1998-03-04 ARRA PacketAGENDA
Regular Meeting of the Governing Body of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
* * * * * * **
Alameda City Hall
Council Chamber, Room 390
2263 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
Wednesday, March 4, 1998
Meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m.
City Hall will open at 5:15 p.m.
1. ROLL CALL
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
2 -A. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of February 4, 1998.
3. ACTION ITEMS
3 -A. Report and recommendation from the Deputy City Manager, Alameda Point, that the. City
of Alameda retain Building #1 as City Hall West.
3 -B. Report recommending that ARRA expand the scope of work of Gallagher & Lindsey to
include the management of the Admiral's House (100 West Essex).
4. ORAL REPORTS
4 -A. Economic & Planning Systems report on East Bay Regional Park District financing.
4 -B.. Oral report and presentation on the film studio RFP status and presentation by Mass
Illusions.
4 -C. Informational briefing on CyberTran, a new transportation company proposing to locate
at Alameda Point.
4 -D. Oral report from the BRAG updating the ARRA on current activities.
4 -E. Written report from the Executive Director updating the ARRA on:
1. Status of Coast Guard housing
2. Western Aerospace Museum -- status of business plan for Hangar 41
3. Golf course feasibility study status
4. Wildlife refuge issues
5. Status of the campus outreach effort
6. Navy response to the inquiry about street lighting at Alameda Point
7. Status of the Tidelands Trust appraisal
8. Status of Economic Development Conveyance
9. Redevelopment area (APIP) financing plan
ARRA Agenda - March 4, 1998 Page 2
4 -F. Oral report from the Executive Director (non - discussion items).
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. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
7. ADJOURNMENT
This meeting will be simultaneously broadcast on cable channel 22.
The next regular ARRA meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, April 1, 1998.
Notes:
• Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact Patti Van Mark, ARRA
Secretary, at 864 -3400 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.
APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, February 4, 1998
SPECIAL SESSION
The special session was convened at 5:30 p.m. with Chair Appez to presiding to
address the following:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -- ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Gov. Code Sec. 54956.9(c)
Potential number of cases: One
Attendees: Chair Appezzato, Member DeWitt, Member Kerr, Member Daysog (by conference call),
Alternate Sweeney, Alternate Brooks, Alternate Friedman. Absent: Alternate Chang, Alternate
Ornelas.
Chair Appezzato adjourned the special session at 5:50 p.m. and convened the regular meeting at
5:55 p.m. He announced that the Board had met in special session, and that by unanimous vote,
instructions were given to staff to acknowledge approval of assignment from Catholic Charities to
Operation Dignity to be provider /operator of 67 family housing units at Alameda Point for the
Alameda County Homeless Collaborative.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Ralph Appezzato, Mayor, City of Alameda
Albert DeWitt, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Barbara Kerr, Councilmember, City of Alameda
James Sweeney, alternate to Councilmember Karin Lucas, City of Alameda
Roberta Brooks, alternate to Sandre Swanson, District Director,
9th Congressional District
Mark Friedman, alternate to Wilma Chan, Alameda County Board of Supervisors,
District 3 (left at 6:50 p.m.).
Absent: Tony Daysog, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Henry Chang, Jr., alternate to Elihu Harris, Mayor, City of Oakland
Kathleen Ornelas, alternate to Ellen Corbett, Mayor, City of San Leandro
Ex- officio: Alternate Diane Lichtenstein, Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG)
CONSENT CALENDAR
3 -A. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of January 7, 1998.
recycled paper 1 HAMENSLEY \ARRANIMJTES\l998\2..4.98.MIN
3 -B. Recommending award of contract in the amount of $501,630 to Svala Construction to
renovate Building 530 at Alameda Point, ARRA Project Number 07-49 -03698 -530A (P. W .
No. 11- 97 -29).
Speakers: None.
Member Kerr moved approval of the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by
Member DeWitt and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 6. Noes: 0. Absent: 3.
ACTION ITEMS
4 -C. Recommendation authorizing ARRA staff to pursue discussions with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service regarding the size and acreage ofthe wildlife refuge.
Speakers:
Leora Feeney, Friends of the Alameda Wildlife Refuge and least tern biologist, expressed her
concern that the birds need to have plenty of land and urged that land not be taken away from the
refuge. She favors cooperation with the original line that was agreed upon between the ARRA and
USFWS. She said that Alameda could become known for its wildlife refuge in the future and that
it could attract people from all over the country.
Corinne Stefanick, Friends of the Alameda Wildlife Refuge, spoke in favor of leaving the current
acreage allowed for the refuge. She also said that there needs to be access for docent -led tours for
students, and that they anticipate having an interpretive center on the refuge.
Mary Schaefer, Friends of the Alameda Wildlife Refuge, concurred with what Leora Feeney had
stated in terms of the size of the refuge.
Arthur Feinstein, Golden Gate Audubon Society, agreed with the previous speakers. He said he
has been involved in this issue from the beginning and served on the BRAG subcommittee. He
urged remaining with the original line and said that this has already become a successful endangered
species colony.
Carolyn West, interested citizen, also asked to keep the boundary as it is and felt that the refuge
will be a unique attribute to the community.
Marge Kolar, USFWS, stated she was available to answer questions and provide background. She
said that in 1994, USFWS submitted a request for 713 acres of land and 300+ acres of water for the
least tern habitat. ARRA asked that this amount be reduced and negotiations followed. She said that
the original line was agreed upon and drawn in good faith.
Bill Smith, interested citizen, said that he could build a 20,000 foot fence for the refuge for low
cost. He said he would do two fences and that the outside fence would be movable and predators
could not land on it.
*recycled paper 2 H:\MENSLEY\ARRA \MINUTES \1998\2- 4- 98.MIN
Executive Director Kay Miller advised that one piece of information had changed since her staff
report was written. The ARRA does not have more acreage than originally calculated; we were
relying on inaccurate maps. Meetings have been held among ARRA and USFWS staff and
representatives from Congressman Dellums' and Senator Boxer's offices, and compromises and
concessions are being explored.
Chair Appezzato reminded all present that the motion under consideration was simply authorizing
ARRA staff to pursue discussions with USFWS, and that when decisions have been made, they will
be brought back to the Board.
Member DeWitt stated that he feels the land requested for the refuge is excessive, and no one has
convinced him otherwise. He asked, on behalf of the citizens of Alameda, when there will be public
access and what are the plans for improvement of the area? Marge Kolar of the USFWS responded
and showed a map of the area with the proposed new boundary lines. She said that public access is
planned, but because they do not own the land yet, no access is allowed.
Member Kerr asked about the right -of -way mentioned in the staff report and why this road would
be problematic. Executive Director Miller advised that there would be no problem with an east/west
road outside the boundary, but USFWS does not think it can give an easement through the refuge.
Alternate Brooks said that she has been very involved with this issue, including attending meetings
in Washington, D.C., and urged all concerned to look for solutions which will be beneficial to all,
including the least tern.
Chair Appezzato made one final comment that there is a perception in Alameda that dealing with
the USFWS is a one -way street. The ARRA has not been a hindrance, has always supported having
the refuge, but acreage needs to be agreed upon. Negotiations need to continue on a two -way street
with cooperation on both sides.
Alternate Brooks moved to authorize ARRA staff to pursue discussions with the USFWS. The
motion was seconded by Alternate Friedman and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes:
6. Noes: 0. Absent: 3.
4 -D. Report recommending authorization for the Executive Director to finalize and execute a five-
year. lease with a five -year option to renew on Building 9 with Simmba System.
Speakers: None
Member DeWitt mentioned that he had met with the owner of Simmba Systems, and he is very
enthusiastic and wants to do a good job.
Member DeWitt moved to authorize ARRA staff to enter into a lease with Simmba Systems.
The motion was seconded by Alternate Friedman and passed by the following voice vote:
Ayes: 6. Noes: 0. Absent: 3.
recycled paper
3 H:\MENSLEY\ARRA \MINUTES \1998\2- 4- 98.MIN
4 -E. BRAG recommendation that ARRA write a letter to the Navy e pressing concern about delays
in the EIS.
Speakers:
Richard Neveln, Nimitz Airfield Society, voiced his support of writing a letter to the Navy and also
recommended that the BRAG task force be reinstituted.
Diane Lichtenstein, BRAG, said that some of the impacts of these delays have included lack of
jobs, as well as negatively influencing home ownership, businesses and taxes. She said that some
people she has spoken to are hesitant to explore moving their businesses to Alameda Point because
of the EIS delays and that they may end up going to other bases in the area. The BRAG urges that
the Navy be pinned down to the January 1999 date.
Doug DeHaan, BRAG, stated that the EIR/EIS has been delayed six times and that Mare Island,
which was on the same track to begin with, had theirs completed in July 1997. He urged the ARRA
to make sure the Navy sticks to this January 1999 time frame.
Chair Appezzato advised that Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy Cassidy would be personally
meeting with staff on February 5 and that this was among several items which would be discussed.
He stated that the results of this meeting will be made available to the public.
Member DeWitt moved to authorize ARRA staff to write a letter to the Navy. The motion was
seconded by Alternate Brooks and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 5. Noes: 0.
Absent: 4. (Alternate Friedman left the meeting at 6:50 p.m.)
ORAL REPORTS
5 -F. Gallagher & Lindsay West Housing marketing plan.
Executive Director Miller reminded the Board that last summer Gallagher & Lindsey was selected
as the project manager for the West Housing at Alameda Point.
Suzanne Lindsey introduced her staff members present and said they are all enthusiastic about this
project. Their marketing program has begun, and they have already gotten inquiries about the
properties. They have a brochure and web site which show photos of the houses and their rental
prices. Right now, they are just dealing with the ranch houses and will market the big whites as soon
as they are released by the Navy. A letter was sent to tenants presently doing business here, and
there have been ten definite expressions of interest already. They expect the first houses to be ready
for occupancy on March 1.
Member DeWitt inquired about the lead paint abatement status, and ARRA staff member Nanette
Banks advised that she had just received a timeline from the Navy that day, which projected the
abatement to be completed on the big whites by the end of April. Member DeWitt asked if it would
be possible for the City to contract with an outside source to speed up the abatement process, but
Executive Director Miller advised that the Navy will not allow that.
°recycled paper 4 H:\MENSLEIMRRA \MINUTES \1948\2- 4- 98.MIN
Cameron Fowler of Gallagher & Lindsey presented the assumptions for financial projections and
reviewed the planned operations budget. The bottom line is that the net cash flow by January 1999
is projected to be in excess of $425,000.00.
Speakers:
Diane Lichtenstein, BRAG, voiced concern about the process for naming of streets and areas within
the West Housing area. She stated that the BRAG had been involved in the renaming of streets but
not in the selection of the name "The Pointe at Alameda Point ".
Chair Apper'ato stated that there is a process for naming of names and it should be followed.
Executive Director Miller knows the process and it was done. There should not be any official names
until it has gone through the proper process.
5 -G. Update on leasing progress by Ed Levine. ARRA Facilities Manager.
Mr. Levine stated that there are currently 28 signed long -term leases representing a total of 726,000
square feet, plus an additional 20 short-term leases. Within the next two months, another 8-10 leases
are expected to be signed, bringing the total leased area to 1 million square feet. The City's use
permit process and ARRA's internal process have been accelerated, so that it is now possible for a
tenant to move in within 3-4 weeks. Another factor has been the availability of EDA grant funds
to do building upgrades, so that tenants do not have to front that money. He cited Tower Aviation,
Delphi Productions and Simmba Systems as examples of tenants who were able to move in quickly
as a result of the availability of the EDA funds. Projected gross revenue from leases for this calendar
year is $2.4 million, increasing to $5 million in 2000. The total projected area under lease within
1 -2 years is 2.5 -3 million square feet, which will generate gross annual income of approximately $9
million by 2002 (not including costs for common services, port operations, utilities, etc.).
Mr. Levine identified 10 major categories for tenant use at Alameda Point: transportation
technology, environmental technology, port operations and services, manufacturing/light industrial,
warehouse /storage, high technology, public uses, university /campus, film and TV production, and
special events.
5 -H. Oral report from the BRAG updating the ARRA on current activities.
Diane Lichtenstein stated that the BRAG is currently reviewing or planning to review the special
events policy, the East Bay Regional Park District financing plan, the right -of -way issue, the wildlife
refuge, the possibility of an RFP for film and TV production, the delays with the EIS, the results of
the Secretary Cassidy meeting, the Naval Air Museum, the Tidelands Trust, and EDC negotiations.
The BRAG will report back to the ARRA on the results of their review of these items. She also said
that she feels there needs to be more communication between the City boards and commissions and
the BRAG.
5 -I. Written report from the Executive Director updating the ARRA on:
1. EDA and OEA budget request status
2. Golf course feasibility study
3. Lead -based paint report
4. Campus outreach effort
®recycled paper 5 H:\ MENSLEY IARRAIMINUTES1199812- 4- 98.MIN
5. Refuge - related issues
6. ARRA letter of support to Congresswoman Tauscher for ISTEA funding for 1-880
demonstration project
Regarding the refuge- related issues, Executive Director Miller stated that the draft management plan
for the refuge is proposed to be issued by the USFWS in March, and that the public and ARRA will
have an opportunity to comment on the plan at that time. The area of most concern is the biological
opinion because that is where the USFWS will look at all the plans for the base property and
determine whether they jeopardize the least tern habitat or not. Public comment will not be allowed
regarding the biological opinion.
Speakers:
Leora Feeney, Friends of the Alameda Wildlife Refuge, stated that she had written a letter to the
ARRA which did not appear to be included on the agenda. Executive Director Miller assured her
that her letter was included in the correspondence section of the agenda packet.
5 -J. Oral report from the Executive Director (pon- discussion items). None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
Speakers:
Richard Neveln, Nimitz Airfield Society, voiced his concern that there seems to be no discussion
about the number of jobs going to local people who are unemployed as a result of the base closure.
He stated it is important for the community to increase local employment.
Doug DeHaan, BRAG, thanked Executive Director Miller and her staff for their efforts in leasing
the properties at Alameda Point. He said the results have been very impressive in the last year.
Chair Apper7ato thanked Mr. DeHaan for pointing out the positive results, since most often they
hear only the negative.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM TIE GOVERNING BODY - None.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by Chair Appezzato at 7:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Patti Van Mark
ARRA Secretary
$recycled paper 6 H:\MENSLEY\ARRA\MINUTES \1998\2- 4- 98.MIN
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
February 25, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Robert La Grone
Deputy City Manager - Alameda Point
SUBJ: Report and recommendation that the City of Alameda retain Building #1 as
City all West.
Background;
At the February 3, 1998 Council meeting, the City Council approved a policy to use Building #1
as a City Hall West Annex at Alameda Point (copy attached).
Discussion:
The BRAG Campus Task Force has previously recommended to the ARRA that all of the
buildings in the campus area previously identified for the Pan Pacific University proposal be set
aside for campus use. Included among the buildings requested is Building #1 (now known as
950 West Mall Square). Currently, the City is short of City office space and is occupying space
from the Alameda Unified School District and renting commercial space located at 1701 Webster
St. The ARRA, the staff for the Cooperative Agreement with the Navy, and the Alameda Fire
Department Preventive Services Division, are currently located in Building #1 along with
approximately fifteen Navy Transition Office staff. The Navy does not charge the City or the
ARRA rent and has paid for or shared the expense for many remodeling improvements via the
Cooperative Agreement. Additional City departments and divisions would benefit if relocated to
Building #1 where space is available.
The Community Development Department and the Public Works Department Administrative
Offices, Engineering Division, and Waste Management & Recycling Division would all benefit
if they co- locate in Building #1. The redevelopment of Alameda Point, which will include
numerous new recreational facilities and require approximately $130M in infrastructure
improvements, will constitute the major redevelopment and engineering center of activity for the
City for the next fifteen (15) years. Therefore, it makes sense to locate the divisions of the City
which will manage the redevelopment process on the redevelopment site.
There would also be financial savings by moving these offices to Alameda Point. The Public
Works Department rent is paid until October 1, 1998. After that date, the rent for the building
currently occupied would be approximately $25K for each following 12 -month period.
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Page 2
February 25, 1998
The Community Development Department estimates that it could sublease its current office
space on Webster Street at a rate that would achieve a surplus, and they (CDD) would not move
until a replacement tenant had been secured. Any savings could be made available for American
Disabilities. Act (ADA) and other improvements to Building #1. The Navy has previously
indicated that it would match funds for some of the building improvements.
Moving suggested/additional City star and offices to Alameda Point would also increase the
number of people who visit Alameda Point and speed its integration as a part of the City.
Webster Street and the west end merchants should benefit from the increased presence. A shuttle
from Alameda Point to Webster Street, Park Street and Fruitvale BART is planned.
Financial Impact:
If the ARRA approves moving offices to Alameda Point, there will be rent savings of
approximately $25,000 a year. The CDD has available grant funding of approximately $135,000
which could be used to provide building improvements. Both of these funding sources constitute
a limited window of opportunity to improve a building which would become a City asset.
Improving Building #1 will save the City rent on a long -term basis, or the improved building can
be sold or leased at a profit. Navy funding will probably not be available within a few months
due to increased restrictions on the use of Cooperative Agreement funds.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the ARRA, by motion, provide policy direction for the use of Building #1
as City Hall West Annex at Alameda Point.
Respectfully submitted,
01}0-
Robert La Grone
RL:pgs
Attachment
City of Alameda
Inter- department Memorandum
January 23, 1998
TO: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
FROM: Robert La Grone
Deputy City Manager- Alameda Point
RE: USE OF BUILDING #1 FOR CITY .OFFICES AT ALAMEDA POINT
Background:
At the December 16, 1997 Council meeting, the Council considered a report (copy attached)
which recommended Council approval of a policy to use Building #1 as a City Hall West Annex
at Alameda Point. After hearing public comment and discussing the recommendation, the City
Manager offered to provide additional information and bring the report back to the Council in
appauximately forty- five.days.
Discussion/Analysis:
Staff has considered both citizen and Council input and offers the following information and
suggestions to the questions raised:
- Concern that moving the Alameda Recreation and Park Department (ARPD) offices to
Alameda Point will not provide adequate public access and will reduce a needed business
presence on Park St.
It is now recommended that ARPD offices remain at their present location at the East Wing of
Historic Alameda High School. Staff is pursuing an offer of lower rent, which was confirmed in
person by the Superintendent of Schools at the December 16, 1997 Council meeting.
- Concern that moving the Community Development Department (CDD) from their
Webster St. location to Alameda Point will lessen local government's presence on Webster
St. and eliminate the Police annex and mail drop -off point, both located in the CDD office.
An additional concern expressed was that the CDD or the City might have to pay the rent if
a replacement tenant was not secured. .
Staff still recommends moving the CDD to Alameda Point but only after a replacement tenant
has been secured. This will provide a continuing business presence at the 1701 Webster St.
building and ensure that neither the City or the Community Development Department has to pay
rent for the site. The Community Development Department estimates that it can sub -lease the
Report
Item #5 -C
213/98
Honorable Mayor and Page 2
Councilmembers January 23, 1998
property at a surplus. The Police annex and the mail drop -off function can be accommodated
from the adjoining fire station at 635 Pacific Ave. The station functioned as an office for the
police walking patrols prior to the occupation of 1701 Webster St. by Community Development.
- Concern that moving Public Works Administrative Offices, Engineering Division, and
Waste Management & Recycling Division would hinder public accessibility for permits and
other services.
Public Works divisions such as Building Inspection.and Central Permits are the primary points of
face -to -face contact for public services such as building and plumbing permits. These divisions
' will remain in their current location in the ground floor of City Hall. It is only proposed to move
the offices that primarily provide management, administration and engineering support but have
limited face -to -face public contact for services.
- Concern that there is no public transportation to Alameda Point.
There is A/C Transit bus service to Alameda Point. The #10 bus travels from Downtown
Oakland to Alameda Point every 30-60 minutes. In addition, Alameda Point is in close •
proximity to the West End Ferry. The #50 and the #325 bus provide limited service to the Ferry
Terminal (approximately 3-6 times per day) . Staff plans to provide a limited employee shuttle to
Webster St., Park St and Fruitvale BART.
The redevelopment of Alameda Point will constitute the major redevelopment and engineering
center of activity for the City for the next fifteen years. More than $130M in infrastructure
improvements are anticipated. Locating on site the offices of the City which will have the
primary responsibility to manage this redevelopment and engineering project will aid in
managing the project more efficiently.
Financial Impact:
If the Council and the ARRA approve moving offices to Alameda Point there will be rent
savings of approximately $25,000 a year. The CDD has available grant funding of
approximately $100,000 in the current fiscal year which could be used to provide building
improvements. The Navy also has offered some matching funding for building improvements.
Both of these funding sources constitute a narrow window of opportunity to improve a building
which would become a City asset. Improving Building #1 will save the City rent on a long -term
basis, or the improved building can be sold or leased at a profit. Navy funding will probably not
be available within a few months due to increased restrictions on the use of Cooperative
Agreement funds.
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
Recommendation:
Page 2
January 23, 1998
Staff recommends that the Council, by motion, provide policy direction for the use of Building
#1 as City Hall West Annex at Alameda Point, and that said direction be forwarded to the
ARRA.
Respectfully submitted,
/2,-/ea- d:duniz-
Robert La Grone
Deputy City Manager - Alameda Point
RL:pgs
Alameda Reuse. and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
February 25, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Kay Miller, Executive Director
SUBJ: Report recommending that ARRA expand the scope of work of Gallagher & Lindsey
to inntiutp thp management of the Arlmiral'c Hnuse11OO West Fssex)
Background:
In September 1997, the ARRA Board directed the ARRA staff to negotiate a contract with Gallagher
and Lindsey for the management of 31 ranch houses and 18 senior officers' quarters, known as the
"big whites." The contract was executed in January 1998.
The Admiral's House, which is considered a big white, was not part of the original discussion
because the City wanted to use the facility as a meeting/conference center. Subsequently, the City
has decided this type of facility would be costly for the City to operate.
Discussion:
As you saw at the January 1998 ARRA meeting, the west housing property management company
of Gallagher and Lindsey has started marketing of the 49 units of west housing. One of the first
market targets was tenants on the base. Many of the corporate tenants and perspective
campus/university tenants have inquired about the use of the Admiral's House. Companies desire
to use these facilities to house executives here on assignment, while college administrators could see
the house as the President's house for hosting university events.
It is important to note that the ARRA has a City Use Permit for the ranch houses and big whites
(excluding the Admiral's House). We are in the process of applying for a Use Permit for the
Admiral's House and designating two potential uses for the facilities: one as residential and the
other as conference/meeting center. We are applying for these uses to allow for the future use of this
facility to be either a conference center or, as once proposed, a bed and breakfast.
Fiscal Impact:
Up to $4500 per month in lease revenues
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the ARRA governing body authorize the Executive Director to expand the
scope of work for Gallagher & Lindsey to include the Admiral's House (100 West.Essex).
Respectfully submitted,
vlli LL4�1J
Kay Miller
Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
February 23, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Kay Miller, Executive Director
SUBJ: Written status report from the Executive Director on ARRA activities.
1. Status of Coast Guard housing. The Coast Guard has provided the attached report on the status
of the occupancy and management of their housing at the Marina Village and North Housing area.
We are still planning to proceed with a leaseback agreement for that housing area, and the Coast
Guard is awaiting authorization to negotiate at the local level.
2. Western Aerospace Museum - status of business plan for Hangar 41. The Western Aerospace
Museum expects to submit its business plan for Hangar 41 on March 16. The BRAG has a special
museum task force which, along with staff, will evaluate the business plan and make a
recommendation to the full BRAG. If the business plan is complete, I would expect the BRAG to .
consider a recommendation from the task force in April and make a recommendation to the ARRA
for its consideration in May.
Attached is a recent correspondence from the Western Aerospace Museum clarifying their
anticipated need for use of the runway to fly in aircraft for display at the Alameda Naval Air and
Western Aerospace Museum. It would appear prudent to consider this request in conjunction with
their business plan for Hangar 41, which would be the proposed permanent site of most of the
aircraft that they would need to fly in.
3. Golf course feasibility study status. There were seven teams who submitted proposals to conduct
the golf course feasibility study. The selection committee -- which consisted of Elizabeth Johnson,
ARRA Environmental/Refuge Consultant Leslie Zander, Dana Banke, Golf Course Manager, Tony
Corica, Member of the Golf Commission, and me -- interviewed five teams. The team of Kyle
Phillips was selected by the committee to conduct the feasibility study. The Kyle Phillips team
consists of Kyle Phillips Golf Course Design, HMH Civil Engineering, Beriogar Geotechnical
Consultants, Golf Research Group Economic Analysts, and HGHB Clubhouse Architects. We
expect to have the team under contract immediately in order to begin work on the study by March
1. We anticipate the study being completed and the report submitted by the end of May with a
presentation to the ARRA Board at its June meeting.
4. Wildlife refuge issues. A draft of the USFWS biological opinion was submitted to the Navy on
February 19. ARRA and City staff are conducting a review of the draft and a meeting with the
Director of the USFWS San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex and the Endangered
Species Office people will be scheduled once the internal review has been completed. At that
meeting, both the issue of the size of the refuge and restrictions by the refuge would be the subject
of discussion.
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 2
February 23, 1998
5. Status of the campus outreach effort. The campus outreach effort continues on target. Dr. Robert
Fisher, the consultant hired to conduct the outreach effort, will be reporting to the BRAG in March
and the ARRA in April. It is also anticipated that we may have proposals to consider from other
campus applicants at those two meetings.
6. Navy response to the inquiry about street lighting at Alameda Point. Attached is the Navy's
response to the ARRA inquiry about the status of street lighting.
7. I t. -y r:,' A draft of the Tidelands Trust appraisal was sent to the
State Lands Commission in late January. ARRA staff is intending to meet with the State Lands staff
in early March to get agreement on the appraisal and to outline the steps needed to effect a trade of
properties. The actual agreement about how a trade would take place will likely require a three- or
perhaps four -way agreement among the ARRA, City of Alameda, State Lands Commission and
perhaps the Navy. The terms of the negotiation for potential land swaps or trades would have to be
approved by the ARRA Board before we could proceed to consummate a Memorandum of
Understanding.
8. Status of Economic Development Conveyance (DC). The Navy has begun its review of the
ARRA's EDC application and has identified their negotiating team, consisting of four officials from
EFA West and one from NAVFAC headquarters. The negotiating teams expect to meet in March
in order for the ARRA staff and its consultants to clarify some of the underlying assumptions in the
cash flow analysis. Before we get into formal negotiations, the Navy team will be asking for
guidance from their headquarters on the parameters of the negotiations. The Navy has expressed its
desire to conclude the negotiations by the end of the year in advance of the Record of Decision
(ROD). However, the documentation memorializing the terms of the EDC cannot be signed until
after the ROD is issued.
9. Redevelopment area (APIP) financing plan. As the final piece of completing the redevelopment
project area formation which was financed with OEA funding, we will be contracting for a financing
plan for the APIP. The plan will consider the various sources of revenue (such as tax increment,
lease revenues, and sale of property) and propose a financing plan for the infrastructure and site
improvements.
Respectfully submitted,
Kay Miller
Executive Director
H: IMENSLEY \ARRAISTATUS.RPT\STATUS3.4
Coast Guard Housing - NAS Alameda
10 Feb 98
Housing Units to be acquired/leased: 582 Multi - family units (300 Marina Village and
282 North Housing and the PWC Housing Office/Bldg 99.)
Marina Village:
Approximately 76% of the units are occupied by USCG personnel, the remainder are
occupied by DoD families. A small percentage of Navy families have been moved from
North Housing to Marina Village due the USCG renovation project.
North Housing:
Of the 282 units only 57 are currently occupied: The-Navy-occupies approximately 16%
(9 units) of the 57 units, the remaining are occupied by USCG families. A phased AFC
43 project is now underway for these units. This project began in July 97 (60 units) and
will continue to FY00. The project plans call for the renovation of 72 units in 1' quarter
FY98, and possibly 36 additional units in e quarter FY 98 depending on funding
authorization. Therefore a total of 168 units would be renovated by Jan 99, at
approximately $30K/unit.
Navy playground equipment scattered through out the housing area has been removed as
part of this renovation project due to safety hazards. Funding for new playground
equipment may come from the Coast Guard Foundation.
All.Navy personnel will be out of CG units by 30 Sep 98
Property Management:
Currently management and maintenance for all housing units at NAS is being completed
by the USCG. As of 1 Oct 97, maintenance will be completed by contract for all housing
units. Management (assignments for USCG and all other DOD services and
administrative work) will continue to be completed by the USCG through our office at
the site (PWC Housing Bldg. 99). Plans arc underway for contracting of "change of
occupancy" maintenance, which is currently being completed by USCG.
Estuary Park:
The USCG will continue to maintain the park as part of our housing acquisition. We
currently have no renovation plans for the park.
Lease -Back: We are awaiting delegation of authority from Coast Guard Headquarters
to our local office before initiating the negotiation process with ARRA.
WESTERN E S ACE MUSEUM
P.O. BOX 14264 8260 BOEING STREET
NORTH FIELD, OAKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, OAKLAND, CA 94614
(510) 638 -7100 FAX (510) 638 -6530
Kay Miller
Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda Point /NAS Alameda
950 W. Mall Square, Building 1
Alameda, California 94501 -5012
RECE!
FEB 0 5 1998
ARRA
CITY OF ALAMEDA
February 4, 1998
Dear Ms. Miller,
In response to your request we prefer using Runway 31 (because it
is longer) to fly -in up to several (10) aircraft for display at the
Alameda Naval Air and Western Aerospace Museum, by June 1998; I
believe we could safely land any of our aircraft on the first 6000 feet
of Runway 31 and thus any length beyond that would not be needed.
It is our understanding that the airfield is still owned by the U.S.
Navy and likely it will not be turned over to the US Fish & Wildlife
Service until at least 1999. 1 talked with Marge Kolar of the
Fish and Wildlife Service and she said that under the present
conditions she believes we should make any requests for landing
aircraft to the Navy as they still control the airfield. We are cognizant
of the Least Tern reproductive season and would attempt to fly
airplanes in prior to the beginning of the Tern nesting season in
April /May and /or with due caution in cooperation with the Refuge
staff and others. Certainly the very few minimal flights that we are
talking about would be much less conflict than anything that
transpired during Navy operation.
Of course we would hope that at infrequent times in the future that
we could land on Runway 31, when a special aircraft of value to the
museum might be available. Occasionally such an aircraft does
becomes available. if we could have the opportunity to land the
infrequent aircraft on Runway 31 then we would not need to use
Runway 7/2 (the east / :vest Runway).
There is precedent for operation of aircraft in existing US Fish &
Wildlife Service Refuges in a number of locations throughout the U.S.
particularly including at now decommissioned Floyd Bennett Naval
Air Station on Long Island, New York. The field there is now
controlled I understand by the National Park Service and is an
official wildlife refuge. Under those conditions they operated an
airshow over the water this past summer and intend to do so again
this summer I believe.
If our very few landings were not possible on Runway 31, then we
would be. .interested in using Runway 7 for landing (and Runway 25
for takeoffs if necessary). This would be making approaches for
landing over the Bay on an easterly heading and takeoffs over the
Bay on a westerly heading (I call this a "one -way Runway "). This
arrangement would thus keep all operations over the Bay and far
removed from any housing. Further more, aircraft noises on landing
approach are minimal because the power on the engine is reduced
and most of our aircraft would be small aircraft. In any event we
would need to taxi aircraft to the Museum area.
I believe that much of the discussion above would be of interest to
the USS Hornet Foundation as they too intend to bring aircraft,
mostly different than ours, into Alameda Point in order to place them
on the Hornet. They very likely would find it very advantageous,
more convenient, and more economical to do so, just as we do, rather
than having to disassemble and truck or barge aircraft in and then
reassemble the aircraft at the Museum or on the Hornet as the case
may be.
We would be glad to discuss the contents of this letter and any
suggestions at any time with anyone.
Ronald T. Reuther
Executive Director
cc: Gerald Lutz, President, USS Hornet Foundation
Barbara Baack, President, Alameda Naval Air Museum
Terry Howell, President, Western Aerospace Museum
MEMORANDUM
To: Ms. Kay Miller, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
From: Dean Wolf, Facility Manager
Navy Transition Office Alameda Point
Copy: LCDR Scott Smith, Officer in Charge, Navy Transition Office
Mr. Robert La Grone, Deputy City Manager Alameda Point
Subj: Lighting at Alameda Point
February 10, 1998
I understand that the ARRA and BRAG have some concerns about the lighting at
Alameda Point. I hope the following status update addresses those issues about which
you care.
BACKGROUND
The Navy Transition Office (NTO) and City of Alameda have learned some lessons this
winter in terms of general area lighting at Alameda Point. This is the fast winter after
closure of the Naval Air Station (NAS) Alameda as an operating military base, as well as
its cessation as an Around- the -Clock community. NAS has always had area illumination
from streetlights, however this used to be supplemented by outside security lights, as well
as lighting from the windows of occupied barracks, housing, offices, and some industrial
areas. The general illumination level at NAS Alameda was similar to, or brighter than,
the level in adjacent residential neighborhoods. Upon closure of the Air Station, the
Navy put buildings in "layaway" status, which often included cutting electrical power to
the buildings. Many of the security and street lights were wired to power sources in the
nearest building. Thus, as the winter of 1997 approached, Alameda Point was noticeably
darker at nighttime than had been encountered in recent memory. The City and NTO
worked together to initiate measures that will brighten up Alameda Point.
ALAMEDA POINT LIGHTING
In late summer, the Alameda Bureau of Electricity (BOE) started surveying street lights
to replace bumed out bulbs and repair inoperable fixtures. The NTO and City worked
together to make sure the street lights on major routes (for example, the route from Gate
to Building 1) were functioning. This meant turning power back -on in some buildings
were it had been cut by the layaway process. Navy and City now periodically re- inspect
the street lights, because the layaway process isn't complete, and for a variety of reasons
once operating lights have been found to be turned off
The BOE is conducting a larger study to determine how to provide dedicated circuits the
street light system at Alameda Point. Their objective is to provide a separate power
source for the street lights, similar to the way power is provided to street lights in the rest
of the City. This is a large undertaking and we probably won't see the results of this
effort until next winter.
950 W. MALL SQUARE LIGHTING (Building 1)
This is also the first year that a large number of public meetings are held in the evening at
Building 1. Some lighting changes are underway here too.
In December, the Navy and City made a plan to improve the area lighting around 950 W.
Mall Square. Bulbs were replaced and fixtures repaired to make sure all existing exterior
lights are operating. The security lighting was turned on at Building 32, across W.
Midway Ave. from the south entrance to 950 W. Mall Sq. Ten additional area lights
have been recently installed on the outside of Building 1, and the .photocell operation is
being adjusted for automatic operation.
The BOE is in the process of installing improved power to the building. When the work
progresses far enough, the City plans to tie into the new source and add street lights in the
parking lot across Midway Ave.
When these lighting improvements are complete, the City and Navy plan to again review
the area illumination level and take additional measures if appropriate.
I hope this information is useful to you. If your office, or the BRAG members, have any
specific questions, please let me know.
Dean Wolf
Correspondence
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Interim Leasing Status Report
Signed Leases and Licenses
Ise2- 98.xis
Page 1
Tenant
Term of
Occupancy
Building #
Occupied Bldg.
(Sq. Ft.)
1
ACET (Environmental Tech. Incubator)
long term
7
15,550
2
Alameda Point Storage (1200 Mini - storage Units)
long term
near Bldg. 530
-
3
Alameda Unified School District (Child Care Ctr.)
long term
258
12,430
4
Bay Ship & Yacht (Ship Repair)
long term
292
2,700
5
Bureau of Electricity (Storage Yard)
long term
at FISC
-
6
CALSTART (Electric Vehicle Consortium)
long term
20
66,000
7
City Garage Carstar (Vehicle Painting)
long term
24
12,927
8
City of Alameda (Feny Terminal Parking)
long term
-
38,976
9
City of Alameda (Gym and Pool)
long term
76 & 134
58,450
10
City of Alameda (Officers' Club)
long term
60
29,550
11
City of Alameda (Records Storage)
long term
397
17,000
12
City of Alameda (Soccer Field)
longterm
Adjacent to Bldg. 360
-
13
Delphi Productions (Exhibit Displays)
long term
39
110,000
14
Forem Metal Mfg. (Sheet Metal Contractor)
long term
114
20,000
15
Giannotti (Ship Parts & Repair)
long term
113
13,150
16
Haviside & Heastings (Ship Repair)
long term
43
10,500
17
Housing Units (31 units in West Housing)
long term
-
47,177
18
Interscope Communications (Film Co.)
5 months,
portion of 11
50,000
19
Love Center Ministries
6 months
portion of 12
8,000
20
MARAD (Ready Reserve Fleet)
long term
Piers 1, 2,3
-
21
MARAD
long term
168
117,419
22
Mass Illusions (Film Co.)
5 months
portion of 11
10,000
23
Navigator Systems (Fumiture Mfgr.)
long term
14
40,000
24
Nelson's Marine (Boat Repair)
long term
167 & finger piers
55,450
25
Piedmont Soccer Club
1 year
280,000 sq. ft. field
-
26
Polyethylene Products (Plastics Recycling)
long term
398
10,000
27
Puglia Engineering (Ship Repair)
long term
67
14,000
28
Quality Assured Products (Valve Mfgr.)
long term
21
66,000
29
Richard Miller Photography (Photography)
_
long term
621
5,770
30
Tower Aviation (Avionics)
long term
530
82,250
31
Trident 3M Services (Port Mgmt. /Maint.)
long term
15
16,603
Number of Properties Currently Occupied:
31
Building Space (sq. ft.) Currently Occupied:
950,902
Current Employment in Leased Buildings:
548
Projected Future Employment in Leased Buildings:
1,371
Ise2- 98.xis
Page 1
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Interim Leasing Status Report
Pending Leases and Licenses
Ise2 -98x1s
Page 2
Tenant
Building Number
Area (Sq. Ft.)
Interim Use
Permits
Approved
1
Antiques by the Bay (Swap Meet)
-
portion of taxiway H
2
Cellular One (Antenna Site)
-
60' x 20'
3
Delaco Builders (Cabinetry)
44
5,100
4
Door Christian Fellowship Church
564
8,600
5
Dynamic Marine Boatworks (Boat Production)
166
55,000
X
6
Forty Plus (Career Counseling)
90
4,500
X
7
FOSS Environmental Services
13
34,540
8
Harbor Bay Maritime (Storage)
Pier 1 North
200'
9
Integrated Technology Group (Computer Rebuild)
66
30,900
10
Mass Illusions (Film Company)
19
23,706
11
NorCal Soccer (Dome)
near Piers
-
12
San Francisco Drydock (Office Trailers)
Near Pier 3
-
13
Sigi, Inc. (Crepe Mfg.)
42
3,000
X
14
Solo Energy Corp. (Prototype Testing)
United States Customs Service
12 & 22
29
176,108
19,480
15
16
USS Hornet Foundation
Pier 3
-
17
Zebra Motors, Inc. (Electric Vehicles)
23
65,500
Completed Licenses
Tenant Building Number
1
Acad. of Model Aeronautics (Model Planes) portion of Runway 25
2
Alameda Recycling Co. (Storage) Bay 2/Bldg. 24
3
Area 51 Productions (Event Production Co.) portion of taxiway
4
Area 51 Productons (Auto Mfg. Marketing Survey) 5A
5
Boy Scouts of America Spike & Pitch Park
6
Chamber of Commerce /BOE (Inter. Trade Expo) 22
7
CINCPAC (Fleet Week '97) Pier 3 South
8
City of Alameda/Bureau of Electricity (EV Expo) 23
9
Clubhouse Pictures (Film Co.) 25
10
Disney Studios (Film Co.) 24
11
Great Benefit Productions (Film Co.) Portions of 24 & 25
12
Industrial Light and Magic (Film Co.) 400A
13
Industrial Light and Magic (Film Co.) portion of taxiway
14
Interscope Communications (Film Co.) 11,12,400A
15
Interscope Communications (Film Co.) 2
16
Interscope Communications (Film Go.) pool
17
Microsoft (Software Co.) 400A
18
Nadel Productions (Film Co.) portion of taxiway
19
Off Duty Productions (Film Co.) portion of roadway
20
Rysher Entertainment (Film Co.) 24
Ise2 -98x1s
Page 2
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND
200 STOVALL STREET
ALEXANDRIA VA 22332-2300
Ms. Ardella Dailey
Naval Air Station Alameda
Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)
Community Co-Chair Member
2200 Central Avenue
Alameda, 'California 94501
Dear Ms. Dailey:
06 FEB 1998
RECEIVED
FEB 1 8 1998
ARRA ._
CITY OF PJAP.F..7;
Thank you for your letter of December 3, 1997,
regarding the Federal Facilities Site Remediation Agreement
(FFSRA) for the former Naval Air Station (NAS) Alameda.
am ,responding for Rear Admiral Nash, who is on extended
travel. We believe it is important to restate the fact that
the clean up of the Alameda base is proceeding on track even
though there is not a signed FFSRA. The Navy has committed
and is required by law to fully fund the base cleanup.
We are happy to report, since the October 7, 1997 joint
letter from the Navy and the State of California Department
of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) to the NAS Alameda RAB,
substantial progress has been made towards developing FFSRAs
at Navy bases in California. We have overcome the difficult
issues on the negotiation of the FFSRA for NAS North Island
and we are well on our way to settlement. These
negotiations should resolve many of the outstanding issues
between the Navy and the State of California and should
smooth the way for the application of agreements to pending
negotiations at other Navy bases, including Alameda.
The resumption of negotiations for Alameda awaits
finalization and signing of the NAS North Island FFSRA.
Alameda negotiations will recommence immediately following
this signing. Furthermore, since many of the toughest
issues have been resolved, Alameda's negotiations are
expected to proceed expeditiously.
As a courtesy, I will send a copy of this letter to the
new community co-chairman, Mr. John Spafford, and the other
RAB members. Thank you again for your dedicated support and
interest in this process.
Sincerely,
B. F. MUR
Captain, CEC, •. S. Navy
Acting Commander
Copy to:
Congressman Ronald Dellums
State Senator Barbara Lee
State Assemblyman Don Perata
Alameda Mayor Ralph Appezzato
Kay Miller, ARRA Executive Director
Members, ARRA.
Mr. John Spafford, RAB Community Co-Chair
Members, NAS Alameda RAB.
Mr. Jesse Huff, Director, DTSC
Mr. Steve Edde, Alameda Pt. BEC (BCT)
Ms. Mary Rose Cassa, DTSC (BCT)
Ms. Anna Marie Cook, EPA Region IX (BCT)
Ms. Lynn Suer, EPA Region IX (BCT)