Loading...
2008-03-05 ARRA PacketAGENDA Special Meeting of the Governing Body of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Alameda City Hall Wednesday, March 5, 2008 Council Chamber, Room 391 Meeting will begin at 6:00 p.m. 2263 Santa Clara Avenue Alameda, CA 94501 I. ROLL CALL 2. Public Comment on Agenda Items only. Anyone wishing to address the Board on agenda items only, may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per item.. 3. ADJOURNMENT To CLOSED SESSION OF THE ARRA To CONSIDER: 3 -A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (54956,8): Property: Estuary Park Negotiating parties: ARRA and Navy Under. negotiation: Price and Terns 3-B. CONFERENCE WIT14 REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (54956.8): Property: Alameda Point Negotiating parties: ARRA and SCC Alameda Point LLC Under negotiation: Price and Terms Annot ncemtent of Action Taken In Closed. Session, If any. 4. ADJOURNMENT 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. Special ARRA Closed Session Council Chamber, Room 391 March 5, 2008 6:00 p.m. Item 3 -A. This report is distributed to the Chair and Boardmembers under separate cover. Item 3 -B. This report is an oral report only. AGENDA Regular Meeting of the Governing Body of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Alameda City Hall Council Chamber, Room 390 Wednesday, March 5, 2008 2263 Santa Clara Avenue Meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. Alameda, CA 94501 1, ROLL CALL 2. CONSENT CALENDAR. Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted, approved or adopted by one motion unless a reciuest for removal for discLrssion or explanation is received from the Board or a member of the i)ublic. 2 -A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of February G, 2008. 2 -B. Provide Building 24 for No Cost to the American Heart Association for a Fundraiser. 2--C. Approve Sublease for NRC Environmental Services at Alameda Point. 2--D. Approve Sublease for Pacific Pine Foods at Alameda Point. 2 -E. Accept the City of Alameda Homeless Needs Assessment Prepared by PMC in Support of the Homeless Screening Process at the North Housing Parcel. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4--A. oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (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 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 ARR.A offices upon request. UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, February G, 2008 The meeting convened at 7 :15 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2 A 1. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Beverly Johnson Boardmernber Doug deHaan Boardmernber Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Lena Tam 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2 -A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 2, 2008. 2 -B. Approve Comment Letter to the Navy on the Draft Feasibility Study Report, IR. Site 24, Alameda Point. 2 -C. Approve an Environmental Testing Contract with Weston Solutions, Inc. to Support 2008 Dredging Not to Exceed $100,000 (to be reimbursed by MARAD). 2 -D. Approve Renewal of On.e -Year License Agreement for the Alameda Civic Light Opera at Alameda Point. Approval of the Consent Calendar was motioned. by Member Matarrese, seconded by Member Tam and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3 -A. Provide Negotiating Direction. Regarding SunCal Companies' Request to Amend the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement to Provide a Time Extension of Mandatory Milestones Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, stated that staff received a letter from. SunCal requesting a time extension for several. of the mandatory milestones contained in ENA: submittal of the development concept and submittal of the draft master plan. On the original schedule, the development concept, along with an infrastructure plan and business plan, were due on March 19, with the draft master plan due on May 19. With the 6 month extension, the due dates would be September 19 and November 19, respectively. Staff recommends the extension be granted if several conditions are met: information and reporting of existing studies and future studies be conducted in the next 6 months, along with expenditure of funds to conclude some studies necessary to get SunCal to its development concept and draft master plan.; and monitoring activities to make sure funds are being spent and work is being undertaken in an aggressive, efficient, and thoughtful way to move SunCal. and the community to the development concept and draft master plan. Member Matarrese asked, for the public's information, the reason why SunCal was requesting an extension. Ms. Potter explained that SunCal requested the extension because they have concluded that the PDC is not a financially and physically viable land plan. Initially when the ENA was negotiated and the time plan was set in place, the time plan was predicated on the assumption that the PDC would be the land plan, and the work that SunCal would undertake would be to refine that PDC document and refine some of the due diligence work. and move the PDC to the next step. with the conclusion by SunCal. that the PDC is not a feasible land plan, they have indicated that they would request additional time such that they can use that time to work with the community, continue their due diligence, and come up with what they feel and believe is the best land plan based on financial viability, what the physical constraints of the site would require for a land plan, and what the community would find as a suitable land plan for Alameda Point. Given the research and due diligence that SunCal has done to date, staff is supportive of the notion that, based on their business model, and the assumptions they've made about engineering viability and risks they're willing to take as a company, that the PDC is not necessarily the appropriate land plan for them to carry out as our master planner, and that it makes sense for them. to pursue other land plans that may be more feasible from their perspective, financially, technically, and from a market perspective. Staff recommends the time extension. with conditions based on performance that the AR..R.A Board and community should be comfortable that SunCal. is undertaking work to advance the development concept and the draft master plan. Member deHaan expressed concern that the reports indicate that single family homes are what doesn't make economic sense, but would like to know about the rest of the project, and whether Suncal is satisfied. Ms. Potter explained that 'he focus of the analysis regarding the viability of the single family homes has been on. the north east quadrant of the site, the area that SunCal has concluded single family homes aren't going to work from a technical. and physical perspective, but that they are not ruling out single family homes in other areas of the property. The land plan they want to explore would include residential, commercial, adaptive reuse of the existing historic structures, and open space. SunCal is still. evaluating the whole range of uses for Alameda Point to understand the proper mix of uses that makes sense and are not deviating from a mixed -use project Member Matarrese asked whether the peer reviewers concur on the technical reports conducted on the flood plains. Ms. Potter explained that the peer review i.s limited and focused on the existing conditions as documented by SunCal's consultants and the consultants who worked on the PDC, and the technologies that could be put into place to build the various types of development. what has been missing from the peer review to date is the cost estimates have yet to be prepared. what might need to happen by way of technologies and mitigations to allow development to go forward have not been costed yet, so we know a portion of the equation in terms of the issues that have been identified about liquefaction, seismic and slope stability. The challenge going forward for SunCal is their proposal on how they're going to mitigate those impacts and what they believe will be the appropriate development given the conditions. Ms. Potter clarified for Member Matarrese that our peer reviewers are in agreement with the assessment of the existing physical conditions. Chair Johnson called the public speakers. David Howard, Action Alameda, discussed density of homes and a cap of 2000 homes at Alameda Point. He also suggested that if the ARRA consider SunCal's extension request, that it should not extend beyond September 3o expressing concerns that SunCal will use the extra time to fund a ballot initiative in the November election to exempt Alameda Point from Measure A. The next speaker, Bill. Smith, spoke about below market rate and affordable housing in other Bay Area cities. Following Mr. Smith was Ann Mitchum who discussed placing more accessible commercial and grocery stores at Alameda Point for low-- income and disabled people living at Alameda Point. The final speaker, Beth Krase, Alameda Architectural. Preservation Society, spoke in support of the time extension for SunCal to allow them more time to consider the potential reuses of historic buildings at Alameda Point. Member deHaan discussed the transportation solutions and housing density with Mr. Pat Keliher, SunCal's Project Manager for Alameda Point. Mr. Keliher affirmed Member deHaan's question on whether SunCal is comfortable with the ambitious schedule. Member Gilmore discussed that we should fully expect there will be additional information or refinement of information that may change circumstances going forward, and we should take the time to analyze new information and figure out if it changes the plan or timeline. The project is not a race and should be done right, rather than quickly. Member Matarrese motioned to provide negotiation direction to staff regarding SunCal's request to amend the ENA to provide a time extension of Mandatory Milestones. Member Tangy seconded the notion and was passed by the following voice votes: Ayes 5, Noes o, Abstentions o. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4 -A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration advisory Board (RAB) representative. The RAB met on January 10 th. with two key items on the agenda: 1) Site 24 Feasibility Study which outlined a range of plans for remediation which. the Navy will evaluate, and 2) an update on sampling being done and rernediation activities of Site 34 along the north west, bounded by the estuary. The next RAB meeting is Feb. 7. 5, ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member deHaan requested a follow -up on the discussion regarding tine improvements on the piers. Leslie Little, Development Services Director, confirmed that there will be feedback to the ARRA Board at a future meeting. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 7:52 p.m. by Chair .Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Interoffice Memorandum. March 5, 2008 TO: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Debra Kurita, Executive Director 2 -C SUBJ: Approve Sublease for NR Environmental Services at Alameda Point BACKGROUND The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) governing body approve all Alameda Point subleases with. a lease term greater than one year. The proposed sublease for NRC Environmental Services i.s for two years. DDT CT T.� STON Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed sublease for NRC Environmental Services for a portion of Building 527. The rent for NRC ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES is $64,800 annually, or $0.90 per sq. ft. in the first year with a 3% increase each year in the subsequent years for the office use. Building 527 is in good condition. NRC Environmental Services has requested to start the lease in March 2008 and to begin. paying rent on April. 1, 2008. This period will be spent readying the space for their occupancy by installing furniture, telephone lines, and a Local. Area Network. In accordance with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the ARRA and Sun.Cal Development, this lease has been discussed with representatives from prom S unCal. and has their concurrence. BUDGET CONSIDERATION l FINANCIAL IMPACT The Lease will generate $59,400 in the -first year. These funds will be retained by the ARRA. RECOMMENDATION Approve the proposed sublease agreement. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and redevelopment Authority R see. Ily submit d, .r- eslie Little Development Services Director R By: Nanette Banks Finance Administration Manager March 5, 2008 Page 2 Attachment A. Proposed Sublease Business Terms B. Site Map ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS TENANT BUILDING SIZE (SE) TERM RENT NRC Environmental Services 527 6,000 2 yrs $5,400/mo. ATTACHMENT 1 c r c "z y 5 C f) X rr S '0 00 00* z CAD C04D i Nub k Y �a" ..ri: rte. v� c r,. ORIO 1 1 1 r 5 k F fSF` S Y a 3 G c z s r v: y ti a It T h i i ✓r �7Z? i{' F. Sz�f{' c.:. dd' AXCz1S' i�. z: i?%^ J�' t: isR2' aF'!i'iYl+�':�fi:6V' ?:pHX�'.�fi li•'v�:f:R yy� 90 �3. 3�s. SL.r r. :v«T,.R'Y/..3•T;sze rY.f.LC? Yj�Ya :ed_:'S.k"�;+: i:��creF?a��� Rh Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Interoffice Memorandum March 5, 2008 TO: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Debra Kuri ta, Executive Director SUB J: Approve Sublease for Pacific Fine Foods at Al ameda Point BACKGROUND The Alameda :Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) governing body approves all Alameda Point subleases with a lease term greater than one year. The proposed sublease for Pacific Fine Foods is for five years plus a three y ear renewal option. DISCUSSION Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed sublease renewal. for Pacific Fine Foods in Building 42. The rent for PACIFIC FINE FOODS is $18,857 annually, or $0.53 per sq. ft. in the first year and a 3% increase each year in the subsequent years, including the option period, for food service use. Building 42 is in fair condition. Pacific Fine Foods has requested a renewal for five years plus a three year option to extend the lease. The lease includes language allowing the lease to be canceled with a 90 day written notice once the extension has become operative. In accordance with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement, this sublease has been discussed with representatives from SunCal Companies and has their concurrence. BUDGET CONSIDERATION f FINANCIAL IMPACT The lease will. generate 18,857 in the first year. 'T'hese funds will be retained by the .A:RR..A. RECOMMENDATION Approve the proposed sublease agreement. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Respectfutly submitted, i L..esfie Little Development Services Director By: Nanette Banks Finance Administration Manager March 5, 2008 Page 2 Attachment: A. Proposed Sublease Business Terms B. Site Map ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS TENANT BUILDING SIZE (SF) TERM RENT Pacific Fine Foods 42 2 1 965 5 yrs 3 yr option to renew $1,571/mo. J Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority 2 _E Interoffice Memorandum To. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: Debra Kuri ta, Executive Director Date: March 5, 2008 Re: Accept the City of Alameda Homeless Needs Assessment Prepared by PMC World for the North Housing Parcel. Screening Process BACK GROUND On. November 5, 2007, the Navy declared an additional 42 acres at the former Naval Air Station Alameda (Alameda Point) as surplus. The property, referred to as the .North Housing Parcel, was previously used by the Coast Guard. The surplus declaration triggers a legislatively prescribed screening process created by the McKinney -Vento Act. This act requires the Federal Government to prioritize any military surplus property to meet homeless needs for both housing and services. The screening process is used to solicit, evaluate, and accommodate homeless assistance requirements and then, subsequently, public uses in planning and implementing the reuse of the North Housing Parcel. The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA), as the Local. Redevelopment Authority (LRA), is responsible for conducting the screening process. As required, within 30 days of the Navy's surplus declaration, the ARRA published a Notice of Availability of Surplus Property on November 16, 2007. An informational workshop for homeless services providers and organizations eligible for Public Benefit Conveyances (PBCs) was held on December: 6, 2007. Notices of Interest (NOIs) must be submitted by Friday, March 7, 2008. DISCUSSION When NOI's are received, the ARRA is obligated to consider and accommodate homeless providers' needs. These needs are balanced against other public and private economic development needs when. determining the future reuse of the North Housing Parcel.. A key component of evaluating requested homeless accommodations is understanding how well the proposed accommodation addresses a gap or un.- served need in the continuum. of care for the homeless. PMC world, an Oakland -based consulting firm, was retained to prepare a Homeless Needs Assessment (Needs Assessment) to support the screening /evaluation process. PMC's work on the Needs Assessment is also part of its consultant work being performed for the City with the Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority March 5, 2008 Page 2 update of the Housing Element. The Needs Assessment, on file with the City Clerk's office, is also a resource for the Housing Element. The Needs Assessment is organized in eight sections: Executive Summary Introduction Homelessness in. the City of Alameda Homeless Services and Housing Available in the City of Alameda Identifying and Prioritizing Unmet Needs Legislative and Programmatic Efforts to Eliminate Homelessness Current Methods and Proven Practices to Address Homelessness Conclusion For purposes of evaluating requests for homeless accommodations, the sections on Homelessness in the City of Alameda and Identifying and Prioritizing Unmet Needs, provide essential information. The sections on. Existing Services and Housing, Legislative and Programmatic Efforts to End Homelessness, and "Best Practices" to address Homelessness provide the context for the priority unmet needs and the most effective ways to address those identified gaps in the continuum of care. Honielessn ss in A.lanieda Homelessness is typically viewed as a regional issue as the homeless population, by definition, is transient and the homeless often shift between jurisdictions for temporary housing and services. Therefore, homeless counts are done infrequently, and, when conducted, are usually at a regional. level.. A key challenge of understanding the needs of the homeless in Alameda is to identify the number of homeless people in the City, a sub region of the County. PMC evaluated several quantitative and qualitative sources to establish a probable range of the number of homeless in Alameda in any given year. In addition to the U.S. Census data and the 2004 Alameda Countywide Shelter and Services Survey, current waiting lists for transitional, assisted and public housing in. Alameda were considered. Based on. these sources, PMC has estimated a homeless population between 828 and 1,062, with an average across all estimation methods of 961 homeless people in Alameda and the immediate Alameda region. For purposes of the screening process, a homeless person is defined in the Federal M.cKinney- vento Act. The Act defines a homeless person as "an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence...." The Act has further defined homelessness for children and youth to include "children and youths who are sharing the housing of other persons due to loss of housing, economic hardship... living in motels, hotels, trailer parks living in cars, public spaces, ..J or) substandard housing..." Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and redevelopment Authority March 5, 2008 Page 3 Homelessness is often equated with "street people" who can be seen living on the streets in urban areas. Numerous studies have found that this most visible sub -set of the homeless population is also the minority of the homeless population, totaling between 10 and 20 percent of homeless people. This hard -to- -serve population is often referred to as the chronic homeless. The majority, between 80 and 90 percent, are typically homeless for short periods, utilizing temporary shelters or low -cost hotels, or moving from place to place staying with family, friends, or charitable organizations. An estimate of the number of homeless people in Alameda provides a yardstick for evaluating proposed homeless accommodations at the North housing Parcel.. It is an order of magnitude number that assists in determining the appropriateness of requests for the number of acres of land and number of residential. units in individual NOIs and the cumulative total request contained in all NoIs. The requested homeless accommodations are evaluated along with other community needs. The end result is an amendment to the Community Reuse Plan for the reuse of the forth Housing Parcel that balances the homeless accommodation, based in part on the identified number of homeless in Alameda, with economic development goals. Identifying and ,Prioritizing Unmet Needs The Federal Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) makes the determination that the proposed accommodation contained in the amended Reuse Plan is appropriate given the estimated homeless population and gaps in the continuum of care. Therefore, identifying and prioritizing unmet needs is the second key factor in evaluating proposed homeless accommodations. PMC conducted two workshops in January 2008. Sixteen people, representing thirteen organizations, participated in the workshops. Participants from the County, City departments, homeless service organizations, and homeless housing providers were tasked with developing and prioritizing a list of unmet homeless needs in Alameda. Eight unmet needs were identified and are listed in the order of importance: Permanent Supportive Housing Protection of Existing Affordable Housing Stock. Access to Basic Amenities Transportation Educational opportunities Programs for Children and Young Adults Economic opportunities Mentoring This list of prioritized unmet needs will be used to evaluate proposed accommodations. Federal regulations require that homeless services providers submit NoIs that specifically address identified unmet needs to be considered for an accommodation. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority March 5, 2008 Page 4 Completion of the City of Alameda Homeless Needs .Assessment and its availability to interested homeless services providers as a technical study that documents the estimated number of homeless people and identifies and prioritizes unmet needs in Alameda is a key milestone in the screening process. Following ARRA. acceptance of the Needs Assessment, interested homeless providers will complete and submit their NOIs on Friday, March 7, 2008. NOIs will be reviewed against the criteria described above, along with other criteria incl uding organizational. capacity and financial. ability to implement the proposed accommodation. As the NOIs are being evaluated, the process to amend the Community Reuse Plan will commence. This community effort will involve several workshops to solicit the community's ideas for the reuse of the North Housing Parcel. Any proposed homeless accommodation will be presented to the community as part of the Community Reuse Plan Amendment and will ultimately be integrated into the Amendment. Following the community effort, the Amendment to the Reuse Plan, including the homeless accommodation, will be presented to the ARRA at a public hearing for final approval. The ARRA.- approved Amendment will then be submitted to DUD for its review and approval. BUDGET CONS IDERATION/FINANCIAL IMPACT Accepting the City of Alameda Homeless Needs Assessment does not impact the City's General. Fund. The cost of preparing the Needs .Assessment was paid from a Department of Defense Office of Economic Adjustment grant. RECOMMENDATION Accept the City of Alameda Homeless Needs Assessment prepared in support of the screening process for the North Dousing Parcel.. Res ectfy submitted, Leshe Little Development Services Director By; D?bbie Potter Base Reuse and Community Development Manager GAComdev\Base Reused. RedevplARRA\STAFFREP12008103- Mar 512 -E Homeless Needs Assess.doc