1996-06-05 ARRA PacketAGENDA
Regular Meeting of the Governing Body of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda High School Cafeteria
West Wing, Historic Alameda High School
Corner of Central Avenue and Walnut Street
Wednesday, June 5, 1996
5:30 p.m.
Alameda, California
IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE AUTHORITY:
1) Please file a speaker's slip with the Secretary, and upon recognition by the
Chair, approach the rostrum and state your name. Speakers are limited to
three (3) minutes per item.
2) Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and only a summary of
pertinent points presented verbally.
3) Applause, signs or demonstrations are prohibited during Authority meetings.
1. ROLL CALL
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
2 -A. Approval of Minutes - Special Meeting of April 9, 1996, Special Meeting of May 1, 1996, and
Regular Meeting of May 1, 1996.
2 -B. Recommendation from the Executive Director that the ARRA Approve the Extension for
Consultant Contracts with EDAW Inc. for Continued Work on the FISC Alameda Annex
Community Reuse Plan and with Zander Associates for Environmental Assistance on the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Section 7 Consultation Process.
2 -C. Recommendation from the Executive Director that the ARRA Request Immediate Funding for
Base Cleanup of the Fleet Industrial Supply Center — Alameda Annex for its Early Reuse and
Redevelopment and Direct Staff to Communicate the Request to the Department of Defense,
U.S. Congress, and President of the United States.
2 -D. Recommendation from the Executive Director that the ARRA Approve a Policy for the
Transfer of Certain NAS Alameda Properties to Pan Pacific University for Educational Uses
Through the Base Reuse and Redevelopment Process.
2 -E. Report from the Executive Director Recommending Adoption of a Resolution by the Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) Authorizing the ARRA Executive Director to
Represent the ARRA and Apply for LAMBRA (Local Area Military Base Recovery Act)
Designation.
2 -F. Report from the Executive Director Recommending that the ARRA Authorize the Executive
Director to Sign a Letter of Agreement with the City of Alameda's Bureau of Electricity for
Reimbursement of Modification Costs to the Trunk System Extension.
ARRA Agenda - June 5, 1996
Page 2
3. ACTION ITEMS
3 -G. Report and Recommendation from the Executive Director that the ARRA Endorse a Proposal
to Lease Portions of the NAS Alameda Piers for Berthing the Aircraft Carrier Hornet as a
Private Museum and Execute a Resolution of Support.
4. ORAL REPORTS
4 -H. Oral Report from the Executive Director on the Developer Selection Process for the Fleet
Industrial Supply Center (FISC).
4 -I. Oral Report from the BRAG Updating the ARRA on Current Activities.
4 -J. Oral Report from the Executive Director Updating the ARRA on
1. Results on ARRA Attendance Poll for July 3 Meeting;
2. Airfield Issues;
3. RFP for Port Services;
4. Status of Consultant Projects.
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 or of which it may take cognizance, that is not on the agenda.)
6. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION TO CONSIDER:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Initiation of litigationpursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9: 1 case.
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of section 54956.9: 1 case.
7. READJOURNMENT TO PUBLIC SESSION AND ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION
TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION, IF ANY
8. COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNING BODY
9. ADJOURNMENT
Notes:
* Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact Margaret Ensley, ARRA
Secretary, at 263 -2870 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 upon request.
APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
in conjunction with
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, April 9, 1996
The ARRA meeting convened at 5:33 p.m. with Vice Chair Swanson presiding.
The Alameda City Council meeting convened at 5:35 p.m. with Vice -Chair
Mannix presiding.
2 -A
1. ROLL CALL
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Present: 7 - Vice -Chair Sandre Swanson, 9th Congressional District (left at 5:45 p.m.;
replaced by Alternate Roberta Brooks); Alternate Lee Perez for Chair Ralph
Appezzato, City of Alameda; Vice -Mayor Charles Mannix, City of Alameda;
Councilmember "Lil "Arnerich (left at 8:00 p.m.; replaced by Alternate Daysog), City
of Alameda; Councilmember Albert DeWitt, City of Alameda; Alternate Greg Alves
for Councilmember Karin Lucas, City of Alameda; Supervisor Wilma Chan,
Alameda County Board of Supervisors, District 3; Alternate Ardella Dailey for Ex-
officio Member Barbara Rasmussen (arrived at 5:45 p.m.), Alameda Unified School
District.
Absent: 2 - Alternate Henry Chang, Jr., City of Oakland; Mayor Ellen Corbett, City of San
Leandro.
ALAMEDA CITY COUNCIL
Present: 3 - Councilmembers Arnerich, DeWitt, and Mannix.
Absent: 2 - Mayor Appezzato and Councilmember Lucas.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
Executive Director Miller stated that a situation requiring immediate attention had arisen regarding
BCDC since the agenda was posted and asked that it be added to the agenda after item 3 -E. Member
Arnerich stated that he objected to any late agenda item that has not been duly posted for public and
press notice. Assistant General Counsel McLaughlin explained that according to the Brown Act an
agenda item could be added by a two- thirds vote if the need to take immediate action arose after the
agenda was posted. Vice -Chair Swanson postponed action on the request until after item 3 -E.
Vice -Chair Swanson called for discussion on the Consent Calendar. Member Chan indicated that
Alameda County supports item 2 -A (AB 3129 - Lee) but that item 2 -B (AB 2736 - Weggeland)
allows a redevelopment project area to include land outside of the Base and the County agencies feel
that makes it very open -ended in terms of economic analysis and she could not support the bill
without an amendment. Vice -Chair Swanson set item 2 -B aside for further comment.
Regarding item 2 -C, Member DeWitt expressed his appreciation to the Commanding Office at NAS
Alameda — Captain Dodge —on his continuing, innovative ideas to help smooth the transition of
NAS Alameda. He further stated that Captain Dodge's plan to open the Officer's Club to the public
on a trial basis is yet another example of his cooperation with ARRA and, in a time when politics
t! Printed on recycled paper
seems to confuse many things, Captain Dodge is doing his best to make the transition as smooth as
possible.
Speakers:
William M. McCall, Sr. McCall, an Alameda resident for 82 years, stated his support for opening
the Officer's Club to the public.
Mr. Tony Daysog, an Alameda resident, stated that he was terribly concerned about the fiscal impact
of the special legislation for NAS Alameda and its impact on the general fund. He voiced his
concern about the lack of a sunset provision in AB 3129 and his opinion that ways must be found
for NAS Alameda to reimburse the general fund.
Member DeWitt stated that he did not understand what Mr. Daysog was saying to the public when
he asks for a way for NAS Alameda to reimburse the general fund of the City of Alameda because
the NAS is part of the City of Alameda.
Member Mannix moved approval items 2 -A and 2 -C of the Consent Calendar. Member Arnerich
seconded the motion, which carried the following voice vote: Ayes: 7. Noes: None. Absent: 2 -
Alternate Chang and Member Corbett. Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk.
*2 -A. Recommendation from the Executive Director that the ARRA Support State
Legislation for Use of Redevelopment Law at NAS Alameda (AB 3129 - Lee). Approved.
*2 -C. Report and Recommendation that the ARRA Endorse the NAS Alameda Base
Commander's Plan to Open the Officer's Club to the Public Beginning in May 1996. Endorsed.
2 -B. Recommendation from the Executive Director that the ARRA Support State Legislation
for Use of Redevelopment Law at Closing Military Bases Generally (AB 2736 - Weggeland).
Executive Director Miller stated that Member Chan's concern about the AB 2736 - Weggeland bill
including land outside of the Base is a correct assessment of the scope of the bill. She further stated
that AB 3129 - Lee, which had just been approved, was the bill ARRA had asked representative Lee
to carry for us. The Weggeland bill is a generic bill that would apply to military bases throughout
California. One provision of that generic bill would allow redevelopment areas to go beyond the
boundaries of the military base. The idea of recommending both AB 3129 and AB 2736 is
precautionary in case the bill specific to NAS Alameda —AB 3129 - Lee —does not pass. Ms. Miller
suggested that it would be appropriate to amend ARRA's support of AB 2736 to state that the
provision allowing the redevelopment project area to go beyond the base boundaries was
unacceptable. Member Chan stated that their lobbyist would be working on amending that provision
and it might be possible, as the author was somewhat open to amending the bill.
A motion to support item 2 -B —if amended to confine the redevelopment project area to the base —
was made by Member Chan and seconded by Member DeWitt. It carried by the following voice
vote: Ayes: 7. Noes: 0. Abstain: 0. Absent: 2 - Alternate Chang and Member Corbett.
2
3. ACTION ITEMS
3 -D. Report from the Executive Director Recommending that a Letter be Sent from ARRA
Requesting the Secretary of the Navy to Convey the FISC Alameda Property Under the
§2834(b) Authority of the 1995 Defense Authorization Act Allowing a No -cost Conveyance of
the Property.
Executive Director Miller amended the report title to read the "1996" Defense Authorization Act
and discussed the details as outlined in the staff report.
Speakers:
William M. McCall, Sr., an Alameda resident, again spoke in favor of the Officer's Club being open
to the public beginning May 1996.
ARRA ACTION
Hearing no other discussion, Vice -Chair Swanson asked for a motion to approve on behalf of ARRA.
Member Arnerich moved that the letter be sent from ARRA Requesting the Secretary of the Navy
to convey the FISC Alameda property under the §2834(b) authority of the 1996 Defense
Authorization Act allowing a no -cost conveyance of the property. Member Mannix seconded the
motion, which carried by a unanimous voice vote: Ayes: 7. Noes: 0. Abstain: 0. Absent: 2 -
Alternate Chang and Member Corbett.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
On behalf of the City Council, Councilmember Mannix asked for a motion that the Alameda City
Council approve the letter and instruct that it be sent. Councilmember Arnerich moved that the letter
be sent as recommended and Councilmember DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: 3. Absent: 2 - Mayor Appezzato and Councilmember Lucas.
3 -E. Recommendations Regarding the Structure and Budget for BRAG April 1996 to April
1997.
Executive Director Miller explained that the OEA would no longer fund the BRAG since the
Community Reuse Plan had been completed. Member Arnerich moved that the recommendations
regarding the structure and budget for BRAG be approved and Member Mannix seconded the
motion. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote: Ayes: 7. Noes: 0. Abstain: 0. Absent: 2 -
Alternate Chang and Member Corbett.
Vice -Chair Swanson asked Executive Director Miller to explain why a late agenda item for action
on BCDC should be entertained. Ms. Miller explain that the emergency item concerned the BCDC
port priority designation on 220 acres at NAS Alameda. Supervisor Chan had received a
communication on April 8 from the Executive Director of BCDC proposing some compromise
language to the Seaport Advisory Plan. This compromise language required an official position from
ARRA for the BCDC Board vote on April 18. Ms. Miller further explained that she wanted to
suggest a counter- proposal to the BCDC's proposed language.
3
Member Arnerich stated that, as a matter of policy, he did not participate in "last ditch" measures
that precluded the proper input, public notification, and preparation necessary to take informed
action. After due discussion, Alternate Alves moved that the item to discuss the BCDC compromise
language be added to the evening's agenda. Supervisor Chan seconded the motion. Member
Arnerich stated that he did not understand how they could intelligently discuss a paragraph they had
just been given twenty minutes before. Member Mannix pointed out that, while he fully understood
Member Arnerich's stand, this was an item that ARRA had already taken a very strong stand on and
that this was just a "fine tuning" of that stand which needed to be done that evening. Alternate Perez
agreed.
Speaker:
William M. McCall, Sr. stated that he strongly disagrees with Supervisor Chan's position on port
priority designation at NAS Alameda.
Vice -Chair Swanson asked for a vote on the motion that ARRA discuss a response to the BCDC
proposed language. The motion passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 5. Noes: 1. Abstain:
1 - DeWitt. Absent: 2 - Alternate Chang and Member Corbett. On being advised by the Assistant
General Council that 6 votes were needed to discuss the issue, Member DeWitt changed his vote
from Abstain to Aye for the following count: Ayes: 6. Noes: 1. Abstain: 0. Absent: 2 - Alternate
Chang and Member Corbett.
Emergency Action to Receive Direction from the ARRA on the San Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) Request for Compromise Language.
The governing body discussed BCDC's proposal for compromise language and a possible counter-
proposal.
Speakers:
Bill Garvine, Alameda Chamber of Commerce, encouraged ARRA to consider an even stronger
response to eliminate the port priority designation altogether.
Carol Gottstein, an Alameda resident, asked that ARRA be sensitive to the need to reserve shoreline
areas.
After further discussion, it was decided that ARRA's strong, unanimous opposition to BCDC's plan
for port priority designation on 220 acres at NAS Alameda would stand as previously decided; no
motion was offered on compromise.
4. ORAL REPORTS
4 -F. Briefing by CAPT Christiansen, Navy Public Works on Request for Additional Military
Housing.
4
Captain Christiansen informed ARRA that at a March 8 meeting of various branches of the military,
it was decided that no supplemental requests for housing at NAS Alameda would be made. Also,
the military population at NAS is falling faster than originally anticipated and the East Housing area
is already 35% vacant; that percentage will go up sharply during the summer. Executive Director
Miller stated that East Housing has 588 units with 90 units designated for the Homeless
Collaborative. It was assumed that ARRA would be responsible for approximately 300 housing
units of West housing. ARRA is now looking at assuming responsibility for upwards of 800 units
of housing. A request is in to the State of California to fund a housing feasibility study to look at
the entire range of options for that housing.
4 -G. Briefing by Mike Petouhoff on Status of Hazardous Materials Cleanup Effort.
Lieutenant Commander Petouhoff presented a four -fold strategy by the Navy to pursue early transfer
actions; create leasing opportunities; implement cleanup which is cost - effective, sustainable, and
protective; and, promote active public involvement.
Speaker:
Bill Smith, an interested citizen, stated that we need to lobby to have recycling and reuse legislation
designate funding for manufacturing facilities.
4 -H. Briefing by Doug Sidon, District Director; Mike Anderson, Chief Planner; and Peter
Sarna, Chief of Public Safety for the East Bay Regional Parks District on Proposed Plans for
a Recreational Vehicle Park at NAS Alameda.
Mike Anderson, Chief Planner and Peter Sarna, Chief of Public Safety, outlined plans for 225 RV
spaces and a dry boat storage area and addressed traffic impacts and safety measures at the proposed
RV park. Significant discussion with the ARRA governing body followed, with concern over
EBRPD's increasing the originally proposed 135 spaces to 225, the newly added dry boat storage
area, lack of public input into park rules, the fact that EBRPD was only offering to pay for
maintenance of the trail system and not Point Alameda Park, and lack of any revenue - sharing plan
with the City of Alameda. Executive Director Miller stated that this property is not being conveyed
to EBPRD but rather to the City of Alameda for lease to EBPRD and it is still just a conceptual
proposal. Any final proposal will need to have a City use permit and comply with future zoning.
Speakers:
Genevieve Chessler, an Alameda resident, voiced her strong opposition to the RV park.
Tony Daysog, an Alameda resident, voiced his strong opposition to the RV park.
Bill Smith, a concerned citizen, raised issues both for and against the RV park.
Bill Garvine, Chamber of Commerce, spoke in favor of the RV park and offered to be part of the
process.
5
4 -I. Oral Report from the Executive Director.
Executive Director Miller briefed the ARRA on the following issues: (1) Fish & Wildlife
consultation has begun and the size of the habitat will hinge on predator management control; (2)
the financing workshop will be held on Wednesday, April 10 from 8:00 a.m. -12:00 noon at the
Oakland Airport Hilton; (3) ARRA staff has invited the West End Neighborhood to a briefing on the
plan and has offered to facilitate a meeting between them and EBRPD and she was renewing that
invitation; (4) Captain Dodge would shortly be announcing that the base will be open to the public
on weekends beginning the first weekend in May; and, (5) Josi Jose, BRAG secretary, will be
leaving ARRA staff April 26 to move to Florida and a replacement is being recruited.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
Earl G. Peacock, Alameda resident, stated that there are too many committees and boards involved
in base reuse and that the Executive Service Corps needs to be brought in to get things done quickly
on the base.
Bill Smith, a concerned resident, spoke about container transportation, BCDC port priority
designation, state involvement, and advertising.
6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNING BODY
7. ADJOURNMENT
The ARRA meeting was adjourned at 8:18 p.m.
The City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:18 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
et E. Ensley
Secretary
6
APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, May 1, 1996
The meeting convened at 4:45 p.m. with Chair Appezzato presiding.
2 -A
ROLL CALL
Present: 5 - Chair Ralph Appezzato, City of Alameda; Councilmember Albert DeWitt, City
of Alameda; Alternate Greg Alves for Councilmember Karin Lucas, City of
Alameda; Supervisor Wilma Chan, Alameda County Board of Supervisors,
District 3; Alternate Sheila Young for Mayor Ellen Corbett, City of San Leandro.
Absent: 4 - Vice -Chair Sandra' Swanson, 9th Congressional District;Vice - MayorCharles
Mannix, City of Alameda; Alternate Henry Chang, Jr., City of Oakland;
Councilmember "Li1 "Arnerich, City of Alameda.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
TOUR OF THE PROPOSED RV PARK AND WILDLIFE REFUGE AREAS AT NAS
ALAMEDA
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by Chair Appezzato at 5:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Margaret E. Ensley
Secretary
Printed on recycled paper
APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, May 1, 1996
The meeting convened at 5:38 p.m. with Chair Appezzato presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: 9 - Chair Ralph Appezzato, City of Alameda; Alternate Brooks for Vice -Chair
Sandre Swanson, 9th Congressional District; Vice -Mayor Charles Mannix, City of
Alameda; Alternate Jay Leonhardy for Councilmember Henry Chang, Jr., City of
Oakland (left at 7:22 p.m.); Alternate Tony Daysog for Councilmember
"Lil "Arnerich, City of Alameda; Councilmember Albert DeWitt, City of Alameda;
Alternate Sheila Young for Mayor Ellen Corbett, City of San Leandro; Alternate
Greg Alves for Councilmember Karin Lucas, City of Alameda; Supervisor Wilma
Chan, Alameda County Board of Supervisors, District 3.
Absent: None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
At the request of Chair Appezzato and Member Chan, items 2 -B through 2 -E were pulled for a brief
discussion by Kay Miller.
Member Mannix moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Alternate Leonhardy
seconded the motion, which carried a unanimous voice vote - 9.
Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk.
*2 -A. Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996.
2 -B. Report from the Executive Director Recommending ARRA Endorse the Selection of a
Consultant Team to Prepare a Market Study, Detailed Development Plans, an Economic
Development Conveyance Business Plan, and a Port Development Conveyance Application
and Authorize the Executive Director to Negotiate and Execute a Contract.
2 -C. Report from the Executive Director Recommending ARRA Endorse the Selection of a
Consultant Team to Prepare a Street Improvement Plan for NAS Alameda and the FISC Sites
and Authorize the Executive Director to Negotiate and Execute a Contract.
2 -D. Report from the Executive Director Recommending ARRA Endorse the Selection of a
Consultant Team to Prepare Building Improvement Study Specifications and a Building
Demolition Study and Specifications and Authorize the Executive Director to Negotiate and
Execute a Contract.
2 -E. Report from the Executive Director Recommending ARRA Endorse the Selection of a
Consultant Team to Prepare a Housing Feasibility Study and Authorize the Executive
Director to Negotiate and Execute a Contract.
tales Printed on recycled paper
Executive Director Miller discussed staff recommendations on selection of four consultant teams and
the process used for their selection.
Chair Appezzato requested that in the future, the top three respondents for any contracts /studies
should be listed in a report with a brief synopsis of their capabilities and the rationale used to select
the chosen consultant team. Paul Tuttle, Reuse Planner, then discussed respondents for each study
and the reasons specific consultants were chosen.
After discussion and questions from the ARRA governing body, Member Mannix moved that the
recommendations for consultant selections 2 -B through 2 -E be approved and Executive Director
Miller be authorized to negotiate and execute the contract. There were no speakers and the vote was
taken. The motion passed by a unanimous voice vote - 9.
ACTION ITEMS
3 -F. Resolution Commending Lieutenant Commander Michael L. Petouhoff for His Contribution
to the U.S. Navy, the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and the Community in His
Capacity as Director of the Environmental Department for Naval Air Station Alameda.
The Resolution was read and Member DeWitt moved that the Resolution be approved. Alternate
Brooks seconded the motion and it passed by a unanimous voice vote - 9. LCDR Petouhoff gave
a gracious acceptance speech. Members of the ARRA governing body expressed their gratitude.
ORAL REPORTS
4 -G. Briefing on Secondary Materials: Demolition and Recycling by Joan Holtzman, Center for
Economic Conversion and Coy Smith, Executive Director, Materials for the Future Foundation.
4 -H. Briefing by Paul Ammon, Contractor for EBCRC on Workers to Business Owners Program.
4 -I. Briefing by Supervisor Wilma Chan on April 10 and April 26 Financing Workshops.
Supervisor Chan gave an overview of the two workshops; the first had a panel of developers and a
panel of financial experts and the second workshop was on State financing. Supervisor Chan stated
that the good news is the planning process to date has gone well and we are in a new phase. They
all emphasized the need to immediately form a redevelopment area. Interesting points included: our
goal for the first couple of years is to break even; trying to leverage whatever resources are on the
Base for future financing; using an RFQ process for a certain part of the Base and perhaps having
private developers conduct part of the cleanup and then be reimbursed by the Navy. Supervisor
Chan ended by stating that we need to keep up these good contacts. Executive Director Miller stated
that an RFQ process would be begun soon, particularly given the possible early conveyance of the
FISC property. Member DeWitt thanked Supervisor Chan for this very valuable set of workshops.
4 -J. Oral Report from the Chair of the Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG) Updating the ARRA
on BRAG Activities.
1 4 i
%
Printed on recycled paper
a
2
Doug DeHaan thanked the BRAG subcommittee chairs for participating in the financing workshops
and voiced BRAG's appreciation for LCDR Petouhoff's efforts on base cleanup. He also announced
that self - guided weekend tours for the public at NAS Alameda begin Saturday, May 4 with a ribbon
cutting ceremony.
4 -K. Oral Report from the Executive Director Updating the ARRA. Executive Director thanked
Supervisor Wilma Chan and Bruce Kern, Alameda County Economic Development Advisory Board,
for putting together the financing workshops. Ms Miller stated that ARRA meetings could be
televised if they were moved into the Little Theater. Chair Appezzato directed Ms. Miller to gather
more information on whether the Little Theater would is available for ARRA meeting dates through
the remainder of the year and whether or not ARRA can be guaranteed the meetings will not be
bumped by the School District. Ms. Miller then advised that HUD had approved the homeless
component of the Community Reuse Plan and thanked everyone involved. Chair Appezzato added
his thanks to everyone involved.
Alternate Roberta Brooks commended Chair Appezzato, as Mayor of Alameda, on his articulate and
eloquent statement at the last OBRA meeting that set the moral tone at the meeting and changed a
lot of people's minds in Oakland.
Speaker:
Neil Patrick Sweeney, a concerned citizen, urged ARRA to televise the ARRA meetings and to
announce the date of the next meeting at each ARRA meeting.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
Neil Patrick Sweeney, a concerned citizen, stated that a data base on all proposed projects should
be published on the Internet.
Bill Smith, virtual agile manufacturing, discussed a home page on the Internet and the necessity of
a recycling remediation zone.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:13 p.m. to closed session.
ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION TO CONSIDER:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - PROPOSED LITIGATION
Initiation of Litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9.
Number of cases proposed: 1.
READJOURNMENT TO PUBLIC SESSION AND ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION
TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION, IF ANY
Chair Appezzato readjourned to public session at 8:00 p.m. He stated that advice had been given
to council and no action had been taken.
toil + Printed on recycled paper
3
COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNING BODY
None
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by Chair Appezzato at 8:01 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
G
Margar t E. Ensley
Secretary
Printed on recycled paper
4
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
May 29, 1996
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Background:
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Kay Miller, Executive Director
2 -B
Recommendation from the Executive Director that the ARRA. Approve the Extension
for Consultant Contracts with EDAW Inc. For Continued Work on the FISC
Alameda Annex Community Reuse Plan and with Zander Associates for
Environmental Assistance on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Section 7 Consultation
Process.
Two contracts with the ARRA's consultant teams technically expired on January 15, 1996. EDAW Inc.
has continued to provide consultant services to complete the FISC Annex planning and Zander Associates
continues to provide services for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Section 7 Consultation process. Both
these project budgets have been approved by OEA and ARRA in March 1996. Although the contracts
have technically expired, the consultants have continued to perform work in good faith based upon the
ARRA budget approval.
Discussion:
The Alameda City Attorney, ARRA's Legal Counsel, has recommended that the ARRA take formal
action to extend the existing consultant contracts to legally conform to the contract provisions (Section
3. Services to be Performed). The contracts for EDAW Inc. and Zander Associates will be extended for
another year- and -a- half —until April 1997 when the final Navy ROD is scheduled for announcement.
Fiscal Impact:
The budgets for both these contract extensions have been approved by the ARRA and the Office of
Economic Adjustment at their meeting of 1996. The FISC Annex planning is $160,000. The Section 7
Consultation work is budgeted for an additional $30,000 this fiscal year FY 1996 -97.
Recommendation:
The Executive Director recommends that the ARRA approve the contract extensions for an additional
year- and -a -half with EDAW Inc. for continued work on the FISC Alameda Annex Community Reuse
Plan and with Zander Associates for environmental assistance on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Section 7 Consultation process.
Respectfully submitted,
Kay Miller
Executive Director
®Recycled paper
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
May 29, 1996
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Kay Miller
Executive Director
2 -C
Recommendation from the Executive Director that the ARRA Request Immediate
Funding for Base Cleanup of the Fleet Industrial Supply Center — Alameda Annex for
its Early Reuse and Redevelopment and Direct Staff to Communicate the Request to
the Department of Defense, U.S. Congress, and President of the United States.
Background:
Environmental cleanup by the Navy is essential for any reuse and redevelopment of NAS Alameda
or the FISC Alameda Annex sites. It is even more essential that the Navy clean up those sites with
early redevelopment potential as soon as possible.. The FISC site has been identified as the most
likely early redevelopment site.. Early redevelopment of the FISC site will contribute the financial
resources necessary for the redevelopment of other portions of the base.
Unfortunately, the FISC site has not been allocated environmental cleanup funds for this year FY
1996 -1997. The FISC site is a BRAC 95 Base closure; NAS Alameda is a BRAC 93 closure. Each
of these bases receives separate federal cleanup funds. Without the necessary cleanup funds this
year, the FISC cleanup schedule will be delayed and the site will not be available for early transfer
to the City of Alameda for redevelopment purposes.
Discussion:
It is imperative that sufficient funds are allocated to the FISC cleanup effort immediately, in order
to accelerate property transfer and early redevelopment. Cleanup funds are needed to complete the
FISC cleanup studies as well as remediation of specific FISC IR sites already identified.
Fiscal Impact:
Without a sufficient and timely cleanup of the base, reuse and redevelopment could be stalled for years.
This is even more critical for the FISC site, which has been identified as one of the early reuse sites on the
base. The fiscal implications for the City of Alameda and the rest of the redevelopment efforts at NAS
Alameda from a delay in cleanup would be disastrous. The greatest need for capital is in the early years
of redevelopment. The FISC site has the greatest potential for financing bonds for needed infrastructure
improvements on the remainder of the base, and reducing the City's liability for public services to the base.
®Recycled paper
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Recommendation:
May 29, 1996
Page 2
The Executive Director recommends that the ARRA request immediate funding for base cleanup of the
Fleet Industrial Supply Center — Alameda Annex for the early reuse and redevelopment of the site,
and that staff be directed to communicate this urgent request to the Department of the Navy, the U.S.
Congress, and the President of the United States.
Sincerely,
Kay Miller
Executive Director
®Recycled paper
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
May 29, 1996
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Kay Miller
Executive Director
2 -D
SUBJECT: Recommendation from the Executive Director that the ARRA Approve a Policy for
the Transfer of Certain NAS Alameda Properties to Pan Pacific University for
Educational Uses Through the Base Reuse and Redevelopment Process.
Background:
Dr. Peter Sun, President of Pan Pacific University, has requested transfer of approximately 65 acres
and 10 major buildings of NAS Alameda property for a new international university —Pan Pacific
University (PPU): Dr. Sun has requested a clarification of the ARRA's policy on the PBC request
or a change in the Community Reuse Plan for Pan Pacific University. The University requests title
transfer of the NAS property. Property ownership is necessary for Dr. Sun's fundraising and
financing efforts. Without title to the property, financing of new University buildings and fund
raising for capital improvements on the site will be severely constrained. Pan Pacific University is
eligible for a Public Benefit Conveyance under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Education.
The Community Reuse Plan specifically recommends that the Navy transfer portions of NAS
Alameda to the City of Alameda for future use by Pan Pacific University (see pages 8 -14 and 8 -15).
The plan intends that the City acquire the property through an Economic Development Conveyance
(EDC) and then lease the property to the University through a long -term lease (25 years with 25 -year
extensions) at a "nominal cost" (essentially a no -cost land lease) until such time as the land can be
transferred directly from the City to the University. It is anticipated that incidental costs (to be
negotiated with Pan Pacific University) would include costs for a legal description of the property
(site survey), legal fees, and any other properly transfer fees required by the County or City.
Additional development fees, infrastructure fees, and public service fees will also be paid by the
University to the City for their "fair share" of infrastructure improvements and City police and fire
services. While some of these development fees may be high, the land, buildings, and personal
property would be leased to Pan Pacific University at no cost.
Discussion:
The ARRA has recommended the EDC conveyance of the property to the City for lease back to Pan
Pacific University for a number of technical reasons:
1) All of the property presently requested by Pan Pacific University falls within the "Public Trust"
jurisdiction. Public Trust law restricts the land use types allowed on Public Trust properties to
maritime trade and commerce uses, open space, and/or parks and recreation uses. In this case,
®Recycled paper
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
May 29, 1996
Page 2
a university such as Pan Pacific University is not consistent with these Public Trust land use
restrictions. Such "non- conforming" uses may only be leased for 25 years with 25 -year
extensions. In addition, lands within the Public Trust areas cannot be owned in fee by private
individuals or entities.
• Public Trust land within the City of Alameda can only be owned by the City of Alameda.
However, the City may lease land to individuals on a long -term basis (25 years with 25 -year
extensions) for non - conforming uses.
• In order to deed property over to Pan Pacific University in the future, the lands must be traded
out of the Public Trust by placing other properties into the public trust. The ARRA has been
working with the State Lands Commission to identify appropriate properties for trading in and
out of the Public Trust.
2) The community is concerned about the potential success of all proposed public benefit
conveyances. Under the federal PBC procedures, unsuccessful projects would have lands and
buildings revert back to the federal government for property disposition through regular federal
excess property procedures. This is a long, complex, and cumbersome process that the
community wants to avoid in the future. Thus, the plan recommends that property not be
conveyed directly to public benefit requesters but to the City of Alameda through an Economic
Development Conveyance (EDC). In this way, the City could then convey the property to Pan
Pacific University with a property reversion clause or first right -of- refusal. If, in the future, Pan
Pacific University wished to dispose of certain lands or if Pan Pacific University were unable to
successfully continue to operate the land, it would revert to the City for other reuse purposes.
3) Under the PBC rules, lands conveyed for educational purposes can only be used for education
purposes. This restriction would not allow Pan Pacific University to sublease properties for non-
educational uses (business institutes, research institutes, and commercial uses). ARRA
encourages the University to allow other non - educational reuse of the site. In this way, Pan
Pacific University would be able to pay for the ongoing improvement and maintenance costs,
infrastructure costs, and public service fees for those buildings. the University will not be using
immediately: Or, the ARRA. could lease the properties and gradually make them available to
PPU as the university is ready to renovate and occupy the buildings.
Conclusion:
The ARRA policy for the conveyance of property to Pan Pacific University is intended to provide
certain lands to the University through a no -cost, long -term land lease (minimal land transfer costs
as described above) to ensure the City's control over future development of the site while providing
the University with the greatest flexibility for successful reuse.
The property acquisition and entitlement process is complex and will require a continued effort from
all parties to achieve goals in a timely manner. Many of these issues on property conveyance, the
EDC and PBC process, and Public Trust compliance will take some time to resolve. However, a
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
May 29, 1996
Page 3
policy clarification on the issue of a "no cost" lease and eventual transfer would give most financial
institutions and other financing sources greater assurance of University control of the site for
investment.
Fiscal Impact:
Along with endorsing no cost leases or transfers of property to a number of public and non - profit entities,
the ARRA adopted a policy that insures that all property owners pay their "fair share" of infrastructure
costs and public services. These fiscal impacts were evaluated as part of the NAS Alameda Reuse Plan.
The use of the historic district for a new university provides an excellent reuse of the older, administrative
buildings in the Civic Core which neither the ARRA nor the City can afford to improve for reuse purposes.
The building analysis has shown that improvement costs for these buildings exceeds the rent that could
be obtained through leases to potential office users. Pan Pacific University would generate tax revenues
from sales through•University purchases from local businesses, and purchases from the student and faculty
population of over 3,000 people living in Alameda. The university would serve as an anchor development
on the base attracting other businesses, industries, and residents to the base and the City.
Environmental Compliance:
The ARRA's endorsement of this policy recommendation to the Navy for transfer of certain lands to the
City of Alameda and then to Pan Pacific University at no cost as part of the NAS Alameda base closure
process does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A full
EIR/EIS is being conducted by the Navy and the City of Alameda on the transfer of lands and will not take
effect until the Department of the Navy's Record of Decision.
Recommendation
The Executive Director recommends that the ARRA clarify its policy on the transfer of certain NAS
Alameda properties designated in the Community Reuse Plan for use by Pan Pacific University. The
policy should state that the properties will be leased to PPU at no cost and that title to these properties will
transfer to PPU when they are freed from the Public Trust. It is further recommended that this policy
clarification be communicated to Pan Pacific University for fund raising and securing development
financing.
Sincerely,
V1kC GlnA,_>
Kay Miller
Executive Director
Attachment: Reuse Policy 01
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REUSE POLICY NO. 01
PAN PACIFIC UNIVERSITY PUBLIC BENEFIT CONVEYANCE POLICY CLARIFICATION
This policy is adopted by the ARRA to clarify the Public Benefit Conveyance recommendation
for Pan Pacific University (PPU) as part of the NAS Alameda Community Reuse Plan.
The ARRA proposes to include the PPU as part of its Economic Development Conveyance
Application (EDC). These facilities will be leased back to PPU by City at no cost until such time as
the property can be removed from the public trust through approved public trust trades. At such time
the property is free of Public Trust land use restrictions, the ARRA shall request the City to transfer the
property to PPU at no cost with the stipulation that in the event PPU would no longer needs the
property for educational purposes or no longer exist as an educational institution, all the property and
improvements would revert to back to the City of Alameda at no cost.
All other provisions and recommendations of the Property Disposal Strategy as outlined in the
approved NAS Alameda Community Reuse Plan remain in effect.
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Reuse Policy was duly and regularly
adopted and passed by the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority in its regular meeting,
assembled on the 5th day of June, 1996, by the following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
Margaret Ensley
Secretary
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Date June 6, 1996
®Recycled paper
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
May 29, 1996
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Kay Miller
Executive Director
SUBJ:
Background:
2 -F!
Report from the Executive Director Recommending Adoption of a Resolution by the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) Authorizing the ARRA
Executive Director to Represent the ARRA and Apply for LAMBRA (Local Area
Military Base Recovery Act) Designation.
In 1993, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 693 establishing the Local Area Military
Base Recovery Act (LAMBRA) in an effort to stimulate business atliaction and private investment
in communities that experience base closures. The LAMBRA legislation creates tax credits, relaxes
regulatory and peunitting processes, and directs the creation of local incentives to benefit employers
locating their businesses on closed military bases. LAMBRA designations are similar to Enterprise
Zones.
Discussion:
A competitive application process is used to award LAMBRA designation; bases slated for closure
vie with others in their own geographic region. The California Trade and Commerce Agency only
designates one LAMBRA per region. In 1993 Mare Island received LAMBRA designation for
Region 1, Castle Air Force Base for Region 3, and George Air Force Base for Region 4. However,
in 1993, none of the closing military bases in Region 2 or in Region 5 were eligible to apply /compete
for LAMBRA designation, as they had not completed their Community Reuse Plans.
The Alameda Naval Air Station is in Region 2; therefore, the ARRA will be competing against all
the other closing military bases in Alameda County, Contra Costa County, Santa Clara County, Santa
Cruz County, San Mateo County, and San Francisco. In making its selection, California Trade and
Commerce will evaluate the local incentives developed by the jurisdictions, their plans for marketing
the LAMBRA to employers, and the degree of service commitment made by the local economic
development partners. Program creativity and innovation, hazardous waste removal and treatment,
and the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report are other factors considered in awarding the
designations.
Fiscal Impact/Budget Consideration:
None.
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Recommendation:
May 29, 1996
Page 2
It is recommended that the ARRA adopt the attached resolution authorizing the ARRA Executive
Director to represent the ARRA and apply for the LAMBRA designation for the Naval Air Station
Alameda.
Sincerely,
VLI.i 1114J
Kay Miller
Executive Director
Attachment: Resolution
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 016
AUTHORIZING THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR TO REPRESENT THE ARRA TO APPLY FOR THE LOCAL AREA MILITARY BASE
RECOVERY ACT ( LAMBRA) DESIGNATION FOR THE ALAMEDA NAVAL AIR STATION.
WHEREAS, in 1993 the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 693 establishing the
Local Area Military Base Recovery Act (LAMBRA) in an effort to stimulate business attraction
and private investment in communities that experienced base closures; and
WHEREAS, LAMBRA designation is similar to Enterprise Zones that creates tax credits,
relaxes regulatory and permitting process, and directs the creation of local incentives to benefit
employers locating their businesses on closed military bases; and
WHEREAS, the California Trade and Commerce Agency is conducting this application
round for Regions 2 and 5; and
WHEREAS, the Alameda Naval Air Station is included in Region 2 and the Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority is eligible to apply; and
WHEREAS, Region 2 includes the closing military facilities in Alameda County, Contra
Cost County, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz County, San Mateo County, and San Francisco
County; and
WHEREAS, the California Trade and Commerce Agency will designate only one
LAMBRA pe'r region.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority that the ARRA Executive Director is hereby authorized and empowered to apply for
the California Trade and Commerce Agency's LAMBRA designation for the Alameda Naval Air
Station.
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly
adopted and passed by the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority in its regular meeting,
assembled on the 5th day of June, 1996 by the following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
Margaret E. Ensley
Secretary
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Date: June 5, 1996
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
May 29, 1996
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Kay Miller
Executive Director
SUBJ:
Background:
Report from the Executive Director Recommending that the ARRA Authorize the
Executive Director to Sign a Letter of Agreement with the City of Alameda's Bureau
of Electricity for Reimbursement of Modification Costs to the Trunk System
Extension.
The Bureau of Electricity (BoE) is presently under contract with the Navy to provide electric service
at the Naval Air Station. BoE and the Navy are currently in negotiation regarding conveyance of the
system to the Bureau of Electricity. The existing electric trunk system requires modification to
improve safety and operational efficiency. To achieve this, BoE has proposed advancing $100,000
to switch portions of the system from 4kv to 12kv. BoE has proposed that ARRA repay this amount
within five years at 6 percent interest. A copy of BoE's proposal and accompanying staff report is
attached. ARRA staffs recommended amendment to the Letter of Understanding with BoE is
outlined below.
•
Discussion:
Presently, the ARRA does not have funds to perform upgrades required to enhance system safety and
operational efficiency. These upgrades must be made in advance of occupancy by several
prospective tenants. In order to avoid delays to the ARRA's ongoing leasing process, the electric
system modifications need to be initiated at the earliest possible date.
The ARRA anticipates that funding for utility system upgrades at NAS will be obtained from some
combination of State and Federal grants and public financing. Preliminary estimates indicate that
the long -term cost of infrastructure improvements at NAS (including roads and utilities) will be in
excess of $185 million.
In this context, the proposed $100,000 advance by BoE represents a small fraction of the base's long -
range infrastructure cost. The ARRA staff recommends that ARRA enter into an agreement to
reimburse BoE for this advance from anticipated State and Federal grant funds. Contrary to BoE's
proposal, staff recommends that there be no guaranteed time limit for the reimbursement. To reflect
this, ARRA staff recommends that the second bullet on the Letter of Understanding be amended to
read:
• ARRA will make best efforts to obtain State and Federal grant funding to pay for
these improvements to the trunk system.
®Recycled paper
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Fiscal Impact:
May 29, 1996
Page 2
The ARRA will experience no fiscal impact by agreeing to reimburse BoE's loan from anticipated
State and/or Federal grant funds.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority authorize the Executive
Director to sign the Letter of Understanding with the BoE with the proposed change indicating our
intent to repay the $100,000 advance with funding obtained from State and Federal grants.
Respectfully submitted,
Kay Miller
Executive Director
KM:gdm/mee
Attachment: BOE Administrative Report, Resolution, and Letter of Understanding
?Recycled paper
City of
ALAMEDA
But-vast .f
ELECTRICITY
ADMINISTRATIVE
REPORT
NO. 96 -0079
MAY 2 :f i t
u „at f.GN','ENSICt; r'.r;l
CITY OF ALAMLOA
AGENDA ITEM 5.C.1
MEETING DATE 5/20/96
To: Honorable Public
Utilities Board
Date: May 7, 1996
From: Harish K. Dave
Engineering Manager
Subject: Trunk System Extension
at the Base and Off-site Area
Submitted by:
Approved by:
d R Hubbard
Assi tant General Manager -
Operations
William C. Lewis
General Manager
Recommendation:
By Resolution, approve a five -year, S100,000 loan at 6% interest for trunk system modification
projects to serve new customers at the Base and Off -site area, authorize the General Manager to
sign a Letter of Understanding with A.RRA with any nonsubstantive changes, and approve the
use of the 0 & M contract reserve generated from revenue from the Base. ARRA. will consider
the letter of understanding at its regularly scheduled June 5 meeting.
Background:
The Bureau's engineer proposes to modify the Base's trunk system to serve new customers at
the Base. The trunk system modification is needed to 1) operate the Base's electric complex as
a utility, 2) retire the existing 4 kV system to reduce losses, and 3) provide a safe electric system
for the public and Bureau personnel.
According to the Bureau's Rules & Regulations, Article X, 1. Line Extensions, a developer /owner
provides underground substructures as designed by the Bureau. Also, the developer /owner is
required to pay 60% of actual costs incurred by the Bureau for the installation of underground
trunk feeder extensions.
Exhibits:
A. Resolution
B. Letter of Understanding (Draft)
C. Cost Estimate for Base Trunk Feeder Modification Projects
D. 0 & M Contract Reserve Balance
ITEM NO. 5.C.2
Discussion /Analysis:
ARRA is the developer /owner of the Base and off -site area. The Bureau is the electric service
provider for the Base and off -site area reuse customers. The Navy and the Bureau are working
on transferring the Base and off site area electric systems to the Bureau. The Bureau has prepared
a trunk system design by modifying the existing 12 kV cable system. These trunk cable
modifications will convert the Base to a safe and efficient electric system. Each modification
project can serve five or six large commercial customers, depending upon the customer's load.
Presently, ARR does not have funds to A rte-
i-fy trunk modifications. ARRA is applying for
Base redevelopment grants. Staff proposes a five -year, $100,000 loan, at 6% interest to ARRA.
The loan will cover costs for the modification projects which will be paid for by A.RRA when it
receives a grant for redevelopment. This loan is only to be used for trunk modifications. The
money can be made available from the 0 & M contract reserve collected from the existing Navy
revenue. Thus, this action does not impact the ratepayers of Alameda, per the Board's request.
Staff prepared a "Letter of Understanding" to be signed by the Bureau and ARRA. The Assistant
City Attorney has reviewed the lever and suggested obtaining the Board's and ARRA's approval.
This will provide funding for trunk system modification to serve new customers now and obtain
ARRA's commitment for its responsibilities. Staff is proposing modification of a system not yet
owned by the Bureau; however, new customers need service as soon as possible. Furthermore,
utility and access easements for the modified trunk system will be procured by the Bureau from
ARRA after the Navy turns over the property to ARRA.
It is remotely possible that the Navy may decide to reopen the Base for military reasons. The
Bureau's 0 & M contract with the Navy addresses this scenario. In the contract, the Navy has
agreed to reimburse the Bureau for any capital improvements if the Base reopens. The contract
also allows the Bureau to modify the electric system.
Staff recommends that the Board, by Resolution, approve a five -year, $100,000 loan at 6%
interest for trunk system modification projects to serve new customers at the Base and off-site
area, authorize the General Manager to sign a Letter of Understanding with ARRA, with
nonsubstantive changes, if required, and approve the use of the 0 & M contract reserve generated
from revenue from the Base.
Budget/Financial Considerations:
As of April 1, 1996, the 0 & M reserve fund has a balance of $461,915. This fund was collected
through the modified A4 rate to the Navy which began October 1, 1995.
ID/kz
a:Admin96.may
2
ITEM NO. 5.C.3
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA
BUREAU OF ELECTRICITY
RESOLUTION NO.
TRUNK SYSTEM EXTENSION
AT. THE BASE AND OFF -SITE AREA
WHEREAS, the Bureau is the electric service provider at the Base and off-site area; and
WHEREAS, the Bureau and the U.S. Navy are working to transfer the electric system to
the Bureau per legislation; and 0
WHEREAS, trunk system modification must be done to serve new reuse customers at the
Base; and
WHEREAS, ARRA does not have funds for the trunk system modifications; and � �,i c--
WHEREAS, Bureau staff recommends trunk system modificatiorf.for employee safety and A
customer service reliability; and
WHEREAS, the Bureau can provide project funding from the Navy 0 & M contract
reserve balance which was generated from the Navy's rate; and.
WHEREAS, the loan for the project will not burden the ratepayers of Alameda; and
WHEREAS, a Letter of Understanding is to be signed by the Bureau and ARRA to
procure the loan amount and easements.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Public Utilities Board approves a five -
year, $100,000 loan at 6% interest for trunk system modification projects to serve new customers
at the Base and off -site area, authorize the General Manager to sign a Letter of Understanding
with ARRA with nonsubstantive changes, if required, and approve $100,000 from the revenue
generated by the Base 0 & M contract.
ITEM NO. 5.C.4
EXHIBIT B
LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING
The City of Alameda's Bureau of Electricity's Rules & Regulations require that the developer /owner
provide underground substructures for the electric trunk system when developing an area or site.
Also, the developer /owner is required to pay 60% of the actual cost of the high voltage trunk cable
system installation.
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) is the developer /owner for the NAS Alameda
site. The Bureau plans to reuse the existing 12 kV high voltage trunk cable system if usable. The
existing high voltage trunk cable system must be modified to serve our new customers. To connect
our new customers and help ARRA, the Bureau proposes a five -year, $ 100,000 loan, at 6% interest,
to ARRA for the proposed modifications, with the following mutual understanding:
ARRA is to repay the loan for the cost of modified substructures for the trunk system,
and 60% of the actual cost of 12 kV trunk cable system modification projects before
the end of five years from the date of the letter.
• ARRA will obtain funds for the cost of future trunk system modifications.
•
ARRA will grant utility and access easements for new, modified electric trunk
systems, substructures, switches, and transformer locations when it receives title to
the land.
The undersigned agrees to the above to serve their mutual customers on the Base:
William C. Lewis
General Manager
HD/kz
Kay Miller
Director, ARRA
Date Date
ITEM NO. ��y� [�
..�~^"" ^~~°.^/\_. ��
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF ALAMEDA CALIFORNIA
BUREAU OF ELECTRICITY
PROJE CT
DESCRIPTION
ESTIMATED
PROJECT
COST
SUBSTRUCTURE
MODIFICATIONS
(BY DEVELOPER)
CABLE & SWITCH INSTALLATION
DEVELOPER'S
SHARE (60%)
BUREAU'S
SHARE (40%)
1. MODIFICATIONS TO
SERVE BLDG. #20,
& OTHER NEARBY
BUILDINGS
$25.800
$9.760
$15.630
$10.420
2. MODIFICATIONS TO
SERVE BLDG. #113.
&OTHERNEARBY
• BUILDINGS
45.170
14.320
$18.510
$12.240
TOTALS
$80.970
$24.070
$34.140
$22.760
TOTAL DEVELOPER'S COST
=
$58,210
NOTE: THE ABOVE TRUNK FEEDER MODIFICATIONS ARE NECESSARY TO SAFELY
AND RELIABLY SERVE NEW CUSTOMERS AT THE BASE, ACCORDING TO
BUREAU AND STATE STANDARDS.
CB
ITEM NO. 5i C. (,
EXHIBIT D
City of Alameda
Bureau of Electricity
Development of NAS O &M Contract Reserve Balance
A -4 NAS
Beginning Revenue O &M Contract Ending
flax] c,- Maxus . Exp.ttscs t.iirconc& Balance
Oct 95 50 191,729 33,764 157,965 5157,965
Nov 157,965 13,286 21,243 (7,957) 150,008
Dec (1) 150,008 (44,238) 15,873 (60,111) 89,897
• Jan 96 89,897 223,298 • 15,303 207,995 297,892
Feb 297,892 77,333 12,027 65,306 363,198
Mar $363,198 122,466 23,749 98,717 • $461,915
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
May 29, 1996
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Kay Miller
Executive Director
3 -G
SUBJ: Report and Recommendation from the Executive Director that the ARRA Endorse
a Proposal to Lease Portions of the NAS Alameda Piers for Berthing the Aircraft
Carrier Hornet as a Private Museum and Execute a Resolution of Support.
Background:
The Aircraft Carrier Hornet Foundation (ACHF) wishes to lease one of the NAS Alameda piers for
berthing the USS Hornet (Hornet) for use as a museum and tourist attraction. The U.S. Navy has
shown interest in donating the Hornet for this purpose. However, to obtain the Hornet, the Navy
requires the ACHF to secure a permanent berthing location. Accompanying this report as Attach-
ment A is a memo from BTC Norma Bishop outlining the requirements of NAVSEA for ships in the
donation program with NAVSEA's Instructions for Preparation of Application for Donation.
The USS Hornet was decommissioned in 1970 and was designated a National Historic Landmark
by the National Park Service in 1991. The ship and crew played a significant role in the Second
World War and the Post War era. It was the launching carrier for the historic Doolittle Raid and the
ship was used to recover the Apollo 11 and Apollo 12 space crafts and crews.
The Hornet has been berthed at NAS Alameda almost one year and was on display during fleet week
and other local events: The ACHF and others have been instrumental in cleaning and repainting the
ship.
Discussion:
The Hornet and other ships could be a great attraction as part of the proposed future Marina
development. There are many examples of historic and not -so- historic ships being used as museums
and tourist attractions. Several ships and a submarine are now berthed in San Francisco.
The ACHF requires a formal lease commitment from the ARRA in order to obtain Navy support for
their proposal. The ACHF understands and is prepared to accept the current five -year term limitation
imposed on interim leases. They are also committed to paying market rate rent for their berth space
and related port services. The lease will require full compliance with applicable environmental and
handicap access regulations as well as appropriate insurance coverage and adequate parking.
Environmental review under CEQA will also be required.
e Recycled paper
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
May 29, 1996
Page 2
At its May meeting, the BRAG considered the matter of leasing pier space to the ACHF. The BRAG
formally endorsed the ACHF's request for a minimum five -year lease (Attachment B) and
recommended that the ARRA approve such a lease. Additionally, the BRAG suggests that ARRA
continue to explore the viability of alternative locations for permanent berthing of the Hornet at NAS
Alameda.
Fiscal Impact:
The ACHF will pay equivalent rent and port services fees that might otherwise be paid by the
Maritime Administration (MARAD) or potential commercial users. In this regard, there will be no
revenue loss as a result of this lease and no fiscal impact on the City. In the event that the operation
fails to meet is financial obligations, the ACHF will have to cease operation. In this case, the Navy
is obligated to remove the ship from NAS Alameda at no cost to the City.
Conclusion:
The preservation of the Hornet for a historical museum is a worthwhile goal. The proposed use has
the potential of creating a tourist magnet and generating significant economic benefits to the reuse
efforts as well as the City of Alameda. The ARRA staff recommends that an additional market
feasibility study be conducted by the ACHF to accurately assess the tourism potential. The proposed
use is consistent with the interim reuse strategy as outlined in the Community Reuse Plan.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that ARRA. endorse the proposal to lease portions of the NAS Alameda piers for
berthing the Hornet for use as a private museum, execute a Resolution of Support, and authorize the
Executive Director to negotiate and execute an interim lease with a minimum term of five years and
advise NAVSEA Command of ARRA's intent to lease pier space to the ACHF.
Respectfully submitted,
i
tlL
Kay Miller
Executive Director
(LPL)
Attachment A: May 24 memo from BTC Norma Bishop with NAVSEA's Instructions for
Preparation of Application for Donation
Attachment B: May 21 letter from Lee Perez, Chairman, BRAG
® Recycled paper
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
MEMORANDUM
Attachment A
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
BASE TRANSITION FIELD OFFICE
250 Mall Square
Building 1, Room 167
Naval Air Station
Alameda, California 94501 -5000
From: BTC, NAS Alameda
To: Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA)
May 24, 1996
Subj: NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND (NAVSEA) DONATION OF SHIPS
PROGRAM
As I promised Chairperson Sause at the April BRAG meeting, I contacted NAVSEA
regarding the ship donation program and the requirements the Aircraft Carrier Hornet
Foundation (ACHF) must meet in order to obtain the Hornet. I spoke with Bill Scott who
works directly for Captain Gordon Petersen in NAVSEA's Office of Congressional
Affairs. He was very helpful and has offered to provide any further information the
community may request. I took detailed notes and quote him in this memorandum where
his comments pertained to issues which seem to be of specific concern to the BRAG and
the community at large. In addition, I am enclosing NAVSEA's Instructions for
Preparation of Application for Donation.
* As background, NAVSEA's success with the ship donation program is well
established. Over the past 40 years, 43 ships have been transferred to various
foundations, associations, and municipalities. Of these, only two have been less
successful than originally anticipated and have been reclaimed by NAVSEA. They
were submarines, generally not deemed to have the same potential for success as large,
significant ships, such as aircraft carriers. And they managed to succeed for relatively
long periods of time, 15 to 20 years, before NAVSEA felt they had to reclaim them.
Bill Scott said that NAVSEA is "very careful" about donating a ship, "to the point
where it [the review of the application and the oversight] gets ridiculous." (They are
currently in their fifth month of the evaluation process of four applications submitted
for donation of the Missouri.) He said they simply cannot afford to present a package
for the Secretary of the Navy's signature which will fail in a few years and require the
expenditure of taxpayers' dollars to reclaim and tow the ship back to a storage berth.
They also cannot afford to permit a ship to be operated or maintained in such a way as
to bring discredit on the Navy.
In order to gauge the potential success of a donation, NAVSEA conducts a rigorous
analysis of the applicant's package. The analysis is made by attorneys and other
experts, sometimes contract consultants, and includes: a financial and market analysis,
environmental compliance program analysis, mooring and weather analysis (based on
weather /storm data over one hundred years), and maintenance program analysis. He
weather /storm data over one hundred years); and maintenance program analysis. He
added, for instance, in regard to market and financial feasibility, NAVSEA does
"...NOT simply take the word of an applicant that 5 million visitors are expected
annually"; it does a market analysis, based on local conditions, demographics, and
market competition to evaluate the application..
As to berthing, Bill Scott told me NAVSEA wants to see a "long -term commitment,
something more than 10 to 15 years... we'd like it to be open- ended." A conditional,
open -ended commitment would be appropriate; a commitment to provide berthing to
the Hornet as long as NAVSEA permits the Foundation to retain and operate her
would suffice.
* The assurance that the program works as intended is that NAVSEA's transfer of the
ship is conditional. The Navy must be protected against claims and liability. Among
the many conditions are those requiring proper mooring and maintenance,
environmental compliance, proper and appropriate use of the ship itself, and the
financial resources at time of donation to carry out the preceding requirements. To
ensure the applicant complies with all conditions, NAVSEA conducts regular
inspections. The team of experts who staff the Inactive Ships Division in the
Northwest Region would conduct those inspections of the Hornet... as they do
presently while she is berthed at NAS awaiting NAVSEA's evaluation of the
Foundation's application.
Presently the Naval Air Station provides for the berthing, security, and emergency services
of Hornet under the terms of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) executed December
6, 1995. This MOA expires January 15, 1997; during the intervening months, the ACHF
must complete. the extensive application and execute an environmental compliance
agreement with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US -EPA) as well as raise the
requisite funding.
In the meantime, the Navy Engineering Field Activity West (EFAWEST) and NAVSEA
are proceeding with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act in preparation
to contract for scrapping of the Hornet immediately in January 1997, if ACHF should fail
in its efforts. Because Hornet is a National Historic Landmark, the Navy must consult
with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Council) which is responsible for
commenting to the Navy. This process was followed and essentially completed when
Hornet was at Bremerton, Washington, when the Council required the Navy to record and
document the ship's engineering and history. The process failed in sufficiency merely for
the Navy's lack of a single signature on an MOA, and the Navy was forced to rescind the
scrapping contract when ACHF filed for a preliminary restraining order in November
1995.
2
There is a sense among some in the Navy that Hornet must be saved not only because she
is a National Historic Landmark, but because she is uniquely representative of our
Nation's heritage. Hornet is the most decorated WW II existing ship. As such she
represents the veterans who served so honorably. She also represents the opportunities
their sacrifices made possible. When Hornet retrieved the first men to walk on the Moon
from the Pacific, her actions marked the real end of the 20th Century and the country's
move into the 21st. No other ship could be such an eloquent symbol of our heritage and
our potential and, thus ideally suited to serve as an educational and cultural resource
center.
Unfortunately, the Navy Historical Center in Washington acknowledges that there is no
mechanism for the Navy, itself, to initiate action to save this ship. It can only proceed
with the Section 106 process and see if the public and private individuals like the members
of the ACHF can muster the resources to establish Hornet as the cultural resource they
envision.
I will be available at the June 5 meeting. If there is additional information I can provide at
any time, I will gladly do so. I have o s ntacts at NAVSEA I can call on if necessary.
Enc
3
Bishop
VSEA .00D'•
ID:703- 602 -4982 MAY 01'96
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND
2531 JEFFERSON DAMS HWY .
ARLINGTON VA 22242.5160
8:51 N0.002 P .02
DECEMBER 1995
IN REPLY REFER TO
NAVY DEPARTMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR
PREPARATION OF APPLICATION FOR DONATION OF
OBSOLETE OR CONDEMNED NAVY SHIPS, BOATS AND SMALL LANDING CRAFT
Under the authority of the Act of August 10, 1956 (10 USC 7306),
the Secretary of the Navy, with the approval of Congress, may
donate obsolete or condemned Navy ships, boats and small landing
craft to the several States, Territories, or possessions of the
United States; and political subdivisions, or municipal
corporations thereof, the District of Columbia, or to
associations or corporations whose charter or articles of
agreement denies them the right to operate for profit. The Navy
restricts the use of donated vessels to static display only, such
as a memorial or museum.
Information regarding the availability of Ships, boats, and small
landing craft may be obtained by communicating with Mr. Charles
Cart, Naval Sea Systems Command, Sea -00D, 2531 Jefferson Davis
Highway, Arlington, Virginia- 22242 -5160. Completed donation
applications shall also be submitted to the aforementioned
address. Prior to submission of an application, a vessel must be
located which'is in a donable status and available for transfer.
Each application shall contain the following information:
a. Type of vessei'desired, or in the case of combatant
vessels, the official Navy identification of the vessel
desired;
b. Statement of the proposed use to be made of the vessel
and where it will be located;
c. Statement describing and confirming : availability of an
appropriate berthing site and the facilities and personnel
available for use in maintenance of the vessel;
d. Statement that the applicant agrees to maintain the
vessel, at its own expense, in a condition satisfactory to
the Department of the Navy, in accordance with instructions
which may be issued, and that no expense shall result to the
United States as a consequence of a transfer or as a
consequence of such terms and conditions prescribed by the
Department of the Navy;
AVSEA OOD
ID:703- 602 -4982 NAY 01'96
8:52 N0.002 P.0
e. Statement that the applicant agrees to take delivery of
the vessel "as is, where is" at its berthing site and to
pay all charges incident to delivery, including without
limitation, preparation of the vessel for removal or tow,
towing, insurance and berthing or installation at the
applicant's site;
f. Statement of financial resources currently available to
the applicant to pay the costs required to be assumed by a
Donee in the event a vessel is donated
(i.e.
refurbishment, preparation of mooring ordisplay�site)ship
Statement should include a summary of sources and amounts of
annual income, estimated annual expenditures and estimated
costs for upkeep of the vessel. In the event the applicant
will rely on commitments of donated services and materials
for maintenance and use of the vessel, describe such
commitments in detail; •
g. Statement that the applicant agrees that it will return
the vessel, if an when requested to do so by the Department
of the Navy, during a national emerOncy, and not
without the written consent of the Department ,wuse they
vessel other than as stated in the application or destroy,
transfer or otherwise dispose of the vessel;
h. If the applicant.asserts that it is a corporation or
association whose charter or articles of agreement denies it
the right to operate for profit, (I) a properly
authenticated copy of the charter, certificate of
incorporation, or articles of agreement made either by the
Secretary of State•or other appropriate officials of the
state under the laws of which the applicant is incorporated
or organized or other appropriate public official having
custody of such charter, certificate or articles; and (II) a
copy of the organization's by -laws; and, if the applicant is
not incorporated, the citation of the law and certified copy
of the association's charter under which--: t is empowered to
hold property and to be bound by the acts..of the
signatories to the donation agreement; proposed
i. If the applicant is not a state,
of the United States, a territory or possession
�
corporation thereof, of the�DistrictbofvColumbia ,manphotol
static copy of a determination by the Internal Revenue
Service that the applicant is exempt from tax under the
Internal Revenue Code;
VSER 000 1D:703-602-4982
MRY 01'96 8:53 No.002 p :0 '-
j. A notarized copy of the resolution or other action of
its Governing Board or Membership authorizing the person
signing the application to represent the organization and to
sign on its behalf for the purpose of acquiring a vessel;
k. Assurance of Compliance with Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (Act of July 2, 1964 - Public Law 88 -352)
(See attached form). All four copies of the form must be
signed and returned for future reference;
1. Statement that vessel will be used as a static display
only for use as a memorial or museum and that if acquired
for such purposes (donee) will not activate or permit to be
activated any system aboard the vessel for the purpose of
navigation or movement under its own power;
m. Statement that the galley will not be activated for the
purpose of serving meals; •
n. A statement that the applicant. agrees to indemnify, save
harmless and defend the Government from an against all
claims, demands, actions, liabilities judgments, costs and
attorney's fees, arising out of, claimed on account of, or
in any manner predicated upon personal injury, death, or
property damage caused by or resulting from possession
and /or use of the donated property;
o. Statement that the applicant acknowledges that
Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) may be present on the Vessel
donated by the Government and that the use of many of the
PCB items on the Vessel is not authorized by the Toxic
Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seg. or
regulations implementing it. The Applicant further
acknowledges the PCB items require special precautions to
ensure against risks to health and the environment.
Accordingly, the Applicant agrees that - it will manage and
dispose of all. PCB items on board the Vessel in accordance
with all Federal, State and local laws. and regulations in
being or issued relating to protection of—the environment,
public health, and safety, and /or such other requirements as
may be established by agreement with the Environmental
Protection Agency or its cognizant regional offices;
Upon receipt, the Navy will determine the eligibility of the
applicant to receive a vessel by donation. If eligible, the
formal application will be processed and Notice of Intention to
donate presented to the Congress as required by the Act of
August 10, 1956, provided the applicant has presented evidence,
satisfactory to the Government, that the applicant has adequate
financial means to assure its ability to accomplish all of the
iVSEA 00D
ID:703-602-4982 MAY 02'96 6:31 No.003 P.
obligations required to be assumed under a donation contract.
The Navy will have authority to donate only after the application
has been before the Congress for a period of sixty days of
continuous session without adverse action by the Congress.
Attachments
Attachment B
Base Reuse Advisory Group
May 21, 1996
Gerald G. Lutz
CEO & Founding Trustee
P.O. Box 460
Alameda, CA 94501
Dear Mr. Lutz:
Thank you for your excellent presentation at the May 15, 1996 meeting of the Base Reuse Advisory
Group (BRAG). As your are aware, the BRAG' acts in an advisory capacity to the Alameda Reuse
and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) in determining acceptable /preferred uses at Naval Air Station
Alameda for civilian reuse after the Base formally closes in April 1997.
We are pleased to report that after due deliberation and discussion, the BRAG voted their support
(8 -2) to endorse the Aircraft Carrier Hornet's request for a minimum five -year lease (the current
legally allowable limit) to berth the Hornet at Pier 3 or at an alternate site at NAS Alameda. This
request will now be forwarded —with the BRAG's endorsement —to the ARRA for action on June
5, 1996.
We would like to thank you, Admiral James Scott, Bob Rogers, and Peter Knudson for your
excellent presentation. The professional approach taken by members of the Aircraft Carrier Hornet
Foundation in pursuing its goals. bode well for the Hornet's future.
Sincerely,
Le - • erez
C aiiuian, BRAG
mee
Base Conversion Office • Naval Air Station Bldg 90 • Alameda, CA 94501 • (510) 263 -2870 • Fax (510) 521 -3764
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 16
IN SUPPORT OF THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER HORNET (CV -12) FOUNDATION
Whereas it is proposed that the xUSS Hornet (Hornet) be berthed at Naval Air Station
Alameda to serve as a museum and tourist attraction; and
Whereas the Aircraft Carrier Hornet Foundation (ACHF) is a not -for- profit corporation
incorporated in the State of California for the sole purpose of facilitating the acquisition of and
administering the ongoing operations of the Hornet as a community and national resource for the
benefit of all citizens and visitors; and
Whereas the ACHF intends to operate the Hornet as an educational and community resource;
and
Whereas the effort and plans of the ACHF enjoy wide support by the citizens and
organizations in the City of Alameda including the Chamber of Commerce, local business
associations, and the College of Alameda.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority (ARRA) that ARRA supports the overall master plan of ACHF to renovate the Hornet and
operate it as a museum and tourist attraction; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ARRA supports the efforts of ACHF to raise the money
necessary to successfully renovate the Hornet and operate it as a viable museum and tourist attraction
that will benefit the community; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as evidence of its support for ACHF and its effort,
ARRA has agreed to enter into good faith negotiations with ACHF to execute a five -year lease with
reasonable rights of extension within its power to do so.
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted
and passed by the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority in a meeting assembled on the 5th
day of June, 1996, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
Margaret E. Ensley
Secretary
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Date: June 6, 1996
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
May 29, 1996
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Margaret E. Ensley
ARRA Secretary
4.-H
SUBJ: Developer Selection Process for the Fleet Industrial Supply Center (FISC).
For your information, attached is a staff report outlining the proposed developer selection process for the
FISC. This staff report was prepared by Dona Hoard, Community Development Director, for the June
6 Community Improvement Commission (CIC) meeting. At the June 6 meeting, the report will be
discussed and feedback will be solicited from the CIC on the proposed developer selection process.
05/29/1996 16:56 510-748-4504
City of Alameda
Inter-department Memorandum
ALAMEDA CITY MANAGER
May 23, 1996
To: Chair and Members
of the Community Improvement Commission
PAGE 01/06
From: Dona Hoard
Community Development Director
Re: Developer Selection Process for the Fleet Industrial
Supply Cater (FTC)
Backgrpund
The Fleet Industrial Supply Center, (FISC), Alameda Facility and
Annex represents the largest underdeveloped parcel along the
northern waterfront (Attachment 1). As cited in the NAS Community
Reuse Plan, FISC Alameda Facility is a potential "mixed use area
with a major emphasis on Research & Development/Light Industrial
uses," coinciding with adjacent uses in the successful, but nearly
built-out Marina Village. The majority of FISC Alameda Annex is
identified as a potential Main Street residential neighborhood.
Acknowledging the potential for redevelopment, the City created a
redevelopment survey area in 1989 and formally adopted a
redevelopment plan in 1991. This Business and Waterfront
Improvement Project (BWIP) area includes only the Facility portion
of FISC.
In conjunction with redevelopment plan adoption, special
legislation was enacted and amended by Congress authorizing the
Secretary of Navy to lease property at FISC Oakland to the Port of
Oakland and at FISC Alameda Facility/Annex to the City for up to 50
years at nominal consideration. FISC Alameda, along with FISC
Oakland and Richmond (Point Molate), was placed on the BRAC closure
list a year ago. The City supported the FISC Alameda being placed
on the closure list because it could provide a mechanism of
conveyance of title. Subsequent to the FISC being placed on BRAC
1995, Congress further amended the legislation to allow the
Secretary of the Navy to convey the property, in the case of FISC
Alameda, to the City at no cost. In April 1996, the ARRA has
expressed its wish to the Navy to exercise this option under this
legislation.
Early development of Navy properties is cited in the NAS Community
Reuse Plan as a means to generate revenue that can be used to
leverage additional development and/or fund public services.
Consequently, the ARRA recently hired consultants to evaluate
market conditions, disposition strategies and assist in the
• Item #3-A (CIC)
6-4-96---
05/29/1996 16:56 510-748-4504 ALAMEDA CITY MANAGER
PAGE 02/0E
Chair and Members Page 2
of the Community Improvement Commission May 23, 1996
preparation of conveyance applications to the Navy. In the event
the Secretary of the Navy declines to convey FISC under special
legislation, ARRA would apply to receive title through an economic
benefit conveyance process. Because of the time necessary to
accomplish early development at FISC, a developer selection process
should be initiated now so that a Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA) can be in place when the NAS redevelopment plan and
General Plan are adopted and when properties are conveyed to the
City under special legislation or, as a contingency, to ARRA under
the regular BRAC process.
Discussion and. Analyis
To initiate early disposition of FISC, the CIC would initiate a
developer selection process while the ARRA would continue planning
and leasing activities at NAS and FISC. To advise the CIC and
ensure the continuity of community participation, the Economic
Development Commission (EDC) could create an ad hoc FISC working
group consisting of three EDC members, two Base Reuse Advisory
Group (BRAG) members and one member each from the Alameda Chamber
of Commerce and the West Alameda Business Association (WABA). The
EDC currently acts as an advisory group to the CIC and BRAG
performs a similar function to the ARRA. The EDC could draw
candidates from the Land Use and Development subcommittee or the
Business Retention and Development Task Force; similarly, the BRAG
could select representatives from BRAG subcommittees, including
Economic Development, }lousing, Reuse and Land Use.
Attachment 2 shows the estimated time line to initiate early
development. By initiating the developer selection process now,
development of Frst could commence by early 1998. To delay this
selection process would forestall' development at FISC. Under this
proposed time line, the CIC would consider approval of a Request
for Qualifications (RFQ) for a developer. Upon approval, the CIC
would issue an RFQ to a wide range of prospective developers.
Following a two-month response period, the CIC would select the
most qualified developers. By October 1996, the CIC would approve
a Request for Proposals (RFP). The selected developers would
prepare detailed development proposals for FISC. By then, ARRA
consultants will have completed the NAS/FISC market study, business
plans, and conveyance applications. While studying the feasibility
of this site along with other sites at NAS, ARRA will be prepared
to file a conveyance application for FISC if the Secretary of the
Navy elects to convey FISC under the BRAC process.
By March 1997, the CIC would select a developer on the basis of a
feasible proposed development program and consider approval of an
Exclusive Negotiation.Agreement (ENA). On a concurrent path,. the
05/29/1996 16:56 510-748-4504 ALAMEDA CITY MANAGER
PAGE .03/06,
Chair and Members Page 3
of the Community Improvement Commission May 23, 1996
Reuse Plan EIR/EIS would be completed by February 1997. It is
anticipated that by April 1997, the Secretary of the Navy will
issue a Record of Decision stating the Navy's method of FISC
conveyance.
Under a time-specified ENA, the selected developer would begin to
negotiate a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with the
CIC. On a parallel track, assuming that a detailed development plan
has been agreed upon, a Project EIR would commence late Spring 1997
and be completed and certified by the CIC by early 1998. The
General Plan would also require updating during this period. EIR
certification and adoption of the NAS redevelopment area by early
1998 could be closely followed by approval of the DDA. It is'
possible that a DDA could be executed prior to EIR certification.
An EIR would have to be certified prior to conveyance to the
developer.
Starting the developer selection process now allows the earliest
possible time to develop the FISC property. Responses to the RFQ
and RFP must conform to the goals and objectives of the NAS
Community Reuse Plan. Beyond the land use parameters stated in the
Community Reuse Plan, there is no preconceived development scheme
or phasing. While the RFQ and RFP would specifically focus on the
redevelopment of the FISC property, it would allow a developer to
include a proposal to redevelop and/or reuse adjacent Navy lands as
part of an integrated development plan.
Budget Consider.ations/Fizgal Impact
There is no anticipated impact on the General Fuhd.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the CIC discuss and provide feedback on the
proposed developer selection process to enable timely development
of FISC Alameda Facility/Annex.
Respectfully submitted,
Dona. Hoard
Community 'Development Director
DH\JD:mc
Attachments
05/29/1996 16:56 510 -748 -4504
ALAMEDA CITY MANAGER -PAGE -.04/8
Chair and Members Page 4
of the Community Improvement Commission May 23, 1996
cc: Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Economic Development Commission
Base Reuse Advisory Group
Alameda Chamber of Commerce
West Alameda Business. Association
FORWARDED
ew.
05/29/1996 16:56 510-748-4504
•
ALAMEDA CITY MANAGER
PAGE '05/06
ATTACHMENTA
Alameda Facility
NAS Housing
• • i; •
'
1T1
is' ire 40)cill'.
Alameda Annex
NAS Housing
•
College of Alameda
MELT AND INDUZIVIAL SUPPLY =Mt ALAMEDA ANNEX AND ALAMEDA FACturf
05/29/1996 16:56 510-748-4504
ATTACHMENT 2
ALAMEDA CITY MANAGER
11011111 11111111111i
PAGE 06/06
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
May 30, 1996
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Kay Miller
Executive Director
SUBJ: Results on ARRA Attendance Poll for July 3 Meeting.
4 -J
Item 1
Four ARRA governing body members can attend the July 3 ARRA meeting as scheduled.
Appezzato
Mannix
DeWitt
Alves
Five ARRA governing body members will not be available to attend the meeting and would prefer
to cancel the meeting if there are no pressing matters to address.
Swanson/Brooks
Chan/Brown
Corbett
Chang/Leonhardy
Arnerich
Due to the fact that a quorum will not be present, the regularly scheduled meeting on July 3 will be
canceled. The meeting will not be rescheduled in July unless urgent issues arise. The next regularly
scheduled meeting will be held on August 7, 1996.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kay Miller
Executive Director
Recycled paper C: \WP\ARRAUULY3MTG.OFF