2010-10-06 ARRA PacketAGENDA
Regular Meeting of the Governing Body of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda City Hail
Council Chamber, Room 390
2253 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
Wednesday, October 6, 201
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. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 1, 2010.
2 -B. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a sublease for Jim Bustos Plumbing, Inc.,
Building 512, at Alameda Point.
2 -C. Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Amendment to an Agreement with
Russell Resources for Environmental Consulting services for Alameda Point
Extending the Terra for 12 Months and Adding $140,005 to the Budget.
2 -D. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a sublease for NRC Environmental
Services, Inc. Building 315 and Yard D -13, at Alameda Point.
None.
4 -A. oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)
representative
Highlights of September 2 Alameda Point RAB Meeting.
LONME:
'A�'* "Zo A ARM:= rs 1m i c l i
(Any person may address the governing body in regard to any mutter over which
the governing body has jurisdiction that is not on the agenda.)
6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS
6 -A. Presentation on "Going Forward" Community Forums for Alameda Point
7. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
This meeting will be cablecast live on channel 15.
Notes
Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the ARRA secretary at
747 -4800 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.
UNAPPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
The meeting convened at 7 :03 p.m. with vice Chair deHaan presiding,
1. ROLL CALL
Present: Boardmember Lena Tam
Boardmember Frank Matarrese
Boardmember Marie Gilmore
Vice Chair Doug del -lawn
Absent: Chair Beverly Johnson (arrived at 8:00 p.m.)
2 -A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 7, 2010.
2 -B. Adopt a Resolution Amending Resolution No. 001 Amending the order of Business of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting.
2 -C. Approve a Fourth Amendment to Agreement with Economic Planning Systems, Inc.,
Increasing the Budget by $25,000 for Providing Negotiation Support for the
Redevelopment of Alameda Point.
Member Tam asked to pull Items 2 -C, and moved to approve the balance of the Consent
Calendar. Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by following voice vote
Ayes: 4.
Member Tam requested more clarification on the amount of the EPS contract amendment and
asked if SunCal was consulted on the overage, to which the Deputy City Manager,
Development Services, responded in the affirmative, explaining that the Negotiating Cost
Ledger has been made available to SunCal, and all invoices are included in the ledger.
Member Tara asked what the ENA obligations are if the budget or scope is exceeded for
consultant contracts. The Deputy City Manager, Development Services, responded that
contracts are separate from the SunCal Cost Recovery account, and the amount of the EPS
contract has not exceeded any Cost Recovery provisions under the ENA.
Member Tarn asked what the total budget was for EPS under the Cost Recovery Account, to
which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services, responded that the total budget for the
quarter was approximately $372,000 for all consultants. Based on this clarification, Member
Tara stated she will abstain from this item.
Member Gilmore asked if there are sufficient funds in the Cost Recovery account to Cover the
overage of the EPS contract amendment, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development
Services, responded in the affirmative.
Member Gilmore asked if there is a mechanism in place if charges are disputed, to which the
Deputy City Manager, Development Services, responded in the affirmative.
A Item #2-
ARR
i
Member Matarrese moved for approval of !tern 2 -C. vice Chair deHaan seconded the
motion, which carried by the following voice votes: Ayes: 3, Noes: o, Abstentions: 1
(Tam) t
3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
3 -A. Adopt a Resolution Supporting the United States Navy's Transfer of 549 Acres of the
Former Naval Air Station in the City of Alameda to the United States Department of
Veterans Affairs for the Development of an out- Patient Clinic and Columbarium.
The Deputy City Manager, Development Services clarified that the staff report combines an
information piece which addresses the VA -NAVY deal, and requires no action; and a
`recommendation' portion to adopt a resolution in support of property transfer to the VA.
The Deputy City Manager, Development Services summarized the background of the proposed
VA project and property transfer.
Member Tam inquired if it was necessary that the resolution exclude the 9.7 acres of the Least
Tern colony, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services explained that the 9.7
acres is included, along with the buffer zone surrounding the Wildlife Refuge, which is more
than half of the 549 acres.
The Deputy City !Manager, Development Services introduced Larry Jaynes, Capital Asset
Manager from the Department of Veteran Affairs. Mr. Jaynes gave a brief presentation of the
status and projected timeline of the VA project.
Speakers: Proponents: Mark Chandler, Commissioner of the Alameda County Veterans Affairs
Commission; Alex McElree, Operation Dignity; Aidan Barry.
Opponents: Gary Bard; Leora Feeney, Friends of the Alameda Wildlife Refuge (FAWR)
Committee; Ron Barklow; Cindy Margulis; Michael Lynes, Golden Gate Audubon; Jean
Sweeney; Jon Spangler; Jim Sweeney; Adam Gillitt; William Smith, Sierra Club; Joyce Larrick,
FAwR; Nancy Hird
Chair Johnson inquired if there is a specific location identified in the resolution for the VA
project, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services responded in the negative,
further explaining that the 549 acres are part of a formal request that includes the specific
property.
Vice Chair deHaan clarified that there was discussion by the Board that the old Phase 3, the
area near the USS Hornet, is a feasible location for the VA project, but there are still options to
be pursued.
Member Tarn inquired whether this Fed to Fed transfer from the Navy to the VA is going to
happen irrespective of whether or not the Board endorse it or oppose it, to which the Deputy
City Manager, Development Services responded that there is a process that has to be followed
in order for the Fed -to -Fed transfer to occur, which includes NEPA and a Section 7
Consultation. At this time, there are no guarantees that the process will be completed, but the
assumption is that once the process is complete, the transfer will.occur.
Member Tara brought attention to the alternative resolution from the Golden Gate Audubon
Society which includes recognition that there should be protection for the Least Terns, based on
a biological opinion issued by the US Fish and Wildlife.
Member Gilmore inquired why the VA was requesting 549 acres when they only require
approximately 100 acres for their project, to which Mr. Jaynes replied that the Navy stated the
transfer would be the 549 acres or nothing. Mr. Jaynes further explained that it is not part of the
VA's mission to manage that portion of property, so the VA is planning to have a separate
agreement with the USF &W to oversee the remaining 449 acres, just as the Navy has the same
agreement with them right now; the funding will come from the VA instead of the Navy.
Member Matarrese inquired if the property was transferred to the ARRA, could the ARRA then
dispose of it to the VA, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services responded in
the affirmative. Mr. Jaynes expressed that there may be stumbling blocks without proceeding
with the B RAC process.
Member Matarrese inquired whether the city will be able to participate in the VA project process,
to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services responded in the affirmative.
Member Gilmore requested more details from the VA regarding ghat their plans are with USFIl,
and the proposed annual budget, so that it does not become an afterthought.
Member Tam suggested adding the language from the Golden Gate Audubon Society regarding
the protection of the Least Tern colony to the ARRA Resolution.
Vice Chair deHaan moved for approval of Item 3 -A, with a revision to the Resolution
adding "Whereas, the City of Alameda will continue to prioritize the protection and
conservation of the California Least Tern in its planning documents. and decisions
Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by a unanimous voice vote: 5
Ayes.
3 -13. Presentation: Alameda Point —'Going Forward'.
The Interim City Manager announced that Item 3 -C will be combined with 3 -13 into a single
presentation. The presentation focused on a planning and assessment model for a going
forward approach for the development of Alameda Point. The Interim City Manager
emphasized that this model is not a development plan, not a land use plan, or anything that
requires actual legislative decision, it is a recommendation and topic for discussion. The
presentation included seven key components of this approach: lessons learned, new structure,
strategic alliances, development delivery systems, asset management police application,
financial resources, and implementation schedule.
Vice Chair deHaan inquired who will comprise the team for this model approach, to which the
Interim City Manager responded that familiar staff members, including the Deputy City Manager,
Development Services; the Planning Services Manager, Public Works Director; and various
consultants, will comprise the team.
Speakers: Adam G illitt, Tony Daysog, Jean Sweeney, Jon Spangler, Alex McElree, Richard
Bangert, Nancy Hird, Doug Biggs, Gretchen Lipow.
Vice Chair deHaan remarked that the timeline for this plan is very aggressive, and suggested
compressing the timeline. The Interim City Manager clarified that the ambitious timeline doesn't
mean the base is going to be completed in 15 months, rather, the 15 months timeline is for
planning an assessment. The Board will have an opportunity to augment the timeline in more
detail after subsequent discussions and at subsequent meetings.
Member Matarrese stated that on strategic alliances, the regulators should be recognized, the
EPA DTSC for cleanup, and USF &W for the environmental. Regarding policy questions,
Member Matarrese also expects certain questions to resurface, i.e., finances and how. tax
increment might be used, where the shortfalls are, how they will be backfilled, and where there
are opportunities for early transfer for land that has already been cleaned up. Member
Matarrese also suggested looking at the potential for having a citywide Project. Labor Agreement
(PLA) There also needs to be discussion about jobs- housing balance, to give an opportunity
for public to weigh in on it. Member Matarrese remarked on the notion of using "other peoples
money i.e., funds from the Federal Government and II,IITC, as these funds could add up.
Member Gilmore echoed Member Matarrese's comments and requested to see a primer of what
the lease environment looks like in the Bay Area, regarding the asset management application.
If the ARRA is renegotiating leases, it would be good to know realistically ghat the competition
is, in order to have a more realistic expectation in terms of putting in more capital into a building
or not.
In terms of leasing strategy, Member Tarn inquired whether or not there is opportunity to adjust
the restriction in the LI FOC which says the Navy can give minimal notice to terminate a tenant,
recommending that it is something that should be pursued.
There was discussion about the amount of documents that have been produced and compiled
through the years, and where they are made available to the public on the City and Alameda
Point websites. The Interim City Manager stated that staff is working on implementing a new
Alameda Point website which will focus strictly on Alameda Point and the development project
going forward.
3 -C. Presentation: Citywide Asset Management Strategy Alameda Point Application.
(This item was combined with 3 -B)
4, OFFAL REPORTS
4 -A. oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board {RAB}
representative
Highlights of August 5 Alameda Point RAB Meeting.
Member Matarrese stated that there were a number of interesting documents that were
presented at the August RAB meeting, including a report on I R Site 35, which is action .sites that
are in the very center of the property being transferred to the ARRA; a presentation on
groundwater remediation at oU -2A, which discussed clean up; and communications from the
RAB to the Navy. Member Matarrese remarked that the most interesting handout was an
abstract done in concert with the Navy, EPA, Shaw Group (the contractor) and federal .money
from a SERDP grant through the University of Florida, Gainesville. The abstract depicts the
results of a method of clean up of TCE (trichloroethene), Plume 4 -1. Member Matarrese stated
that this should be of interest to Alameda because it is being published in a scientific journal, it
brings focus on what is going on at Alameda Point, and creates notoriety on methods that could
be used at other bases. Handouts were provided to the Clerk for copies to be made and
distributed.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
There were no speakers.
6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
None.
ADJOURNMENT
Meetin was adjourned at 10:03 p.m. b Chair Johnson.
Respectfull submitted,
Irma Glidden
ARRA Secretary
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authorit
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authorit
From: Ann Marie Gallant
Interim Executive Director
Date: October 6, 2010
Re- Authorize Ne and Execution of a Sublease for Jim Bustos
Plumbin g Inc., Buildin 612, at Alameda Point
NK
The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authorit (ARRA) g overnin g Board approves
all Alameda Point subleases with a lease term g reater than one y e a r. The proposed
sublease for Jim Bustos Plumbin Inc. is for three y ears with no option period.
DISCUSSION
Jim Bustos Plumbin Inc. currentl occupies Buildin 612 at Alameda Point. The have
been a tenant since Au 2004 and occup 4,000 s feet.
Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed subl for Jim Bus
Plumbin Inc. in Buildin 612. The rent for Jim Bustos Plumbin Inc. is $1,943-00
monthl or $0.485 per s ft. in the first y ear. There are 3% annual increases effe
on the lease anniversar date. The buildin will continue to be used for the operation of
a plumbin installation and repair business and g eneral office.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION FINANCIAL IMPACT
This lease will g enerate $23,316.00 in the first y ear. These funds will be retained b the
ARRA.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize ne and execution of a sublease for Jim Bustos Plumbin Inc. at
Alameda Point.
A Item #2-13
ARRA
10-06-2010
Honorable Chair and Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authorit
Respet'.4ull submitted,
Leslie Little
Economic Development Director
October 6, 2010
Pa 2 of 2
Attachment: A. Proposed Sublease Business Terms
B. Site Map
ATTACHMENT A
PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS
TENANT
BUILDING
SIZE (SF
TERM RENT
Jim Bustos
Plumbi_n Inc.
612
4,000
3 y rs. $1,943/mo.
ATTACHMENT B
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authorit
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authorit
From: Ann Marie Gallant
Interim Executive Director
Date: October 6, 2010
Re: Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Amendment to an A
with Russell Resources for Environmental Consultin Services for Alameda
—Point Extendin the Term for 12 Months and Addin $_140,000 to the Bud
Russell Resources has provided the environmental consultin services of reviewin
anal and preparin comments on Nav environmental documents for the
remediation of the Alameda Naval Air Station (Alameda Point) on behalf of the Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authorit (ARRA) for the past 10 y ears. In additi Russell
Resources attends and represents the ARRA at meetin with State and Federal
environmental re and the Nav and provides professional expertise to ARRA
staff to allow full participation in the remediation decisions made b the. Nav Russell
Resources also assists. the ARRA on issues related to conve -and. environmen tal
remediation. Russell Resources' contract was approved on Jan uary 2, 2008.. for
$117,500, was amended on November 18, 2008 for an additional $147,500. and on
December 9, 2009 for an additional $124,900. This third amendment extends the term
of the a for 12 additional month's and adds $140,000 to the .bud for a total
contract amount of $529,900. The ori contract and amendments are on file with the
Cit Clerk.
DISCUSSION
In 2004, a limited Re for Proposals was issued for environmental consultin
services at Alameda Point to determine if an additional environmental firm should be
retained to au Russell Resources, or if a new firm should be retained to replace
Russell Resources. Three firms were interviewed as part of that process. An
evaluation team met with Levine Fricke, Environmental Resources Mana West,
and CH2M Hill. Followin those interviews and a review of the proposals received, the
evaluation team determined that no additional services were necessar and that the
ARRA should continue to en Russell Resources.
In addition, as part of evaluatin environmental services for 2007, staff conducted an
informal solicitation from two environmental consultin firms, Erler Kalinowski and
GeoMatrix, to determine if Russell Resources' expertise and cost were comparable to
that of other firms. Given Russell Resources' familiarit with Alameda Point, lon
A Item #2-C
ARRA
10-06-2010
Honorable Chair and October 0, 2010
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 2 of 2
standing relationships with the Navy personnel and environmental regulators assigned
to Alameda Point, and competitive billing rate, the ARRA Board approved an agreement
to retain Russell Resources.
Also, Russell Resources' billing rates and expertise were comparable to all firms
interviewed. Russell Resources has the additional advantage of fa.rniliarity with
Alameda Point's environmental challenges. This knowledge is an important asset as
the city moves forward with conveyance and development of Alameda Point and .works
to mitigate the complex environmental issues involved with that process. It is important
that ARRA's consultant have full knowledge and history of issues at Alameda Point to
interact effectively with the Navy, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB), environmental
regulators, the ARRA Board, and staff on key environmental concerns.
It is recommended that the Russell Resources contract be amended to extend the term
for 12 months, adding $140,000 to the budget for a total of $529,900. The amended
agreement would expire on December 31, 2011. The proposed amendment provides
that, over the next 12 months, Russell Resources will support discussions with the .Navy
related to the conveyance of Alameda Point and will provide technical supporto. staff
regarding current and future environmental remediation. In addition, Russell Resources
will continue to attend all Base Closure Team and RAB meetings, attend meetings in
furtherance of conveyance between ARRA and the Navy, and attend other technical
meetings that may be necessary to support conveyance of Alameda Point. Russell
Resources will also review, and prepare draft comments on technical envi ren mental
documents published by the Navy, along with reports and work plans in support of the
successful transfer and redevelopment of Alameda Point. Finally, Russell Resources
will prepare a summary/analysis of actions taken at monthly RAB meetings for the
ARRA's review and information.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Funds for Alameda Point environmental services are budgeted in the ARRA budget.
Authorize the Executive Director to execute an amendment to the agreement with
Russell Resources for environmental consulting services for Alameda Point extending
the term for 12 months and adding $140,000 to the budget.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennifer Ott
Deputy city Manager
Alameda Meuse and Redevelopment Authority
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
From: Ann Marie Gallant
Interim city Manager
Date: October 6, 2010
Re: Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for NRC Environmental
Services, Inc. Building 616 and Yard D -13, at Alameda Point
BACKGROUND
The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) governing Board approves
all Alameda Point subleases with a lease term greater than one year. The proposed
sublease for NRC Environmental Services, Inc. is for three years with no option period.
DISCUSSION
N RC Environmental Services, Inc. currently occupies Building 616 and Yard D -13 at
Alameda Point. They have been a tenant since August 2004 and occupy 24,806 square
feet.
Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed sublease for NRC
Environmental Services, Inc. in Building 616 and Yard D -13. The re.nt for NRC
Environmental Services, Inc. is $5,620.71 monthly, or $0.226 per sq. ft. in the first year.
There are 3% annual increases effective on the lease anniversary date. The building
will continue to be used for the storage and staging for environmental cleanup
operations.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION FINANCIAL IMPACT
The lease will generate $67,448.52 in the first year. These funds will be retained by the
ARRA.
Authorize negotiation and execution of a sublease for NRC Environmental Services, Inc.
at Alameda Point.
Agenda Item #2 -D
ARRA
10 -06 -2010
Honorable Chair and October 6, 2010
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authorit Pa 2 of 2
RespeQtfull submitted,
kI,
Leslie Little
Economic Development Director
Attachment: A. Proposed Sublease Business Terms
B. Site Map
ATTACHMENT A
PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS
TENANT
BUILDING
SIZE (SF)
TERM
RENT
NRC Environmental
Services, Inc.
616
24,806
Year 1
$5,620.71 /mo.
Year 2
$5,789.33/mo.
Year 3
$6,963.6 Imo.
�TT&CI��ENI8
_�1%
�r-<
i
�r-<
Russell Resources, Inc,,
environmental management
Alameda Point RAB Meeting on September 2,2010
Highlights and Analysis
RAB members resent: Dale Smith (Community Co- chair), George Humphreys, Joan Konrad,
James Leach, Jean Sweeney, Jim Sweeney, and Michael John Torrey.
Remediation and other field work in progress.
o Relocation of an Alameda Municipal Power substation near the corner of West Tower
Avenue and Monarch Street and removal and replacement of several radioactively
contaminated storm drain lines beneath it are nearing completion. These are the final
tasks of the Buildings 5 and 400 TCRA, which had to be completed before contaminated
sediment is dredged from the lagoon.
o Active subsurface groundwater treatment is tentatively complete at IR Site 14, along the
Oakland Inner Harbor in Northwest Territories. At IR Site 27, just north of Pier 1, a third
phase of active groundwater treatment will occur in May 2011.
o The air sparge /vapor extraction system to treat groundwater contaminated with
benzene and naphthalene at Alameda Point OU -5 and FISCA IR Site 2 is operating.
o Most of the petroleum contaminated groundwater treatment operation near the
Atlantic Avenue entrance has been completed. However, further groundwater
treatment is being conducted in a small area near the intersection of Atlantic Avenue
and Orion Street where higher petroleum levels persist. Petroleum contamination
persists at one of the five 160,000- gallon aviation gas tanks formerly located in the
landscaped oval dividing Atlantic Avenue near the east entrance. The five tanks were
demolished in place and only partially hauled off site. Now, the rubble from the problem
tank is being excavated and hauled off site.
o The Navy will begin construction of sediment drying beds and other land -side facilities
on the tarmac north of the Seaplane Lagoon to support the Navy's upcoming dredging
activities in the Lagoon's northeast and northwest corners. The dredging is scheduled to
occur between January 4 and March 15, 2011.
o Additional demolition of Building 459 (the former gas station at the corner of west
Tower Avenue and Alain Street) is planned to allow excavation of metals contaminated
soil. This work is postponed while the Navy finalizes contract issues with the company
that will do the work.
Building 346, a Quonset but near the northwest corner of Building 5, is being
demolished prior to radiological screening as part of the basewide radiological surveying
project.
A Navy /EPA /University of Florida field research study is in progress at Plume 4 -1,
immediately north of Building 360 near Alameda Point's east entrance. The research
focuses on better characterizing the solvent contamination in groundwater prior to
RRI, 440 Nova Albion Way, Suite 1, San Raf iel, California 94993 435.902.3123 fax 815.5 Agenda Item #4 -A
ARRA
10 -06 -2010
Page 2 of 2 Alameda Point RAB Meeting, September 2, 2010
Ocotber 6, 2010 Highlights and Analysis
remedy selection and design. This research should improve not only the Navy's cleanup
of OU -2B groundwater, but similar contamination elsewhere.
Operable Unit 2 -B Treatability Study
The Davy discussed the treatability study it is preparing to undertake in OU -2B between
Buildings 14 and 162. The technology involves electrically heating an apparent source area of
solvent contamination to groundwater, similar to the removal action successfully completed at
Building 5. Briefly, electrodes are driven into the ground to the zone of high contamination. As
electric current flows between the electrodes, the zone heats up. As the solvents' boiling points
are reached, the solvents evaporate out of the groundwater, thereby cleaning it. As was the
case at Building 5, soil vapor extraction will be used to collect volatilized solvents to prevent
them from being released to the air. This technology has been used twice. already at OU -2B:
once successfully and once unsuccessfully. The successful use was under .Building 360. When
attempted at Plume 4 -1, near the AMP substation north of Building 360, temperatures had to
be moderated to protect underground utilities, and the system was not effective.
Building 5 Reuse Alternatives Report
EPA is close to finalizing the report on reuse alternatives for Building 5 that it had received
funding from EPA Headquarters to prepare. The report finds that demolishing and refurbishing
the building would both be expensive. The report includes costs for demolition, lead
encapsulation, lead abatement, and steel recycling. Examples of buildings similar to Building 5
that have been refurbished will appear in an appendix. The report should be available in
electronic form by the end of September.
440 Nova Albion Wcry, Suite 1, Son Rafael, California 94903 415.902.3123 fax 815.572-8600
Al a nd Redevelopment Authorit
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
From: Ann Marie Gallant
Interim Executive Director
Date: October 0, 2010
Re: Presentation on "Going Forward" Community Forums for Alameda Point
BACKGROUND
In January 1990, the City of Alameda and the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority (ARRA) adopted the Naval Air Station Alameda (NAS Alameda) Community
Reuse Plan (Reuse Plan), which established the following Vision Statement for the
reuse of former. NAS Alameda:
Between now and the year 2020, the City of Alameda will integrate the Naval Air Station property
with the City and will realize a substantial part of the Base's potential. Revenues will have increased
and a healthy local economy will have resulted from the implementation of a coordinated,
environmentally sound Tarr of conversion and mixed -use development. While building upon the
qualities, which make Alameda a desirable dace to live, efforts for improving recreational, cultural,
educational, lousing, and employment opportunities for the entire region will have been successful.
In 2000, the City amended the General
Alameda consistent with the Reuse Plan
development to proceed on the portions
known a.s Bayport and Alameda Landing.
to address. th.e redevelop.ment and reuse
(Alameda Point)
Plan to entitle portions of the former NAS
and to allow conveyance of the land and
of the base east of Main Street, currently
In 2003, the City amended the...General Plan
of the remainder of former. NAs Alameda
In July 2007, the City entered into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) with the
developer,. S.unGal Companies (SunCal), to entitle and facilitate. conveyance and
development of .Alameda Point. In 2000, SunCal placed a plan for Alameda Paint on the
ballot.that was inconsistent with the Reuse Plan, General Plan and City Charter (SunCal
Initiative). In February 2010 voters rejected the SunCal Initiative by 35 percent.. In July
2010, the ENA with SunCal expired. i
On September 1, 2010 the Interim City Manager presented the outline of a Planning
and assessment strategy for "going forward 1) at Alameda Point. One component of the
"going forward" strategy included a series of community forums to re- engage the
community in the planning process for Alameda Point. This staff report provides. a more
detailed ..summary of the proposed plan for the "going forward" community forums.
A Item #6-
ARRAlg
10-06-201
Honorable Chair and October 6, 2010
Members of the Alameda Meuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 2 of 6
DISCUSSION
The purpose and intent of the proposed "going forward" community forums is to learn
from, and build upon past planning efforts in order to establish a foundation for a new
vision concept for Alameda Point. This vision concept will serve as the basis for a land
use and entitlement plan and conveyance agreement with the United States Navy for
Alameda Point. More specifically, the "going forward 31 community forums will be
designed to gain a better understanding of:
e Lessons learned from past planning efforts;
Differing perspectives and priorities that may exist among residents and
businesses from the various Alameda neighborhoods;
Ideas for economic development opportunities for Alameda Point as proposed by
existing tenants;
Perspectives on economic development potential and strategies for Alameda
Point from local and regional businesses, planners, technical and industry
experts and developers.
Staff is proposing the following schedule of meetings to solicit input and direction for a
new vision concept for Alameda Point.
November 9, 2010 "Lessons Learned" community Forum East Alameda
Bay Farm Island Grand Pavilion
November 18, 2010 "Lessons Learned" Community Forum central Alameda
Mastick Senior center
December 8, 2010 "Lessons Learned" Community Forum vilest Alameda
The O'Club
January 2011
Alameda Point Tenant Community Forum
Historic Advisory Board Meeting
Transportation commission Meeting
Recreation and Parks Commission Meeting
February 2011
Business and Developer Economic Development Forum
Economic Development Commission Meeting
Planning Board Meeting