1999-01-14 ARRA PacketAGENDA
Special Meeting of the Governing Body of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
* * * * * * **
Alameda City Hall
Council Chamber, Conference Room 391
2263 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
1. ROLL CALL
Thursday, January 14, 1999
Meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM
Anyone wishing to address the ARRA on this agenda item only may speak for a
maximum of three minutes.
3. SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION OF THE ARRA TO CONSIDER:
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR:
Property: Alameda Naval Air Station
Negotiating parties: ARRA and the U.S. Navy
Under negotiation: Price and Terms
Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54956.8
4. ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
5. ADJOURNMENT
The next regular ARRA meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 3,
1999.
AGENDA
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, January 6, 1999
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 December 2, 1998.
2 -B. Recommendation to appoint Planning Board Representative to the Base Reuse Advisory
Group (BRAG).
2 -C. Recommending adoption of plans, specifications and estimates and authorization to call for
bids for construction contracts to upgrade Building 23, No. P.W. 03- 98 -04.
2 -D. Resolution recommending that the City of Alameda Public Utilities Board proceed to
recover its Stranded Assets due to closure of the Alameda NAS and FISC through a claim
against the Federal Government outside of the BRAC process.
3. ACTION ITEMS
4. ORAL REPORTS
4 -A. Oral report from BRAG.
4 -B. Oral report from the Deputy City Manager (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
ARRA Agenda - January 6, 1999 Page 2
7. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION OF THE ARRA TO CONSIDER:
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR: 5:30 p.m.
Property: Alameda Naval Air Station
Negotiating parties: ARRA and the U.S. Navy
Under negotiation: Price and Terms
Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54956.8
8. ADJOURNMENT
This meeting will be simultaneously broadcast on cable channel 22.
The next regular ARRA meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 3,
1999.
Notes:
• Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the 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, December 2, 1998
The meeting convened at 5:35 p.m. with Chair Appezzato presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Ralph Appezzato, Mayor, City of Alameda
Barbara Kerr, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Sandre Swanson, District Director, 9th Congressional District
James Sweeney, alternate to Councilmember Karin Lucas, City of Alameda
Mark Friedman, alternate to Wilma Chan, Alameda County Board of Supervisors,
District 3
Kathleen Ornelas, alternate to Sheila Young, Mayor, City of San Leandro
Absent: Tony Daysog, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Jay Leonhardy, alternate to Elihu Harris, Mayor, City of Oakland
Ex- officio: Lee Perez, Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG)
CONSENT CALENDAR
2 -A. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of November 4, 1998.
Speakers: None.
Member Kerr moved approval of the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by
Alternate Friedman and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 5. Noes: 0. Abstentions:
0; Absent: 3.
ACTION ITEMS
3 -A. Report recommending authorization for the Executive Director to finalize and execute a
ten -year sublease on Building 169 with the U.S. General Services Administration.
Alternate Sweeney questioned whether there are any fixtures and if the building is just a vacant
warehouse.
®recycled paper 1 h: \12- 2- 98.min
Executive Director Miller indicated she cannot answer the question specifically, however, Staff
Reports does indicate the total cost for building improvement would not exceed $10,000 dollars.
Alternate Friedman moved, and Alternate Ornelas seconded the staff recommendation.
The motion passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 5. Noes: 0. Abstentions: 0. Absent: 0
3 -B. Report recommending authorization to finalize negotiations and execute an interim lease
through the term of the Master Lease with Dignity Housing West for 30 West Housing apartment
units.
Executive Director Miller stated that this is an action similar to a number of actions the Board
has taken in beginning to interim lease the housing units to members of the Homeless
Collaborative. These leases are needed to be executed prior to the Record of Decision in order
for these providers to go forward with their federal funding.
Alternate Friedman moved, and Alternate Ornelas seconded the staff recommendation.
The motion passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 5. Noes: 0. Abstentions: 0. Absent: 0
3 -C. Report and recommendation by the Executive Director for approval of a six -month
proposed 1999 budget for ARRA lease revenue.
Executive Director Miller advised that Nanette Banks from ARRA Staff is available to answer
any questions on the Staff Reports.
Member Kerr inquired who is the environmental consultant.
Executive Director Miller indicated they contracted through the City Attorney's office, through
the same attorneys that they are using for the FISC negotiations, Shute Mihaly, with their
subcontractor Peter Russell. The contract has been extended to include work for ARRA and, it is
therefore, an efficient process because they are dealing with many similar issues on the FISC
property.
Member Kerr inquired on the 1999 ARRA fund balance projection. The ending balance on June
30, 1999, is down to $2,947.00, which is a little bit thin.
Deputy City Manager Berger indicated that they did look beyond the ending period for the next
six months, and in fact, the ending balance projected is $561,000. The reason that it is down to
that level is because there is some front -end loaded cost related to matching the EDA grants for
the entire year's worth of improvements. So the second six month's expenditures would not
contain EDA matching amounts which equates to about $550,000 according to ARRA Staff
Member Banks. The OEA grant is also funded for the entire year match at $650,000. The next
six months did not include those figures. The fact is that we took the revenue and divided it by
two but we could not do that with the expenditures because we had an obligation to put the full
match for federal grants in the first six months. This is just the transition budgets so that we can
do a fiscal year budget that matches the City's fiscal year budget. It will be much more efficient
for the operation to have a fiscal year that matches the City's fiscal year.
@recycled paper 2 h: \12- 2- 98.min
Member Kerr questioned the requirement for the matching funds and whether they are actually
paid by July 1. Deputy City Manager Berger deferred the question to ARRA Staff Member
Banks. Staff Member Banks indicated that they are just budgeted, they are incumbered for that
time period. Member Kerr remarked that there is actually money in the bank that has not been
spent yet. Staff Member Banks indicated yes.
Executive Director Miller noted that the ARRA Staff have had a lot of learning experience from
operating one year of these revenues. With this experience under their belt, they have a better
handle on where some of the cost and anticipated cost are going to be. The biggest unanticipated
expenditures have been on building maintenance.
Alternate Friedman moved, and Member Kerr seconded the staff recommendation. The
motion passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 6. Noes: 0. Abstentions: 0. Absent: 0.
3 -D. Report from the Executive Director recommending endorsement of ARRA's proposed
grant proposal to the Office of Economic Adjustment for the 1999 -2000 fiscal year.
Speakers: None
Member DeWitt moved, and Member Kerr seconded the staff recommendation. The
motion passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 6. Noes: 0. Abstentions: 0. Absent: 0.
ORAL REPORTS
4 -A. Oral report from the BRAG updating the ARRA on current activities.
Speakers:
Lee Perez, BRAG Chair, reported how very pleased he was with the open house. He publicly
thanked the staff for all the work they did and particularly congratulated Andrine Smith, the
Chairperson of BRAG Community Involvement Group and all of the volunteers under her. He
added it was a very good experience and the open house offered an opportunity for the
community to come in to see what is going on at Alameda Point. BRAG will continue to discuss
how it sees its future role. There are some things that are still holding fire, such as the soon to be
scheduled meeting of the Museum Task Force.
Chair Appezzato noted how impressed he was with BRAG and the hundreds of volunteers who
have contributed their time.
Lee Perez, BRAG Chair, expanded in saying that this whole community is known for real
involvement.
Member DeWitt noted that he really liked this type of open house where each of the businesses
open their doors where an individual can go in and observe what that business is about. He is
interested in seeing this type of open house in the future.
®recycled paper 3 h: \12- 2- 98.min
Diane Lichtenstein, BRAG Vice - Chair, added that the tenants were thrilled to have this
opportunity where the public can see them and for them to get exposure. This is a good formula
that they will do again.
Member Kerr, noted it was an excellent forum because people were able to see what is going on
in the Base by walking through the businesses. This type of open house goes a long way into
familiarizing people of Alameda of what is going on at Alameda Point and getting them to see
and appreciate it.
ORAL REPORTS
4 -B. Oral report from the Executive Director (non- discussion items).
Executive Director Miller indicated that there are a couple of items that need to be reported. The
Board asked a number of the Boards and Commissions in the City to look at the golf course
issue. In the interest of efficiency, the BRAG is hosting a joint workshop on the golf course
issues and inviting the Golf Commission, the Parks and Recreation Commission, and the EDC,
so that they can all be given information jointly, share and talk among and between their various
groups. This will take place in December. They will not be taking formal actions but will be
back in January or February with recommendations.
Chair Appezzato asked if there are still discussions with the Port of Oakland about some kind of
tipping fee for clean dredge spoils.
Executive Director Miller indicated yes. Since the Water Resources Act did not pass the last
congressional session, the project has been delayed. However, they have had very productive
discussions with the Port and think there is an expectation that there is going to be a tipping fee.
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services advised us verbally, and soon will be announcing their Refuge
Management Plan. They expect to be circulating the document for public comment very shortly
and hold a public meeting early in January. As soon as we have an official notice of that
schedule, we will advise you formally.
Tomorrow we will be officially submitting to the Navy our revised EDC application. We have,
with your authorization, informally begun discussions with the Navy EDC Team about the major
concept of the business deal. We will be meeting with their entire Navy negotiating team next
week to start to get into the details of the business plan.
Finally, I would like to say that this is my last official meeting with the Board as Executive
Director. I have enjoyed this experience and enjoyed working with all of you. Thank you for the
opportunity.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
Tom Paulseck, Restoration Advisory Board Committee (RAB), indicated that he was in a
meeting last night where he was informed that the Big Whites and the CPO Housing at the
®recycled paper 4 h: \12- 2- 98.min
Alameda Point have had the remediation completed but that the units were not ready for renting.
This is a revenue producing item and would like to know when they would be available?
City Attorney Terri Highsmith, indicated that they are still waiting for the Navy's contractor, IT
Corp. to provide certification that the lead base paint abatement was properly done for each
individual unit. We are in discussions right now with the Navy regarding the terms of the prime
lease between the ARRA and the Navy regarding the liability the City will be assuming in
accepting these properties.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
None
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by Chair Appezzato at 6:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
ate )14Vtf---
Marites Ward
ARRA Secretary
®recycled paper 5 h: \12- 2- 98.min
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Author;
Interoffice Memorandum
December 10, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: David A. Berger, Deputy City Manager
Community and Economic Development
SUBJ: Recommendation to appoint Planning Board Representative to the Base Reuse
Advisory Group (BRAG)
Background:
Currently the Base Reuse Advisory Group consists of representatives from other Boards and
Commissions. With the election of the BRAG Planning Board representative to the City Council,
the Planning Board has selected Gary Bard to represent them on the BRAG.
Discussion:
The BRAG By -laws outline the procedure for replacing a representative from another City Board
or Commission. The outside body must select a representative and the appointment of that person
is ratified by the ARRA Governing Body.
Fiscal Impact:
None
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the ARRA Board, by motion, approve the appointment of Planning Board
member Gary Bard to represent the Planning Board on the Base Reuse Advisory Group.
Respectfully submitted,
David A. Berger
Deputy City Manager
Community and Economic Development
DB /nb /cb
C:\MARITES\ARRA\AGENDA\BRAG 1--1. WPD
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
December 28, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Kay Miller, Executive Director
SUBJ: Report from the ARRA Executive Director recommending adoption of the plans, specifications
and estimates and authorization to call for bids for construction contracts to upgrade building
23, 2401 Monarch St., No. P.W. 03 -98 -04
Background:
On May 5, 1998, the ARRA governing board awarded a contract to Muller & Caulfield Architects to prepare
plans and specifications to upgrade to Building 23. These upgrades are required to make the building code
compliant and suitable to lease.
Building 23 is scheduled to be leased by the Alameda Reuse & Redevelopment Authority to Zebra Motors,
an electric car manufacturing company. The term of the lease will be 5 years. Prior to the execution of this
lease, life safety and code upgrades must be completed.
Discussion:
The improvements include re- striping parking, upgrades to comply with Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), upgrades to the heating and ventilation system, provision and/or upgrades to utility services (gas,
electricity, and water), installation of a fire alarm system, abatement of hazardous materials in the path of
construction, waterproofing, modification of the sprinkler system. Estimated cost to upgrade this hangar is
$700,000 to $850,000. Architectural and engineering plans and specifications are available for review at the
City of Alameda Public Works office during normal business hours. The Planning Board determined the
project is categorically exempt from CEQA and approved a use permit on December 16, 1998.
This action is subject to Council review of this same recommendation. It is scheduled for their January 19,
1998 meeting. Bid solicitations will be advertised after Council approval.
Fiscal Impact:
These improvements are required to comply with code requirements and allow the building to be occupied.
EDA grant funds will cover 75% of construction costs. The required local match to cover the remaining 25%
of construction costs will be paid from ARRA lease revenues.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the ARRA governing body, by motion, authorize adoption of the plans and
specifications and authorize a call for bids for construction contracts to upgrade building 23 at Alameda
Point, No. P.W. 03- 98 -04.
Respectfully submitted,
Kay Miller
Executive Director
I I: \M ENSLEY \ARRA \STAFFREP\ 1998 \BLDG23.
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Members of the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority
David A. Berger, Deputy City Manager
Community and Economic Development
December 30, 1998
Proposed ARRA resolution supporting the Alameda Bureau of
Electricity pursuing reimbursement for stranded investment costs
from the U.S. Navy.
I have received the attached memo from Alameda Bureau of Electricity General Manager Tom
Evans. I concur with his recommendation and forward it to the Board for your consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
David A. Berger
Deputy City Manager
Community and Economic Development
@Recycled paper
City of
ALAM El)A
Bureau of
ELLC'I'II.ICI'I'Y
Inter - department Memorandum
DA'Z'E: December 28, 1998
TO: David A. Berger, Deputy City Manager
Community and Economic Development
FROM: Thomas P. Evans, General Manager
B f El
ureau o ectricity
SUBJECT: Alameda Bureau of Electricity - U.S. Navy Contract
Background:
The summary of this issue is:
► The Alameda Bureau of Electricity (Bureau) made significant long -term, capital
investments in power plants in response to the U. S. Navy's (Navy) requirement to
provide power at the Naval Air Station (NAS).
► The closure of the NAS has resulted in a significant portion of those capital costs
becoming stranded investments.
• The value of the stranded investments made on behalf of the Navy has been calculated
to be approximately $22 million.
► The Bureau's remaining customers are now paying rates which are 6.5 percent higher
as a result of the Navy's stranded investment.
Thomas P. Evans, General Manager, Bureau of Electricity, discussed the issue of collecting stranded
costs from the Navy with Mr. Bill Chandler, State Director for Senator Diane Feinstein, and with Mr.
Sandre Swanson, State Director for Congressmember Barbara Lee. Both Congressmember Lee and
Senator Feinstein's offices are interested in helping lend support to the City of Alameda in resolving
this issue with the Navy. Mr. Chandler believes it is important that the process be clearly supported
by ARRA, and the Bureau not be perceived as pursuing this independently.
Thomas P. Evans has discussed this issue with David A. Berger, Deputy City Manager, and David
Brandt, Deputy City Attorney. They both concur that it is important to pursue recovery with the
Navy and that the Bureau it is the logical department of the City to do so.
Thus, we are requesting that ARRA adopt the attached resolution which will clearly indicate to
everyone that the Bureau is pursuing this issue with the full support of the ARRA Board.
chal Paper
Discussion:
The City of Alameda, California has its own municipally -owned electric utility, the Bureau of
Electricity. The Alameda NAS was by far the Bureau's largest single customer, constituting
approximately 30 percent of the Bureau's sales of electricity prior to its closure in 1997. Electricity
sales at the NAS site, now called Alameda Point, are now only about one -tenth of that amount. This
has resulted in significant consequences for the City of Alameda. The fixed costs of generating
resources which were put in place by the Bureau to serve the NAS are now, in part, stranded
investments. The share of the stranded investments attributable to the NAS totals nearly $22 million.
The Bureau served the NAS's electricity requirements since its inception in 1940. The Navy's
electrical requirements increased continually over the years and, in 1982, a modification' of the
service contract' was executed for provision of 50 million volt - amperes (MVA) to the NAS, a
significant jump in the requirement.' The Navy contractually agreed to contribute funds in aid of the
construction of local transmission facilities to help supply the increased load.' The Navy also required
that the entire 50 MVA level of power supply be available at all times.' °5 This level of service was
required by the Navy in order to supply the "cold iron" loads of two nuclear - powered aircraft carriers
and other ships at the piers in addition to the other loads on the base.
Although actual consumption increased considerably with the presence of the aircraft carriers,' the
expected 50 MVA load level never fully materialized and, over the next few years, the Bureau
worked closely with the Navy to reduce their forecast commitment to a more realistic level.7'8 From
that time until the announced closure of the NAS, the Bureau utilized the Navy's forecast commitment
as a guide in planning for the combined requirements of the City and the NAS and in developing or
contracting for power supply.
Stranded Investment
Electric generating resources are very capital- intensive facilities which require long planning and lead
times for construction and have service lives extending over many decades. The Bureau's contractual
'Contract modification P00018.
2Contract No. N62474 -67 -3 -0160.
3The requirement was previously 30 MVA.
4Contract modifications P00018, 21, 22, 23, and 27.
5February 25, 1983 letter from A.H. Studebaker, Department of the Navy, to Jack R. Shepard,Alameda Bureau of Electricity.
6Peak load increased from approximately 25 MW to 35 MW. The average monthly peak demand increased from the low 20s to nearly
30 MW.
7Short -term Load Forecast Commitments - Contract Modification P00025.
$The average monthly peak demand forecast was reduced to approximately 31 MW.
2
commitment to the Navy required it to acquire generating resources to reliably serve the NAS. A
principal goal was to do so at the lowest possible cost so the Naval Aviation Depot, a major industrial
tenant of the NAS, would be cost - competitive. As a result, the Bureau participated in the
construction of a number of power plants and long -term purchase contracts.9 In the main part, these
were capital intensive renewable resources which were entered into with the encouragement of the
U.S. Department of Energy.
With the closure of the NAS, the Bureau finds itself with substantial outstanding debt and other
obligations, not only in the local transmission upgrades which the Navy helped finance, but much
more significantly in the amount of generating resources which the Bureau has put in place or
contracted for on a long -term basis to reliably and economically meet the previously expected
requirements of the NAS. The Navy no longer contributes its fair share of the cost of those generating
resources.
The generating plants were financed by the issuance of bonds which the Bureau is obligated to pay
off over the financial life of the projects. Due to the reduced consumption at the NAS site, a
significant portion of the Bureau's generating capacity has become excess to its requirements.
Because the market for this power is currently depressed, and is expected to continue to be relatively
low over the next several years, the Bureau has experienced stranded cost due to the base closure
which has been calculated to be $21,895,000 on a net present value basis.
As the electric load at the NAS declined, the remaining customers in Alameda have paid higher rates
to cover the costs for power supply resources that were acquired for the Navy. It is estimated that
the Bureau's customers pay 6.5 percent more for electricity than they would if the Navy were to pay
its share of the stranded cost. In addition, the amount of money that can be transferred to the City's
general fund has been greatly reduced as a result of the Bureau's compromised competitive position.
Specifically, the transfer has been reduced from a high of $3.6 million in Fiscal Year 1996 to $2.4
million in Fiscal Year 1999. The majority of this reduction, approximately $1 million, can be
attributed to loss of sales at the NAS.
Fiscal Impact:
The ARRA has submitted an Economic Development Conveyance application to the Navy. The
application states that if the Bureau of Electricity is unsuccessful in obtaining reimbursement from
the Navy through the P.L.85 -804, that the stranded costs should be considered in the terms of the
Economic Development Conveyance.
Recommendation:
Adopt the attached resolution Recommending that the City of Alameda Public Utilities Board
Proceed to Recover Its Stranded Assets Due to Closure of the Alameda NAS, and FISC Through a
Claim Against the Federal Government Outside of the B.R.A.C. process.
9lncludes participation in Northern California Power Agency geothermal, hydroelectric and combustion turbine projects.
3
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. _
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY OF ALAMEDA, PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD,
PROCEED TO RECOVER ITS STRANDED ASSETS DUE TO CLOSURE OF THE
ALAMEDA NAS, AND FISC THROUGH A CLAIM AGAINST THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OUTSIDE OF THE B.R.A.C. PROCESS
WHEREAS, the City of Alameda Bureau of Electricity has provided electric power under
contract to the U.S. Navy (Navy) for over forty years; and
WHEREAS, the city of Alameda, Bureau of Electricity, invested in generation facilities solely
to supply the requirements of the Navy; and
WHEREAS, the current value of that "stranded" investment which cannot be recovered
through sales of electricity to the Navy due to the closure of the Alameda Naval Air Station (NAS)
is approximately $22 million; and
WHEREAS, the Economic Development Conveyance application prepared by the Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority currently does not include this $22 million liability in the
valuation of the former Alameda NAS.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Governing Board of the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority that the Alameda Public Utilities Board is urged to pursue reimbursement
or relief from this existing liability through a claim against the Navy under Public Law 85 -804,
through special legislation or through some other negotiated settlement with the Navy or the U.S.
Department of Defense or other means as may be appropriate and necessary to obtain full and
adequate relief.
G: \USERS\ALLSHARE\DUNCAN\ARRA.TPE 4
CO'' SPONDENCE/
MISCELLANEOUS
BARBARA LEE
9111 DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA
comm1TTLEs
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES
SCIENCE
REPLY TO
OFFICE CI IECKED'
0 2108 RAYBURN H.O.B.
WASHINGTON. DC 20515
(202) 225-2661
0 1301 CLAY STREET
SUITE 1000 N
OAKLAND, CA 94612
)510) 763-0370
Olongreos of the 31initeb *tees
?Amon of ittortoentottuto
illoobington, BAIL M515-8509
November 24, 1998
Ms. Kay Miller
ARRA
950 West Mall Square
Alameda, CA 94501
Dear Ms. Miller:
WASHINGTON OFFICE
CARLOTTIA A. W. SCOTT
t.1-.1)N15TR,=[S1STAN'.
DISTRICT OFFICE
SANDRE R. SWANSON
DISTRICT DIRECTOR
ROBERTA CHEFF BROOKS
ASSISTANT DISTRICT DIRECTOR
REC
DEC 1 1998
CITY OF At A (IEDA
I write to congratulate you upon your receipt of a grant
of $500,000.00awarded on November 23, 1998 by the U.S.
Department of Commerce. This grant will be used to conduct
engineering studies and prepare plans and specifications for
construction of an extension of Tinker Avenue to allow improved
access to Alameda Point.
I congratulate you upon your having been chosen by your
peers to receive this support. I wish you the best in your
endeavors.
BL:th
Sincerely,
arbara Lee
Member of Congress
c
6ATE9 O(
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
The Assietunt Secr- tery D *valcsp:rert
Washington, D.C. 20230
DEC 1. 1998 DEC 0 7 1998
In reply refer to:
Award No.: 07 -49 -03852
Ms. Kay Miller
Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
• 950 West Mall Square
Alameda, California 94501
Dear Ms. Miller:
Congratulations on the approval of your application for an Economic Adjustment Program Grant.
I want to offer my sincere good wishes for the success of your project.
The grant supports the efforts of your organization to conduct environmental studies and
engineering for the Tinker Avenue extension.
EDA shares your expectations regarding the impact of this project. When successfully completed,
we are confident that your project will be an integral part of your community's plans for local
economic development and will assist in achieving lasting improvement for your community.
Sincerely,
lrt czeit/w+tM
Phillip A. Singerman lilt
Assistant Secretary
for Economic Development
1..0
.....,
co
0
t4
0
C4
00
t4
-4
t'..)
O'N
t4
VI
t4
4D.
t4
t./4
1‘4
t4
t4
.....
t4
0
0
00
-.I
0
LA
40.
0
0
00
-1
01
LA
.P
t....)
ts4
PROJECTED FUTURE EMPLOYMENT I
CURRENT EMPLOYMENT
OCCUPIED BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE
NO. OF PROPERTIES CURRENTLY OCCUPIED
[Love Center Ministries
IWA Engineers (Steel Fabrication)
Housing Units (31)
!Home Auto Repair
Forty Plus (Career Counseling)
Forem Metal Manufacturing
Emerg. Svcs. Network (Homeless Coll.)
Dunavant of California (Storage)
Door Christian Fellowship Church
Delphi Productions (Exhibit Displays)
CyberTran International (Test Track)
City of Alameda (Tennis Courts)
City of Alameda (Soccer Field)
City of Alameda (Public Works)
City of Alameda (O'Club)
City of Alameda (Gym & Pool)
City of Alameda (Ferry Terminal Parking)
City of Alameda (Dog Run Park)
City Garage Carstar (Vehicle Painting)
Cellular One (Cell Site)
CALSTART (Test Track)
CALSTART (Electric Vehicle Incubator)
Bureau of Electricity (Storage Yard)
Bobac (Warehouse)
Bay Ship & Yacht (Ship Repair)
!Antiques by the Bay (Collectibles Faire)
(Altair Marine (Ship Repair)
Alameda Unified School District
Alameda Point Storage (Mini Storage)
AC Hornet Foundation
ACET (Environmental Tech. Incubator)
Signed Leases & Licenses
16 months
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
short term
0
0<1
Fri
g
0
0Q
Fo'
g
0
ao
Fri
long term
!long term
Ei
cm
FI/-
g
long term
long term
long term
6 months
long term
long term
long term
1 long term
I long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
Tong term 1
0.3
-I
113
4D,
U t
0
90
ON
....
Lo
bi
(IP
11
=
'''
C)
VI
ON
4>
I.I-I
0
Lo4
■O
-4
G\
0
76 &134
VI
g
0
at FISC I
Bldg 2 FISC
292
tarmac & 405
14.)
00
near Bldg. 5301
Pier 3
-..I
Building #
1,085'
00
0
IN)
C.,14
co
1,...
44.
00
8,000
■-•
■-4
47,177
...
-VI
0
0
in
0
0
20,000
'0
0
0
170,000
00
G'
0
0
■-•
..-•
o
0
0
0
,---'
-4
0
0
0
t4
,c)
U
0
(..n
00
-.It.
t.4%
0
t,.)
0
:0
t4
-4
—
-.it.
0
0
0
01
0,
0
0
.....
.....
so
c=
0
0
(00L`Z
4 .•
'Oo
00
0
.-.
0
i..er
0
0
12,4301
,.-
tal
1..o
VI
Bldg. Sq. Ft. I
41.
00
40.
...4
4=.
ON
.4:..
VI
40.
41.
.P.
l.,4
40.
IN.)
4=.
.....
41.
0
l....)
1/40
I...4
00
tr4
-4
c..4
0
t...4
LA
(...4
.A.
t..4
t.•4
L,.■
r4
1Woodmasters (Cabinetry)
United Indian Nations (Homeless Coll.)
Trident 3M Services (Port Mgmt.)
iTower Aviation
Simmba Systems (Records Storage)
,Richard Miller Photography
Piedmont Soccer Fdn.
Piedmont Baseball Fdn:,
Pacific Fine Food, Inc. (Crepe Mfg.)
Nelson's Marine (Boat Storage /Repair)
Navigator Systems (Furniture Mfg.)
Marine Sanitation
Maritime Administration
Maritime Administration
Marathon Pallet (Polyethylene)
Manex Entertainment
Manex Entertaiment
Signed Leases & Licenses
long term
long term
long term
0
00
CD
long term
long term
1 year
.....
CD
long term �
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term 1
0
GO
CD
g
long term
long term
0.3
.1
0
=
4D.. .-. •
...
■—•
0£S
621
soccer field1
cn
0
...-.
CD
0..
421
■-■
g°
!It •
;4
co -P.
CP , --6.
.-- oo
-0
—
cn
■■•■•
•■
is.)
r....)
3981
c....)
tV
t0
G •
S
CP1
4t
,..I.C1 N.)
■-■ ' 4 = , .
0 0
00
....
CD
01
0
L.4
1OSZ`Z8
,.0
t•.)
00
-
-4
10LL`S
3,0001
VI 4D.
VI 0
4 0
tA 0
0 0
■—•
■-•-■
I..-` ---3
0 4 a
0 .-
0 0
•—•
0
O
a
0
34,5401
-4
Bldg. Sq. Ft. I
Bldg. Sq. Ft.
en
s
■.6
34,5401
0
o
0
0
—
CZ
--,
1,000
40,0001
0
r)
kri
0
0
m
0
s
N
,r,"
92,8171
0
kr,
N
N's
co
(fl
0
■-0.,
■0
--•
0
c."
,:t.
N
c,
ec
-.
tr,"
qt
4
....
,
,
N
en
oo
rn
Piers 1, 2, 3
168
--,
■•0
14
167 & piers
42
"0
t.r...
=
...
4...,A
0
In
soccer field
--.
V)
0
0
m•-,
tel
kr)
CPO units',
long term
long term
"long term
long term
long term
long term
11ong term
long term
long term
1 year
1 year
long term
long term
1long term
long term
Ilong term
long term 1
Signed Leases & Licenses
1 Manex Entertainment
1Manex Entertainment
Marathon Pallet (Polyethylene)
!Maritime Administration
Maritime Administration
Marine Sanitation
Navigator Systems (Furniture Mfg.)
Nelson's Marine (Boat Storage/Repair)
Pacific Fine Food, Inc. (Crepe Mfg.)
Piedmont Baseball Fdn.
Piedmont Soccer Fdn.
Richard Miller Photography
Simmba Systems (Records Storage)
Tower Aviation
Trident 3M Services (Port Mgmt.)
United Indian Nations (Homeless Coll.)
Woodmasters (Cabinetry)
N
en
en
rn
vt
m
kr)
m
■0
en
S
en
oo
en
C
en
0
*I-
-■
,t
N
*I-
m
'I-
..:1-
.4*
kr)
"et
■0
-,4-
S
"zr
00
•zt
er
C.9)
0.0
0
,e1
4r1,
ken
,...
0
en
•ch
c",1
,....
0
0
r
(5.
__,
4,8801
0 0
0 0
NO
ri (5
,-.4
-
0
0
1/40,
0
■0
0
0
'cr
—
26,9271
0
kr)
"ki"
00
kr)
0
kr)
kr)
C\
N
17,0001
0
0
0
c)^
--,
-.4
0
0
1/40,
00
170,0001
0
0
1/40,
.1-
0
0
0
0
i005`tt
0
0
—
.....,
47,177'
Ln
•-■
cn"
,--4
0
0
00
00
"I'
,...■
CZ
■0
en
CV
,
CD
00
v-I
III
00
e-i
It
oz
....
=
=1
C--
Pier 3
near Bldg. 530
258
tarmac & 405
292
Bldg 2 FISC
C.)
4.4
C'
.
24, 25
76 & 134''.
0
,.0
r--
v,
m
0,
m
.,:t
k-o
kr,
()
up
,..
ra.
bi)
"C)
01:1
m
—
ko
,:h
—
—
0
as
Cr■
kr,
-4.
m
—
_
N
—
E
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
6 months
long term
long term
Hong term
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
long term
short term
long term
long term
long term
"long term
o.)
bi)
C
0
long term
long term
long term 1
long term
6 months
NO. OF PROPERTIES CURRENTLY OCCUPIED
OCCUPIED BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE
Signed Leases & Licenses
ACET (Environmental Tech. Incubator)
AC Hornet Foundation
Alameda Point Storage (Mini Storage)
Alameda Unified School District
Altair Marine (Ship Repair)
Antiques by the Bay (Collectibles Faire)
Bay Ship & Yacht (Ship Repair)
Bobac (Warehouse)
Bureau of Electricity (Storage Yard)
CALSTART (Electric Vehicle Incubator)
1 CALSTART (Test Track)
Cellular One (Cell Site)
City Garage Carstar (Vehicle Painting)
City of Alameda (Dog Run Park)
City of Alameda (Ferry Terminal Parking)
City of Alameda (Gym & Pool)
City of Alameda (O'Club)
City of Alameda (Public Works)
City of Alameda (Soccer Field)
City of Alameda (Tennis Courts)
CyberTran International (Test Track)
Delphi Productions (Exhibit Displays)
Door Christian Fellowship Church
Dunavant of California (Storage)
Emerg. Svcs. Network (Homeless Coll.)
Forem Metal Manufacturing
Forty Plus (Career Counseling)
Home Auto Repair
Housing Units (31)
IWA Engineers (Steel Fabrication)
Love Center Ministries
CURRENT EMPLOYMENT
PROJECTED FUTURE EMPLOYMENT 1
--
N
en
ci-
,f)
,0
N 00
ON
0
--.
•-■
-,
CV
--.
en
-4
"ti"
-4
kel
,--,
1/40
•-•
l",
--.
00
-•
0
-4
0
N
)--.
N
N
N
rn
CV
<I-
r4
ken
CV
'.0
eV
N
CV
00
N
0•%
N
0
en
--.
en
Interim Leasing Status Report
Premises:
Runway 251
N
taxiway
taxiway
5A
Bldgs. 11/12/400A1
N
bb
1 Pool'
park
N
Pier 3
Bldg. 231
Bldg. 251
Bldg. 241
Bldgs. 24/25
0¢
taxiway'
�--�
0
col
roadway'
^t
N
N
Completed Sublicenses:
Acad. of Model Aeronautics
Alameda Recycling (Storage)
AREA 51 Productions (TV Show)
AREA 51 Productions (Custom Car Show)
AREA 51 Productions (Auto Mfg. Survey)
AREA 51 (Rehearsal Studio)
ATL /Interscope Communications (Film Co.)
ATL/Interscope Communications
ATL /Interscope Communications
1Boy Scouts of America
Chamber of Commerce /Bur. of Elect. (Trade Expo)
CINCPAC (Fleet Week '97)
CALSTART/Bur. of Elect. (EV Expo) 1997 & 1998
Clubhouse Pictures (Film Co.)
Disney Studios
Great Benefit Productions (Film Co.)
Industrial Light & Magic (Film Co.)
Industrial Light & Magic (Film Co.)
Mass Illusions (Film Co.)
Microsoft
Nadel Productions (Film Co.)
Off Duty Productions (Film Co.)
Rosebud Touring Co. (Rehearsal Studio)
Rysher Entertainment (Fillm Co.)
TOTAL COMPLETED SUBLICENSES:
--�
N
M
et
WI
lC
N
00
CT
0
•-.
^'
N
.-.
M
.-.
d'
vl
•-.
lC
•-.
N
.-.
00
.�
Cl
,--.
0
N
-�
N
N
N
M
N
d'
N
Use Permit
Approved
><
><
><
><
><
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
vt
--
.0
M
N
0
0
0
oo
.-.
44,800.
265,000
,.0
00
0\
0
0
0
0
41
C^
0
vl
00
N
0
V1
et
0
0
O
v1
t�
0
v
0 t
0
N
M
CT
,-.
0
h
IT
^
0
0
0
r
0
0
t
M
N
0
N
N
—
0
0
0
O
[�
N
0
vl
0
06
N
0
00
d'
C\
--+
0
0
00
tV
0
0
vn
vi
s.
sO
N
O\
--+
N O
O.
M
tSA
"CS
'=
CA
SOLI
�'
77
N
NOL
64
..■
N
vl
494
Cans
~
CG
,-,
Cl
l�
.-.
.0
Z
t
a.
102
N*
v .-.
b
.-.
531, 532, 533
N-
.-■
N
TOTAL PENDING SUBLEASES /SUBLICENSES
Pending Subleases & Sublicenses
ACET (Environmental Tech Incubator)
ACET (Office Area Only)
Alameda Naval Air Museum
Altamont Technologies (Equip. Mfg.)
Alternative Storage
AREA 51 (Special Event Productions)
Calif. State Univ. (Research Station)
City of Alameda (Offices)
City of Alameda (Fire Department)
City of Alameda (Police Department
Container Storage
Container Works (Storage)
Doctors' Group for Elderly Housing
Dynamic Marine Boatworks
Fribel Internat'l. (Concrete Mfgr.)
General Svcs. Administration
Harbor Bay Maritime (Storage)
Influence Communications (Mktg.)
Jim Bustos Plumbing
Manex Entertainment
Miller & Sons (Contractor)
Orbit Development (Property Mgmt.) 1
San Leandro Womens' Shelter
U.S. Customs Service
Waters, Caldwell (Environ. Services)
Zebra Motors (Electric Vehicles)
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE:
•-■
N
M
d'
vl
V^
N
00
ON
0
•••
.-1
N
.-.
M
v..
d'
.-.
U1
.-.
■O
..
t--
.-.
00
.-.
CT 0
.-• N
—
N
N
N
M
N
d'
N
Vl
N
■C
N
A1uueda. Reus and iedeveloprneu.t Authority
Alameda Point Redevelopment Center
950 W. Mall Square, Rm. 159
Alameda, CA 94501
Governing Body
Ralph Appezzato
Chair
Mayor, City of Alameda
Sandre R. Swanson
Vice - Chair.
District Director for
Ronald V. Dellums
9th Congressional District
Wilma Chan
Supervisor, District 3
Alameda County Board
of Supervisors
Henry Chang, Jr.
Oakland Councilmember
serving for
Elihu Harris
Mayor, City of Oakland
Ellen M. Corbett
Mayor
City of San Leandro
Tony Daysog
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Albert H. DeWitt
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Barbara Kerr
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Karin Lucas
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Kay Miller
Executive Director
Recycled paper
December 30, 1998
To: Ralph Appezzato, Chair and Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
From: Teresa L. Highsmith
General Counsel
(510) 864 -3400
Fax: (510)521 -3764
Re: Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Closed Session Meeting
January 6, 1999 - 5:30 p.m. - Real Estate Negotiations
Attached is a memo from Kay Miller, Executive Director, Alameda Reuse
and Redevelopment Authority, addressing the homeless collaborative
accommodations and impacts on the sale and reuse of portions of Alameda Point and
a proposed solution of this matter.
Please contact me if you have any questions or require additional information.
Teresa L. Highsmith
General Counsel
Attachment
bee: Steve Belcher, David A. Berger, JohnsDoll, Jim Flint,
Mike Pucci, Jim Musbach yq,s
CONFIDENTIAL
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
CLOSED SESSION MEETING - REAL ESTATE NEGOTIATIONS
TO: Honorable Members of ARRA Board
FROM: Kay Miller, ARRA Executive Director Vy' "
SUBJECT: Recommended accommodation with the Homeless Collaborative for
125 Barracks Units * Family Housing in East Housing Area
DATE: December 30, 1998
Background:
ARRA and City staff have been negotiating with representatives from the
Homeless Collaborative regarding two issues: 1) an accommodation for the remaining 125
barracks units committed to in the Standards of Reasonableness, and 2) moving 97 family
housing units from East to West Housing. The 125 barracks units had been assigned to Operation
Dignity for use by homeless veterans. The Community Reuse Plan listed several options for
meeting this obligation. Among the options were 125 rooms at the Bachelor Officers Quarters
(BOQ) or 125 rooms at the Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (BEQ).
Originally, these two issues were being negotiated separately. However, both negotiation
teams decided to combine the two issues and look for a "package" solution which addresses both
these issues. The Homeless Collaborative "team" consisted of John Brauer and Jack Shepherd
who were selected by the Homeless Collaborative Steering Committee and empowered to "make
a deal," subject to ratification by the Steering Committee. The ARRA/City negotiation team
consisted of myself and Nanette Banks from the ARRA, and John Doll representing the CIC's
interests on East Housing and FISC, plus legal counsel from Assistant City Attorney, Terri
Highsmith. [Note the CIC is the Community Improvement Commission...the City
redevelopment agency). The team was assisted by a large resource team consisting of:
Marti Buxton, and her housing development colleagues from Catellus; Steve Belcher, the City's
Housing Development Manager, Mike Pucci, Executive Director of the City Housing Authority;
Jim Musbach and David Zehnder from Economic Planning Systems (EPS) who provided
1
CONFIDENTIAL
numbers on infrastructure fees, land values, etc.; and Marc Mihaly, outside counsel to the City
Attorney's office assigned to provide legal assistance on the Catellus project for the FISC.
The impetus for the negotiations was the desire to "free up" the BOQ and BEQ and other
NAS facilities from any "claim" by Operation Dignity or the Homeless Collaborative for 125
barracks units. Both the BOQ and the BEQ have had substantial market interest. EPS attributes
value to the BOQ based on revenue projections at $2.8 million; they value the BEQ at $4.6
million, using similar methodology.
The interest in asking the Homeless Collaborative to consider moving their 97 units from
East to West Housing was to enable the desired development to occur in the FISC/East Housing
Catellus project, which would also encourage a higher land value in the sale of the property to
Catellus. Catellus and City Staff agreed that planning an integrated new neighborhood with
appropriate infrastructure would be seriously impeded by the presence of 97 units of existing
housing.
Finally, it should be noted that the ARRA has an obligation to accommodate the
Homeless Collaborative because of federal law. The commitments made to the Homeless
Collaborative are reflected in the adopted Community Reuse Plan and the Standards of
Reasonableness. If this obligation is not met, it could jeopardize the conveyance of NAS, and
indirectly the FISC.
Discussion:
The need to reach agreement on an acceptable alternative accommodation for the barracks
and East Housing family units is being driven by two factors. 1) Both Operation Dignity and UA
Housing have received federal funding to begin the rehabilitation of their family housing units.
They have a statutory deadline of January 23, 1999, at which time they have to be able to
demonstrate "site control" of the specific units they plan to rehabilitate. In order to substitute
West Housing apartment units for East Housing units, the ARRA Board will need to agree to the
terms of this substitution and authorize a lease for the West Housing units by the January 23rd
deadline. 2) Catellus and the City staff agree that in order to allow the planning for the
FISC /East Housing property to proceed, and to complete the DDA negotiation, the issue of the
97 East Housing Homeless Collaborative units must be resolved.
Because of the aforementioned deadline demands, the negotiating teams have undertaken
an accelerated meeting schedule in order to bring a recommended solution to the ARRA Board
and CIC. The ARRA/City negotiating team and the resource team have all had input into and
reviewed the proposed alternative accommodation. The Homeless Collaborative negotiation
2
CONFIDENTIAL
team has assured us that the Homeless Collaborative will accept this as an alternative to the
accommodation agreed to in the Standards of Reasonableness. Both teams believe this is a win -
win solution for these key reasons:
► Satisfies the Community Reuse Plan Homeless Accommodation without adverse
effect.
► Counts towards Catellus and APIP LMI obligation.
► Satisfies Catellus Inclusionary requirement without in -lieu fees.
► Helps fulfill Guyton decision very low income unit production goal.
► Opportunity for Housing Development and/or LMI subsidy to preserve Catellus
residual land value to the City.
► Allows creation of a new residential neighborhood at East Housing/FISC annex
that will integrate with the surrounding residential community.
► Allows an opportunity to lease and eventually sell the BOQ and BEQ, generating
substantial revenue to the City.
Summary of the Proposal
A. Elimination of the 125 Barracks Units
In order to eliminate the 125 barracks units completely from the homeless
accommodation (thus freeing up both the BOQ and BEQ for revenue generating lease and
potential future sale), it is necessary to "buy out" both Operation Dignity's interest in the units as
well as the Homeless Collaborative's interest in assignment of the units to another provider. The
"buy out" is as follows:
• To Operation Dignity: $310,000 cash: $260,000 to be paid in a lump sum
within 90 days after an agreement memorializing the deal is executed, and
the remaining $50,000 paid over two years time for specific invoices that
Operation Dignity has incurred for rehabilitation of affordable housing at
an off -site location;
• To the Collaborative: waiver of infrastructure "fees" and waiver of public
service fees.
The combined cost of this aspect of the "proposal" is $310,000 up front, most of
which is payable within 90 -days of approval of the proposal. The "waiver" of fees is
estimated to be valued at approximately $4 million, according to EPS. The value to the
ARRA/City of having the BOQ & BEQ available for lease and /or sale is estimated to be
3
CONFIDENTIAL
over $7 million ($2.8 million for the BOQ + $4.6 million for the BEQ in 1998 dollars).
B. Moving 58 Units From East Housing to West Housing
One matter that was not negotiable was Operation Dignity and the Homeless
Collaborative's insistence on maintaining some units in East Housing as a "presence" to be
planned into the Catellus development. In order to move some of Operation Dignity's units and
all of University Avenue's (UA) units to West Housing, the Collaborative insisted on payment
of a differential in value of the units of $15,000 /unit; this value difference is not disputed,
especially given the further deterioration of West Housing units with seasonal rains.
. Additionally, the two providers demanded a "match" of existing grant funds to begin their
rehabilitation. The APIP would receive inclusionary housing credit for substantial rehabilitation
of all 58 units. This component of the proposal is summarized as follows:
•
30 U.A. family housing units move to West Housing and payment of an
amount not to exceed $850,000 (combined valuation difference plus grant
match) to be paid beginning September 30, 1999 over 6 months time to
substantially rehabilitate the units;
• 28 Operation Dignity units move to West Housing and change in use from
family housing to transitional housing for veterans, and payment of
$713,500 (combined valuation difference plus grant match) to be paid
beginning September 30, 1999 over 6 months time to substantially
rehabilitate the units. Note that the 28 units, which could be satisfied by 7
four- plexes in West Housing, would provide 3 -4 beds per unit, or
transitional housing for up to 112 veterans.
The combined cost of moving all 58 units going to West Housing is estimated to be
$1.56 million, payable between September 30, 1999 and March 31, 2000 (or by the end of
the rehabilitation project). Funding for this substantial rehabilitation is available from a
variety of affordable housing development and redevelopment 20% set -aside funds. As a
prerequisite to the ARRA's obligation to pay this funding, the Record of Decision must
first have been reached, and the ARRA have entered into a contract of sale with the Navy
for the property.
C. Building a New39 Unit Housing Authority Development in East Housing
Of the remaining 39 Operation Dignity units, (67 unit original accommodation, minus 28
moved to West Housing) it is proposed that these units be relocated to an approximately 2.5 acre
portion of the FISC property adjacent to the Coast Guard Housing and next to the Business Park
proposed by Catellus. The 39 units would be built as a new Housing Authority multi - family
4
CONFIDENTIAL
complex under the Housing Authority exemption provided by Measure A. These units would be
built sometime in 2001 -2002 after Navy clean -up and conveyance of the site. The project would
be owned by the Housing Authority and operated in a joint venture with Operation Dignity and
the Red Cross to provide permanent family housing. The APIP would receive inclusionary
housing credit for the new 39 multi - family units.
If for any reason the City did not take title to the FISC and East Housing property and
this project could not proceed, then 39 existing units in East Housing will be reassigned to
Operation Dignity.
The estimated cost to build such a project is $5.7 million, to be spent in 2001 -2002.
(This assumes that the FISC land is conveyed at no cost from the Navy to the City). The
Homeless Collaborative would contribute $1 million to the project. The balance of $4.7
million could be funded by the increased value in the land sale of East Housing to Catellus
(by freeing up a net 9 -10 acres by moving 97 units from the original East Housing site), and
monies from the 20% set -aside fund and other development funds within the City. As a
prerequisite to the City or Housing Authority's obligation to build these 39 units, the FISC
property must have been conveyed to the City and the City must have entered into a sales
agreement with the Navy for Alameda Point (including East Housing).
The Benefits of the Proposed Solution to the ARRA /City, CIC, and City Housing Authority
1. The elimination of the 125 barracks units accommodation "frees up" both the
BOQ and the BEQ to be leased at market rates and perhaps eventually sold by
ARRA. Staff is currently in serious negotiations with a group of Alameda
physicians who propose to renovate the BOQ for an assisted living facility for
seniors. EPS values the BOQ at $2.8 million given its projected income stream.
They value the BEQ at $4.6 million (buildings 2 and 4 plus the galley). The 125
barracks units would have occupied approximately 30% of the facility.
There has been substantial interest also in the BEQ. A number of educational
users have looked at the building and ARRA Staff are developing a proposal to
convert, one wing of the facility into a hi -tech "accelerator" (the next stage of an
incubator). Having the 125 barracks units in the BEQ would likely limit the
marketability of the property.
2. The elimination'of the 97 Homeless Collaborative family units in the East
Housing area will allow Catellus and the City to plan and build a highly
marketable development on the FISC /East Housing property. Eliminating the 97
units will likely make the property more marketable and enhance its value. The
Catellus project will serve as the "entrance" to Alameda Point and that
development can set the tone for the redevelopment of all of Alameda Point. The
97 Homeless Collaborative units in East Housing not only are an impediment to
5
CONFIDENTIAL
the establishment of a new integrated neighborhood in the Catellus project, but
would seriously complicate the infrastructure and street plan for the development.
3. The removal of the 97 units in East Housing makes an additional net of
approximately 10 acres available in the Catellus project area. (The 39 multi-
family units will occupy approximately 2.5 acres of property adjacent to the FISC
business park site). Depending on the final square footage value of the property,
that additional acreage could produce between $2 -1/2 million to $4 -1/2 million in
additional revenue for the CIC. For purposes of this analysis, we are assuming $3
million in additional revenue.
4. The 39 units of multi - family housing within the Catellus project serves multi -
purposes:
• The units can be counted as meeting the requirement for 40% of
the 15% inclusionary housing requirement to serve a very low
income population.
• The proposal provides an opportunity for the Housing Authority to
construct 39 units of affordable housing that can also be counted as
new units under the Guyton Court Order.
• Depending on timing of construction, the new units may be able to
be counted toward meeting the City's "fair share" of affordable
housing goals in a revised Housing Element within the general
plan.
• Incorporates affordable housing within the Catellus project which
is an issue with affordable housing advocates.
5. The 58 units of "substantially rehabilitated" housing in the West Housing area can
be counted toward the 15% inclusionary requirement in the APIP (Alameda Point
Improvement Project). Units which will serve very low income population are the
most costly for a developer to construct. Housing Development staff notes that
these units can be available for meeting future inclusionary needs within the APIP
and can, in a way, be "banked ". Subject to CIC review and approval, a developer
can "draw" from the "bank" of existing very low income units for a future
residential project by a cash payment or in -kind investment to the new ( "in lieu
fees ") project which has up to the equivalent value of the cost of developing a
very low income unit. It is estimated that these types of units have an
approximate value of $100,000 /unit. The net effect of this would be to raise the
value of other residential property at NAS because the very low inclusionary
housing requirement has been already fulfilled by the City.
6
CONFIDENTIAL
Funding Sources to Finance the Proposal
The proposal will require approximately $1.87 million in the next two years to Operation
Dignity and to U.A. Housing and to provide the funding to upgrade and provide the necessary
match for the rehabilitation of the 58 units plus buyout of the 125 barracks units. The
construction of the 39 new multi - family units is projected to cost approximately $5.7 million,
payable in 2001 -2002. It is expected that $4 million of the 39 new unit project costs could be
paid from grant contributions from the Homeless Collaborative ($1 million), and $3 million in
the increased land sale proceeds from East Housing, leaving a funding gap of $1.7 million.
Staff has identified approximately $4.9 million over a period of 5 years of uncommitted
(i.e. not budgeted) housing funds which could be used to make up the $3.57 million gap in funds
($1.87 million up -front plus $1.7 short fall in 2001 and 2002) for new housing. All of the $1.87
million early costs as well as the new multi - family housing should be eligible for these monies if
properly matched. Housing fund sources include the Affordable Housing Unit/Fee Fund, the
Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG), 20 percent set -aside funds from the
BWIP (Business Waterfront Improvement Project) and the Federal HOME Program. In addition
to these dedicated housing funds, there could be monies available from land sale proceeds, and
there will be monies available in the APIP 20 percent set -aside fund which can be used for those
purposes.
It should be noted that there are a number of actions necessary to make these funds
available including: match source of funds to specific need and availability; "findings" resolution
authorizing redevelopment funds to be used from one project area to another project area; review
regulations governing each funding source and prepare necessary documents or legislative
changes if necessary; verify compliance with the APIP Inclusionary Housing Plan and Homeless
Collaborative accommodation; and review for Guyton compliance. These requirements are not
considered barriers to creation of a financing plan to fund these affordable housing projects.
RECAP OF HOMELESS NEGOTIATION
COSTS AND AVAILABLE FUNDING RESOURCES
Proposal Item
1. "Buyout" of 125 Barracks Units in BOQ/BEQ
a. Operation Dignity off -site units rehab assistance
b. Collaborative infrastructure contribution waiver
2. Move 58 Unit Substantial Rehab from East to West Housing
3. Build New 39 Unit AHA Project on FISC site
Total
Cost
$ 310,000
(see note 1)
1,560,000
5,700,000
$7,570,000
7
CONFIDENTIAL
Funding Resources
1 Homeless Collaborative grant contributions $ 1,000,000
2. Increased Catellus Land Sale Value 3,000,000
3. Uncommitted City Affordable Housing Unit/Fee Fund,
CDBG, BWIP 20% set - aside, federal HOME grant 4,900,000
Total $8,900,000
Note 1: No cost item, since Homeless Collaborative's $4 million infrastructure cost share and in-
lieu tax waiver, is more than offset by $7 million in projected BOQ/BEQ lease revenues with
homeless accommodation at those facilities eliminated.
Fiscal Impact:
Various sources of funding for this proposal have been identified which will not
jeopardize the projected cash flow upon which the Alameda Point Financing Plan and EDC
application were predicated. Most of the funds identified exist to promote affordable housing
needs. The proposal may be funded on a "pay as you go" basis, which would substantially
deplete current balances in existing affordable housing funds, or could be funded through
borrowing against these funds and the future value of the 20% set aside fund for the APIP.
Depending on the extent to which existing housing funds are required for the project,
there may be an impact on ongoing planned projects and programs. However, additional
affordable housing funding should also be available from the WECIP and from the impact fees
from the Catellus commercial development. The Housing Authority is exploring the feasibility
of acquiring some poorly maintained properties which would need HOME and/or affordable
housing funds for purchase and rehabilitation. Both the Down Payment Assistance and the
CASA Homeownership programs are now making loans and will need additional funds in order
to continue in the future. Over the next five years, these programs will need an estimated
$260,000 from AHUF, $507,000 from HOME and as much as $500,000 from BWIP. The City
Council has referred the Ad Hoc Homeownership Committee report to the Housing Commission
to work with the committee for a report to Council on implementation. Proposed
implementation activities, if adopted by the City Council, would require some housing funds.
It should also be noted that there is significant work involved in implementing the
proposed deal as well as preparing agreements and monitoring city funded projects. This work
should be incorporated into the mid -year budget adjustment.
8
CONFIDENTIAL
Staff Recommendation
ARRA and City staff are recommending that the ARRA Board approve this proposal in
concept and authorize staff to finalize a written agreement with the Homeless Collaborative.
Staff further recommends that the ARRA Board authorize staff to execute an interim lease with
Operation Dignity for 28 apartments in West Housing and for 30 apartment units in West
Housing with U.A. Housing. The term of the lease would be for the maximum allowable term of
the ARRA's prime lease with the Navy, approximately 13 years. This lease would be identical to
a number of other interim leases the Board has authorized for other providers which has served to
demonstrate site control for their federal funding.
c: \homlesco.wpd 9