yield the Marina Park Alternative as the alternative with the fewest regulatory constraints, because the site currently dredges and operates under agreements through the LTMS and this approval process should be fairly straightforward. Removing the piers and pilings would require permits from all of the state and federal resource agencies during construction, and the implementation of this alternative would be permitted through the LTMS for maintenance dredging similar to current conditions at the Marina. The Marina Park Alternative provides for the continuation of the Marina operations and includes the slightest change in use compared with the other alternatives. Overall, it appears that this Alternative would have the shortest approval time compared with the other alternatives based on the assumption that agency concerns would likely be minor. The constraints rating of the Aquatic Park and Nature Park Alternatives yield approximately the same level of constraints because of the amount of in -bay fill associated with these alternatives. It is assumed that the amount of fill to construct the beaches and high marsh (Aquatic Park Alternative) and the high marsh (Nature Park Alternative) would be greater than the existing fill of the Marina itself. While this would likely be viewed as an improvement, increased bay fill will be a constraint for all agencies. It should also be anticipated that the agencies will require assurances that these Alternatives will be self-sustaining ecosystems and that maintenance dredging will not be necessary. It should be anticipated that, prior to authorization, the agencies may require additional information, such as sediment modeling, or post -construction monitoring or both. San Leandro Marina Harbor Basin 4-16 ESA / 210461 Alternatives Study March 2011