In the fall of 2015, the Trust for Public Land reached out to ULI San Francisco (ULIsf) to assemble a TAP of multidisciplinary experts who could understand the complexities of Point Molate and provide recommendations for the future of the study area.

The ULI TAP Process
Technical Assistance Panels provide expert advice to local governments, public agencies and nonprofit organizations facing complex land use and real estate issues in the greater Bay Area. Drawing from our seasoned professional membership base, ULIsf offers objective and responsible guidance on a variety of land use and real estate issues ranging from site-specific projects to public policy questions. At the same time, TAPs provide ULI members a unique opportunity to give back to their communities.

In the spring of 2016, ULIsf assembled an interdisciplinary group of Bay Area leaders for the Point Molate TAP, who volunteered their expertise in topics including market analysis, land use and design, finance and development strategies, governance and policy, and implementation. The TAP panelists included:

• Rick Dishnica, President, Dishnica Company, Panel Chair
• Alan Billingsley, Principal, Billingsley Interests
• Kelly Kline, Economic Development Director and Chief Innovation Officer, City of Fremont
• Tom Lockard, Former Managing Director, Stone & Youngberg
• Amit Price Patel, Principal, David Baker Architects
• Corinne Stewart, Associate Principal, AECOM
• Megan Keith, Urban Planner, AECOM, Lead TAP Author

Point Molate Background
Point Molate is approximately 400 acres of bayfront land located in Richmond, California. It is one of the last pieces of undeveloped waterfront in the region. The land immediately to the north, east, and south of Point Molate is owned by Chevron. Although it is only accessible by one narrow road right off of the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, Point Molate is desirably situated between the East Bay Cities and Marin County. Point Molate’s geographical features are a mix of beaches and hills in addition to several public amenities and abandoned buildings that are the legacy of its previous users.
The Three Questions
The goal of the TAP was to provide recommendations based on the three questions posed by the City of Richmond.

Question 1: Given the uses suggested in the plans for Point Molate since the U.S. Navy began contemplating transferring the property of Richmond, are there any additional or different land uses that you would recommend for the site for a mixed use concept that optimizes synergy between economic development, natural beauty and historic character of Point Molate?

Question 2: What are the short, mid and long term implementation strategies to bring the mixed use concept to fruition? What are the specific next steps that need to happen (such as related to: governance, funding, infrastructure, marketing, and specific planning)?

Question 3: What financing mechanisms are available to the City of Richmond for utility infrastructure development, Winehaven Historic District rehabilitation, environmental restoration, as well as any additional development needed to support future land uses and parkland goals?

TAP Recommendations
The ULI TAP panel was tasked with outlining recommendations in response to these questions that the City of Richmond posed concerning future potential development of Point Molate. The panel took a tour of Point Molate. A handful of stakeholders were consulted to find out their perspectives and what they hoped would happen at Point Molate. The panelists spoke with a limited number of city staff, representatives from community organizations, and community members. Generally speaking, stakeholders felt that changes to Point Molate should include:

• Maintaining and highlighting its historical importance
• Providing the City of Richmond with more recreational space
• Generating revenue for the community

In Question 1, the City of Richmond asked for recommendations on different development strategies for the land. The panel provided six alternate concepts. These alternatives included: maintain current use, park plus, lodging/ conference center/ camping, commercial/ industrial, housing, and mixed use. A summary of each of these options can be seen in the graphic below.
Regarding the second question, the panel’s answer was split into time based implementation recommendations: Short-Term (the first 1-2 years) concentrated on securing funding and further research; Mid-Term (3-5 years) focusing on improvements and amenity installations; and Long-Term (6 years and beyond) centered on soliciting and implementing plans for development.

For Question 3, the panel recommended and evaluated a dozen funding options. Their highest recommendations were a general obligation bond, state cap and trade funds, and historic tax credits.

Read the full TAP report and recommendations here.

Find out more about ULI San Francisco Technical Assistance Panels (TAPs) Program.