The URL can be used to link to this page

2009-01-07 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 1. ROLL CALL 2. CONSENT CALENDAR Wednesday, January 7, 2009 Meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted, approved or adopted by one motion unless a request for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the Board or a member of the public. 2 -A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 5, 2008. 2 -B. Approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of November 18, 2008. 2 -C. Approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of December 2, 2008. 2 -D. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Mariusz Lewandowski dba Woodinasters at Alameda Point. 2 -E. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Alameda Soccer Club at Alameda Point. 2 -F. Authorize the Sale of Four Boston Whalers to NRC for $44,500. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3 -A. Alameda Point Update - Presentation of SunCal's Draft Redevelopment Master Plan. 3 -B. VA /Navy Presentation Regarding the Navy /VA Federal -to- Federal Transfer at Former NAS Alameda. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4 -A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of December 4 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) (Any person may address the governing body in regard to any matter over which the governing body has jurisdiction that is not on the agenda.) ARRA Agenda — January 7, 2009 Page 2 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY 7. ADJOURNMENT This meeting will be cablecast live on channel 15. Notes: ■ Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the ARRA Secretary at 749 -5800 at least 72 hours before the meeting to request an interpreter. • Accessible seating for persons with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs) is available. ■ Minutes of the meeting are available in enlarged print. • Audio tapes of the meeting are available for review at the ARRA offices upon request. APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, November 5, 2008 The meeting convened at 7:26 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Beverly Johnson Boardmember Doug deHaan Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Lena Tam 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2 -A. Approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of September 10, 2008. 2 -B. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 1, 2008. 2 -C. Approve a Permanent Waiver of License Fees for Alameda Unified School District Student Activities. 2 -D. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Building 43 & Associates, Inc. at Alameda Point. Member Gilmore motioned approval of the Consent Calendar, seconded by Member deHaan, and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes – 5, Noes – 0, Abstentions – 0. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3 -A. Alameda Point Update — Review and Comment on SunCal's Development Concept Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, summarized SunCal's submission of Development Concept pursuant to the ENA on September 19th. During October, SunCal presented its Development Concept to eight boards and commissions, and received feedback. Comments received were provided in the staff report and presented to give the ARRA an opportunity to follow -up on the comments from the boards and commissions, provide feedback, and to hear additional comments from the public. The draft Master Plan, a more detailed land plan, is due to on Dec.19, and will be presented to the ARRA Board at its January 7th regular meeting. As SunCal has indicated, the current land plan has residential densities beyond those permitted in Measure A, therefore, SunCal would need a vote of the people to implement its land plan. They have until April 30, 2009 to decide to pursue a ballot initiative. Business terms between SunCal and the CIC is due by June 2010. There is a Council resolution of Fiscal Neutrality mandated for base reuse, so a project proforma, an analyses of project cost and revenues to determine project feasibility, is being prepared. Alameda Point is within the APIP redevelopment area. When Alameda Point is conveyed, that new development will generate revenue and value, which will result in incremental increase in property taxes paid. The project must create the value to generate the tax increment that the CIC can then choose to invest in the project. There is no tax increment without project, therefore it is not possible to determine which tax increment funds, if any, are available without completing the project profornia and negotiating a DDA, which is due in June 2010. The CIC has made no commitment of funds to the project. Its only obligation is to negotiate in good faith on both the land plan and public. /private partnership until the ENA expires in June of 2010. The DDA must be approved by the City Council and the CIC; and until the DDA is approved, it is not possible for the CIC to commit funds to the project. Under the terms of the ENA, SunCal is paying for all city staff costs and third party consultant costs consistent with the requirement for the fiscal neutrality that we demand. Member Matarrese referred to the comments included in the staff report and stated that it was important to make a distinction whether the points being raised were from the boards or from individuals. Pat Keliher, SunCal's Alameda Point Project Manager gave the presentation. The presentation will be made available on SunCal's website. At the conclusion of the presentation, Chair Johnson called all of the speakers first: Corinne Lambden — concerned about the historical relevant structures, and would like Board to consider all options of adaptive reuse before permanently destroying them. Mary Fetherolf — thanked SunCal for the presentation and asked a couple of process questions about where to find the financial models and assumptions of the project, and about the draft Master Plan. Elizabeth Krase — spoke on behalf of AAPS. She discussed concerns about the historic buildings planned for demolition, stating that it's not acceptable. Doug Biggs — APC has enjoyed participating in the SunCal community process and supports SunCal's plan. Mi'Chelle Fredrick — excited to see the progress that has been made, encouraged by the plan that acknowledges the unprecedented potential of Alameda point yet still recognizes the constraints. Diane Lichtenstein — echoed what Mi'Chelle Frederick said. Interested in how the development will happen, and would like to see more of the integration and diversity in the types of housing and structures. Helen Sause — congratulated Member deHaan and Member Gilmore for their re- elections. Had a request that the city undertake an active role in developing the transit system which addresses the whole island. Gretchen Lipow — discussed fiduciary responsibility of the Alameda Point project. Nancy Heastings — from HOMES, complimented SunCal on its transit oriented design, and wanted to know the date and review process for the transportation plan. John Knox White — requested the ARRA really give direct direction to SunCal as to what they would like to support before the process moves forward. He discussed that we cannot try to react to the market, we need to look at something that has that flexibility, and a plan we can be proud of in 50 or 100 years. Arthur Lipow — discussed the poor economy and traffic mitigation issues, and suggested an alternative of a public trust modeled on the Presidio trust that could have productive uses of the structures. Susan Decker — supports SunCal's plan and the flexibility in their process. Encouraged that it would produce something that is truly an asset to Alameda. Michael Krueger — agreed with most of the speakers and is supportive of SunCal's plan. Chair Johnson explained that this meeting has to be recessed in order to reconvene the PUB meeting of earlier. Meeting was recessed at 9:15 p.m. by Chair Johnson. All Board members agreed that Item 3 -A (SunCal's Development Concept) and the balance of the 11/5 agenda be continued at a Special ARRA Meeting scheduled on November 18, 2008. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Tuesday, November 18, 2008 The meeting convened at 9:43 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Beverly Johnson Boardmember Doug deHaan Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Lena Tam 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2 -A. Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Amendment to Agreement with Russell Resources for Environmental Consulting Services for Alameda Point Extending the Term for 12 Months and Adding $147,500 to the Budget. 2 -B. Approve a One -year Lease with Two One -Year Options with Makani Power for a Portion of Hangarl2. Member deHaan motioned approval of the Consent Calendar, seconded by Member Matarrese, and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes – 5, Noes – 0, Abstentions – 0. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS This portion of the meeting is a continuation of the Regular ARRA Meeting of 11/5, which was recessed by Chair Johnson. On 11/5, all Board members agreed that Item 3 -A (SunCal's Development Concept) and the balance of the 11/5 agenda be continued at the Special ARRA Meeting scheduled on November 18, 2008. 3 -A. Alameda Point Update — Review and Comment on SunCal's Development Concept (Continued from the November 5, 2008 Regular Meeting) Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, provided an overview regarding the purpose of presenting SunCal's Development Concept, which was to solicit feedback and comments from the ARRA to move forward with the draft Master Plan, which is due Dec. 19`l' Chair Johnson called the public speakers first. Michael Krueger reiterated a point that if any board member cannot support the plan for whatever reason, now is the appropriate time to discuss and raise objections, and what changes need to be made. Arthur Lipow discussed his concerns about the impact of the bankruptcies of SunCal Companies to the Alameda Point project. Susan Decker discussed her continued support of the Plan. The Board reminded the public that the list of questions from the last meeting on Nov. 5th has been summarized and will be addressed this evening. Pat Keliher, SunCal's Alameda Point Project Manager, Matthew Ridgway of Fehr and Peers, Peter Calthorpe and Peter Tagami, of California Capital Group, were present to answer questions. Member Gilmore stated that a key issue revolves around the feasibility of implementation and the traffic solutions - how to move people on and off the island. She discussed this as being a big part of her comfort level with regard to whether the plan can be executed. She wants to see real life examples of the solutions in place and working, and does not want Alameda to be the experiment. Member Matarrese had two transportation — related points: how we are addressing commute in the tube into China Town, and truck routes, how are we moving goods? Matthew Ridgway, consultant from Fehr & Peers, addressed the transportation issues. He stated that traffic congestion is expected to be worse, regardless of Alameda Point redevelopment, as moving traffic to /from Alameda Point is secondary next to the traffic moving through the tube and the 880 corridor. One of the questions was whether the option of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) was out. Mr. Ridgway responded `no', but is reserving the right of way to bus transit alignment. He further discussed that the project is developer funded and funding will be sought from AC Transit and other funding sources. Another question was regarding buy -in of other stakeholders. Mr. Ridgway explained that they are working with AC Transit for funding issues and Caltrans on Broadway /Jackson improvements, but there is a much larger group of stake holders, and they are not assuming things outside of Alameda's purview. The Board had requested a matrix be created. Mr. Ridgway prepared a draft which highlights major differences between the three plans, the APCP plan, the WRT plan, and the current SunCal plan. One of the major differences they realized was having an onsite school, which was carried forward to the current AP transportation strategy. A rapid bus element was not definitive in other plans, but in the current AP transportation strategy, it is definitive to fund a rapid bus transit system, also proposing to fund construction and operating costs for an additional BRT line across the whole island to the Fruitvale BART station in order to increase transit use throughout the island. A bikeshare program is being proposed; and another dramatic difference is a progressive parking plan, which was in the APCP plan, and is carried forward to the current plan. Shared parking, unbundling cost of residential parking, commercial fee based - parking, parking maximums, limit number of auto trips — new elements included in the summary of the matrix proposed to reduce auto trips. Chair Johnson and Member Matarrese were concerned about the passive incentives of parking, which did not have the effect that was intended, because other transportation hasn't been provided. Member Gilmore discussed these unintended consequences and not being able to lure business to site because there is not enough parking. Member deHaan discussed the real life situation in Alameda, that streets upon streets are constrained because of no parking. He stated his concern that lack of parking has not driven ,Alamedans to use public transportation. Mr. Ridgway explained that possibly parking shortages weren't in tandem with a whole host of transportation alternatives. They are proposing to implement the transportation alternatives and provide the level of parking that would balance with those alternatives — to be effective economically and be viable. They are trying to develop a plan that addresses all these issues. Chair Johnson stated that if we insure other transportation alternatives were available, people would use it. Vice Chair Tam discussed the City's settlement with Oakland China town over the impact of the Alameda Point project with traffic in China Town - a traffic level threshold was generated, and the appropriate level was 1800 units. She asked Mr. Ridgway if their mitigation measures are all to get back to that threshold level. Mr. Ridgway affirmed, stating that they are marketing the plan as a green development — you live here because you only have one car or no car — the people that have a lifestyle with fewer or no automobiles would want to live here. Another question addressed how the water emergency transit authority will interface and will meet the needs for maintenance and fueling facilities, and if this can be accommodated at Alameda Point. Mr. Ridgway explained that they have looked at the issue of relocation of the ferry terminal to the estuary or to sea plane lagoon, but have not looked at dredging or fueling stations; and have not reached that level of detail at this point. Another request from the Board was to provide examples of transit alternatives. Fehr & Peers provided a handout with information which cites several examples. Studies included comparative analysis of transit uses among specific cities in the bay area. They are diligent in citing statistics and research conducted nationally to reduce the number of auto trips. Regarding funds for island wide transportation solutions, Mr. Ridgway stated that operating and capital cost are being borne by the Alameda Point project. In response to the request to have an analysis of how many vehicle trips this plan will create, Mr. Ridgway said that a detailed phasing plan will be included in the Dec. 19 draft master plan. Member Matarrese reiterated that the PDC and concept plan didn't address the issue of goods and services moving on and off Alameda Point - truck routes, etc. for commercial and retail. He stressed that this is a critical component that needs to be addressed. For Peter Calthorpe addressed the next category of issues regarding adaptive reuse and light industrial questions, and questions regarding examples of other transit oriented development. Mr. Calthorpe gave a presentation of several examples of comparable mixed use developments, housing over retail, live -work — in other bay area cities including Oakland, Richmond, Daly City, San Mateo, and San Jose. Alameda Point has a unique component to offer which attracts entities to the various mixed -use elements, that Alameda Point has the ability to have a large company "campus ". Vice Chair Tam asked Mr. Calthorpe to comment on creating that buffer between the different types of uses so there are no inherent conflicts that city councils have to deal with. Mr. Calthorpe explained that, until you get to real industrial uses, you don't have to buffer. The beauty of that mix, the services, parks and shops are double duty — if you put a store in a typically residential neighborhood, it won't be used — but if you put it in mixed use — it's used throughout the day, a better viability and keeps folks out of their cars. We're all focused on transit mode. Member deHaan asked about adaptive reuse and light industry, and the compatibility of this? Mr. Calthorpe stated that the parcels for commercial development are not best used as light industrial, rather as low -rise office, and some historic reuse that can be industrial; explaining that when you invest this much in public infrastructure, the parks and transit — you don't want to dedicate land to light industrial — it would be underutilization for light industrial. Member Matarrese wanted to discuss the potential reuse of hangars. Phil Tagami, of California Capital Group, continued the presentation by discussing adaptive reuse of the historical district structures. He discussed the tax credits and identified the protected historic districts. His focus is on 23 of 86 buildings identified, including the flight tower and the dive building. In total, he was asked to study 1.3M sq. ft. of space, as well as preserving and protecting the open space that is part of that. One of the tests of being able to restore the buildings is to give equal attention, respect to the buildings, and early involvement is key — having the opportunity to transition and put the site into reuse NOW would protect from further decay, create use and activity, and generate more revenue. There is a demand for certain activities and good transitional uses; now is the opportunity to have the time to become intimate with these buildings and begin process of next phase. Member deHaan stated that the Navy had an inventory of the historical buildings and had desires and needs for specific ones. He asked how far we are in that process and does it relate to the 23 of 86 buildings. Mr. Tagami stated that they are 1/3 of the way done and there is a lot of due diligence that needs to be exercised. He further explained that the Navy hasn't fully processed the application for the historic district. Clear policies and a well- thought -of redevelopment effort requires patience, due diligence, and there will be verbal sparring — a challenge and constraint that they are ready to engage in. Mr. Tagami discussed a similar situation with the Fox Theatre in Oakland — there were more reasons why you can't renovate the building versus why you can — and there's a shorter time horizon here at Alameda Point, so they are willing to explore adaptive reuse prior to transfer and are ready to take that risk. Member Matarrese asked whether Mr. Tagami has had discussions with the City regarding transitional use prior to transfer and whether we are pursuing this. Member Matarrese stated that this option was a way to get us closest to the plan without losing the assets out there, as there is copper mining, vandalism, and no funds to secure property. Mr. Tagami said that he has expressed this desire and that SunCal has beginnings of communication with the City. It is an ongoing process, but they want to mind their role, focus on due diligence and underwriting, but said that when the time is appropriate, they would be prepared to engage in that dialogue. Member Matarrese asked if the appropriate time is now and if they are prepared to engage in that dialogue now. Member Matarrese expressed to the Board that they consider giving direction to move this issue as a priority. Vice Chair Tam discussed that the heavy capital makes the council and the board reluctant to make investments for property we don't own. Mr. Tagami explained that they often go at risk and are not asking the city to go at risk. They evaluate current increment expense, have a good track record of delivering value, all of which requires a team approach. They will expend the time, energy and money. Chair Johnson asked if DSD wants to move forward with interim adaptive reuse. Debbie Potter explained that the key components to the partnership and business deal is the leasing program and at what point to transition that leasing program. These discussions are underway, and staff is interested in understanding what SunCal and Phil Tagami are proposing. Taking over the leasing program and expanding that program, renovating and identifying what uses can be derived from those if renovated. David Brandt, Deputy Executive Director, added that there was also discussion of starting with restoring one building at a time. Chair Johnson stated that there are lots of benefits to adaptive reuse prior to transfer and that we should move forward. Member Gilmore asked how many of the 23 buildings are currently under lease, to which Ms. Potter replied that most are not, because they are in poor condition. Member Gilmore discussed working something out with Suncal and Mr. Tagami for taking over historic properties that are not under lease, to rehab and get them for productive use, and the sooner the better. Ms. Potter explained that we should continue the analysis, what they can expect for a revenue stream, and how willing are they to go at risk for buildings we don't own. Mr. Tagami explained that all properties need time on task; they need to take stock of the buildings, introduce them back on marketplace. It will take lots of work, and there will be obstacles and tears shed, but they are up for the challenge and there is no excuse not to engage. Mr. Keliher wanted to make it clear that SunCal has not engaged staff in any kind of detail about this particular issue, in response to Chair Johnson's request that SunCal communicate with staff on more regular basis staff so they can have a better understanding of possibilities, and they are not caught by surprise. Ms. Potter stated that she didn't intend to give that impression, and that the issue just hasn't been discussed in great detail. She explained that SunCal and Tagami have to do their deal before they can come to the City with a proposal. The Board and staff were all in agreement that there are advantages to moving forward with rehabilitation on the structures that can be saved, and to make it a priority to move forward on discussions and do it as quickly as possible. Member Matarrese proposed that the ARRA direct staff to get into discussions with SunCal and Phil Tagami tomorrow and bring an update back on what the discussions have been like and what the choke points are; and this issue can be discussed as a separate activity that runs parallel to the development. All Boardmembers agreed. Vice Chair Tam expressed that the key to a successful project is flexibility in reacting to the changing economic conditions. In the next decade there is some expectation that the sustained downturn in economy will require job creation, and looking at the potential for self sustaining for energy level for the entire island, maybe there are some partnerships with AP &T, such as a solar farm, or other type of renewable energy source. Vice Chair Tam supports the plan, as it reflects and captures sentiment that we've been hearing throughout the community and public workshops. Chair Johnson stated that there needs to be discussion about the phasing of public amenities at some other appropriate point. FM — reiterate some comments from last time including that the plan needs work on environmental issues such as the working waterfront, which showers noise upwind. He expressed that it's an odd place to put a neighborhood. He also mentioned not wanting to see plans that have sidewalk dining because it's freezing cold near the waterfront — and no water play in park. He cited that there are plenty of lessons in town to learn from, discussing the Bay Street, Emeryville situation where there is residential over retail and the problems that come from that type of development. Member Matarrese stated examples are all around that we should consider, and would like the same level of detail in the final plan that has been given to residential, given to commercial and light industrial. Member dehaan asked SunCal about a survey that they were conducting with Alameda residents. Mr. Keliher clarified that the survey is preliminary and is sponsored by SunCal and not the City. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4 -A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative. - Highlights of October 2 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. (Continued from the November 5, 2008 Regular Meeting) Member Matarrese provided a brief presentation. He discussed highlights from the ARRA meeting of Sept. 10th. The BCT gave an update and of the fiscal year and their activities, and there were comments on the transfer of FOST for site IR 15. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 11:34 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Tuesday, December 2, 2008 The meeting convened at 11:18 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. . ROLL CALL Present: Chair Beverly Johnson Boardmember Doug deHaan Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Lena Tam 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2 -A. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Petris Air Work Industries, Inc. dba Alameda Aerospace at Alameda Point. This item was pulled from the agenda and not addressed. It was continued to the January 7, 2009 regular ARRA meeting. (This item was subsequently submitted as an off - agenda). 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3 -A. Approve the Community Reuse Plan Amendment and Legally Binding Agreement for the Homeless Accommodation at the North Housing Parcel This item was continued to a Special Joint Meeting of the ARRA and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners on February 4, 2009. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4 -A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of November 6 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese did not attend the 11/6 RAB meeting and did not have a report. He was attending a Council meeting on 11/6. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 11:19 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, OXe(,/,.__, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Interoffice Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: Debra Kurita Executive Director Date: January 7, 2009 Re: Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Mariusz Lewandowski dba Woodmasters at Alameda Point BACKGROUND The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) governing Board approves all Alameda Point subleases with a lease term greater than one year. The proposed sublease for Mariusz Lewandowski dba Woodmasters (Woodmasters) is for five years. DISCUSSION Woodmasters formerly occupied Building 44 at Alameda Point. In February 2008 the Navy informed the ARRA that they would be conducting screening and testing in four buildings at Alameda Point and that those buildings are required to be empty for these tests. Building 44 was one of those buildings. Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed sublease for Woodmasters in a portion of Building 43. The rent for Woodmasters is $19,896 annually, or $0.3419 per sq. ft. in the first year. There is a 3% increase in each subsequent year. The building will continue to be used for light manufacturing and office purposes. Building 43 is in poor to fair condition. In accordance with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the ARRA and SunCal Companies, this lease has been discussed with representatives from SunCal Companies and has their concurrence. BUDGET CONSIDERATION / FINANCIAL IMPACT This lease will generate $19,896 in the fist year. These funds will be retained by the ARRA. RECOMMENDATION Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Woodmasters at Alameda Point. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority By: January 7, 2009 Page 2 Respectfully submitted, Leslie Little Development Services Director Nanette Banks Finance & Administration Manager Attachment: A. Proposed Sublease Business Teiuis B. Site Map ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS TENANT BUILDING SIZE (SF) TERM RENT Mariusz Lewandowski dba Woodmasters 43 4,480 5 yrs $1,658/mo. ATTACHMENT B c [1- f L Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Interoffice Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: Debra Kurita Executive Director Date: January 7, 2009 Re: Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Alameda Soccer Club at Alameda Point BACKGROUND The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) governing Board approves all Alameda Point subleases with a lease term greater than one year. The proposed sublease for Alameda Soccer Club is for five years. DISCUSSION The Alameda Soccer Club leased the field they currently occupy from the ARRA five years ago. At that time, the Alameda Soccer Club installed a new grass playing field, which included grading, installing an irrigation system, planting the grass, and installing a fence and bleachers, all at their sole expense. Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed sublease for the Alameda Soccer Club at Hornet Field. Although the rent for the Alameda Soccer Club is waived, the club shall continue to maintain the field at their sole expense, which is estimated to be approximately $40,000 annually. In addition to maintaining the field, they also pay for the water used, which averages $550 per month. The field will continue to be used for adult and youth soccer. When the field is not in use, the field will be available for the Recreation and Park Director to schedule use. In accordance with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the ARRA and SunCal Companies, this lease has been discussed with representatives from SunCal Companies and has their concurrence. BUDGET CONSIDERATION / FINANCIAL IMPACT This lease will generate approximately $6,600 in the first year to pay for water. These funds will be retained by the ARRA. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority January 7, 2009 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Alameda Soccer Club at Alameda Point. Respectfully sub 'tted, By: Leslie Little Development Services Director Nanette Banks Finance & Administration Manager Attachment: A. Proposed Sublease Business Tem s B. Site Map ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS TENANT BUILDING SIZE (SF) TERM RENT Alameda Soccer Club Hornet Field 104,544 5 yrs Waived ATTACHMENT B m CD (f) 0 0 0 P1 0 0 0 \\\\ \\\\\\\\\ ‹ft.* \ ..\\.• . . . \ \\\:•\,\:\ • -\\*>\"\\ \ \ \\\\\ ' \ \\\ • • \ \ \\ \\\\\N \ \\*.\\N\ .\\.\\:\ • \ \N\\\•\‘.`s, \\\\ .-\\\\\ \ • ,.\\N\ • • \\\\ \\ \ \\ x \N\\\\ \-.■\\\ • • \\\\\`\\\\ ..\\x • \N\\\ IIII 0 C:3 7 0 0 'IInd 1INiOH 'M Ljj VI / ❑® 0 0 K IN.G 1 (0 co N cD a) Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Interoffice Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: Debra Kurita Executive Director Date: January 7, 2009 Re: Authorize the Sale of Four Boston Whalers to NRC for $44,500 BACKGROUND In June 2001 the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) established a procedure for the disposition of personal property. The procedure delegated to the Executive Director the authority to declare as surplus any item of personal property which is valued at less than $10,000 and which is not required for use by the ARRA in the administration of its powers and duties pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreement between the Alameda City Council and the Alameda Community Improvement Commission. DISCUSSION The Navy transfer of personal property to the ARRA included the title to two 1996 Boston Whalers, Serial Numbers BWCPA035L596 and BWCPA0336596; a 1992 Boston Whaler, Serial Number BWCPA3031293; and a 1993 Boston Whaler, Serial Number BWC8222EH394. NRC Environmental Services (NRC) uses these boats in support of port management. They have spent a considerable amount of money to maintain the boats in working order. NRC has requested to purchase these boats and add them to their maintenance program. Staff initiated a marine survey in order to determine the value of these boats. VRS Vericlaim determined the market value of the boats to be $15,000 for BWCPA035L596, $12,000 for BWCPA0336596, $18,000 for BWCPA3031293 and $8,000 for BWC8222EH394. As part of their request to purchase these boats, NRC included invoices showing the amount they have spent on each boat to restore them to working condition. As has been the ARRA's past practice, NRC's prior investment in the boats was taken into account when determining the sale price of the vessels. The attached City Owned Vessel Repair Synopsis and New Offer shows the appraised value, materials, and labor required for repairs and the offer of purchase price for these Boston Whalers. BUDGET CONSIDERATION / FINANCIAL IMPACT The purchase will generate $44,500 to the ARRA lease revenue fund. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority RECOMMENDATION January 7, 2009 Page 2 Authorize the sale of four Boston Whalers to the ARRA' s port services manager, NRC, for $44,500. Respectfully s itted, Leslie Little Development Services Director By: Nanette Banks Finance & Administration Manager ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Mr. Mike Hampen Property Manager PM Realty Group Alameda, CA October 16, 2008 Re: Offer to Purchase Four City Owned Vessels Dear Mr. Hampen, 1 would like to thank you for providing the results by the independent contract surveyor pertaining to the City of Alameda owned vessels. It is our intention to actively pursue the search for a buyer of these vessels in order to help the city gain the most valuable offer available. That being said NRCES would like to offer to purchase four (4) of the vessels listed. These are: 1996 Boston Whaler, BWCPA035L.596 1996 Boston Whaler, BWCPA0336596 1992 Boston Whaler, BWCPA3031293 1993 Boston Whaler; BWC8222EH394 While we appreciate that the surveyor conducted his appraisal given the current condition of the four vessels mentioned we would like all parties to understand that the vessels were in their current condition due to the substantial repair and maintenance completed by and paid for by NRCES. We understand that based on our current contractual agreement with the City of Alameda these vessels were available for our use at no charge as long as they were maintained and operated at our expense. With this in mind I would like the city to take into consideration the following: Firstly when NRCES took over the contract from Trident Marine the vessels in question were in very poor condition, one was not usable at all due to a bad engine. Due to the high standards NRCES adheres to and to better be prepared to fulfill our contractual obligation to the city and to MARAD we took it upon ourselves to bring these vessels to a condition where they could be relied on to fulfill their purpose safely and efficiently. Thus the survey values came back as they did. Secondly we went beyond the normal maintenance required and committed substantial funds and manpower to bring them up to their current valuation. If this work were not to have been completed the boats would not be valued as they are presently by the survey. Lastly we continue to provide a high level of maintenance and care to these vessels something we feel was neglected for many years previous to our taking over the contract with the city. 1 Given the above information we would like to offer the City of Alameda the amount of $44,500.00 for purchase of these vessels. We feel this is a very reasonable offer and given that their current state is due only to our due diligence and expense we feel it is reasonable and fair. I have included below a synopsis of the repairs made to the vessels we are offering to purchase and the invoices for the expenses incurred. We sincerely hope that you will help us in completing this sale and to help the city understand why our offer is some what lower then their current appraised value. Respectfully Submitted e 64. 7,11. 9e,e2 Charles Greer CA Regional Marine Operations Manager City Owned Vessel Repair Synopsis and New Offer 1996 Boston Whaler, BWCPAO35L596 Work performed by NRCES: • Engine and lower unit repaired to make usable. • See attached invoices for materials purchased #144086 and #102453. • Total materials to make vessel usable; $3287.39 Appraised Value: $15,000.00 Materials: $3287.39 New Offer: $12,500.00 1996 Boston Whaler, BWCPA0336596 Work performed by NRCES: • Original engine replaced due to failure. • Vessel required VHF radio. None as originally received. • See attached invoice #144366 for $17,053.16. • Motor and radio installation performed by NRCES. • Estimated labor cost at $45.001hr x 2 men x 24 hrs. _ $2160.00 • Total Materials and labor to make vessel usable = $19,213.16 Appraised Value: Materials and Labor: New Offer: $12,000.00 $19,213.1.6 $9,000.00 1992 Boston Whaler, BWCPA3031293 Work performed by NRCES: • Both outboards repaired due to various issues. • See attached invoice #144478 for $9017.23 Appraised Value: Materials and Labor: New Offer: $18,000.00 $9,017.23 $15,500.00 1993 Boston Whaler; BWC8222EH394 Work performed by NRCES: • Engine repaired due to various issues. • See Attached Invoice #1444084 for $1,040.98 Appraised Value: Materials and Labor: New Offer: $8,000.00 $1,040.98 $7,500.00 Total Appraised Value: $53,000.00 Total Invested in Repairs: $35,558.76 Total Offer for Four Boats: $44,500.00 3 OUTBOARD MOTOR SHOP OPEN M-F 8:30AM - 5 :30PM SAT 9:00AM - 5:OOPM CLOSED SUNDAY 233 KENNEDY STREET OAKLAND, CA. 94606 (510) -533 -9290 Work Order 11022 Invoice 144366 12/01/2007 11022 102453 NRC ENVIROMENTAL SERVICES 1605 FERRY PT OIL SPILL .hTTN:MARCUS ALAMEDA, CA 94501- 510 - 719 -0076 WK #510 -749 -1390 Reprint 09 :50 :25 Year /Make 96 BOSTON WHALER Model: IMPACT 21 Loa: 21 CG Number: Hrs: Serial No: BWCPA033L596 VeSeel: BF150/BANJ1301378 Warr: / / INVOICE FOR WORK PERFORMED FOR BOAT /VESSEL NEW HONDA 150\ & OWNERS 1 1 . INSTALL NEW HONDA 150 (T /M) PO #250434 JOB #31532 INSTALL NEW HONDA. 150 AND SAVE OLD Part Number 08207- 10W30MFC -W SHOP HBF150AKX Stock No 4186 06240- 2W5 -U40 36452- ZW7 -110AH 32205- 2Y6 -025AH 37250 - ZW5 -010ZA 37260 - ZW5 -000ZA 37450- ZW5 -000ZA 32103- ZW7 -000AH 1 301947X22FT 58130- ZY3 -015A Date 11/30/2007 2 Description OIL,10W30 FC -W 10 4 GA BATT CABL HONDA 150HP 4 -STR 12410.00 BANJ - 1301378 BOX KIT, R. I.GN /STP PNL W /PGM 20 -WIRE MAIN HRN, TACH /HR METER BK, BK TRIM METER, FA BK VOLTMETER, FA INSTRMNT HARN, FAR DISC RIGGING HARD 33C SUPREME 111.24 3X15 1/4 X 15 AL List Qty 7 1 1 Description 216 INSTALL NEW MOTOR 2 REPAIR BILGE PUMPS Price 6.58 44.50 11658.00 1 249.99 1 199.99 1 106.69 1 87.99 1 62.69 1 18.69 1 75.44 1 75.00 2 68.49 1 162.9$ Material; 0% comp MOTOR Ext Price 46.06 44.50 11658.00 249.99 199.99 106.69 87.99 62.69 18.69 75.44 75.00 136.98 162.98 12925.00 Hours Price 16.00 1568.00 Labor: 1568.00 Subtotal: $14493.00 (T /M) 0% comp BOTH BILGE PUMPS NOT WORKING Part Number BPO540 54 -1597 50 -1025 Description COUPLER REPAIR XI RULE- A -MATIC PLUS MERCURY -FREE RULE 500 PUMP ttAGFA0114Sevo Z0/t0 39tid BDIAa3S List Qty Price 1 48.00 2 56.79 1 28.49 Material: Ext Price 48.00 113.58 28.49 190.07 @50EEE90t9 9560 8002/LI/0t ®� OUTBOARD MOTOR SHOP OPEN M -F 8:30AM - 5 :30PM SAT 9 :00AM - 5 :00PM CLOSED SUNDAY 333 KENNEDY STREET. OAKLAND, CA. 94606 (510)-533-9290 Work Order 11022 Invoice 144366 12/01/2007 102453 NRC ENVIROMENTAL SERVICES 1605 FERRY PT OIL SPILL ATTN :MARCUS ALAMEDA, CA 94501- 510- 719 -0076 WK #51 0- 749-1 390 11022 Reprint 09 :50:25 Year /Make: 96 BOSTON WHALER Model: IMPACT 21 Loa: 21 CG Number: Hrs: Serial No BWCPA033L596 Vessel: BF150/BANJ1301378 Warr: / / INVOICE FOR WORK PERFORMED FOR BOAT /VESSEL NEW HONDA 150\ & OWNERS 1 . 1 : INSTALL NEW HONDA 150 (T /M) 0% comp PO #250434 JOB #31532 INSTALL NEW HONDA 150 AND SAVE OLD MOTOR Part Number 08207- 10W30MFC -W SHOP HBF150AKX stock No 4186 06240 - ZW5 -D40 36.452- ZW7- -110AH 32205- ZY6 -025AH 37250- ZW5 -010ZA 37260 - ZW5 -000ZA 37450 - ZW5 -000ZA 32103- ZW7 -000AH 1 301947X22FT 58130- ZY3.015A Date 11/30/2007 2 Description OIL,10W30 FC -W 10 4 GA BATT CABL HONDA 150HP 4 -STR 12410.00 BANJ- 1301378 BOX KIT, R. IGN /S'TP PNL W /PGM 20 --WIRE MAIN HRN, TACH /HR METER BK, BK TRIM METER, FA BK VOLTMETER, FA INSTRMNT HARN,FAR MISC RIGGING HARD 33C SUPREME 111.24 3X15 1/4 X 15 AL List Qty Price 7 6.58 1 44.50 1 11658.00 Description 216 INSTALL NEW MOTOR 2 : REPAIR BILGE PUMPS 1 249.99 1 19'9.99 1 106.69 1 87.99 1 62.69 1 18.69 1 75.44 1 75.00 2 68.49 1 162.98 Material: BOTH BILGE PUMPS NOT WORKING Part Number BP0540 54-1 597 50- 1025 Description. COUPLER REPAIR SCI RULE- A -MATIC PLUS MERCURY -FREE RULE 500 PUMP CPAs X36 <lc Z0 /T0 39dd 33IAd3S List Qty 1 2 Ext Price 46_06 44.50 11658.00 249.99 199.99 106.69 87.99 62.69 18.69 75.44 75.00 136.98 162.98 12925.00 fours Price 16.00 1568.00 Labor: 1568.00 Subtotal: $14493.00 (TIM) 0% comp Price Ext Price 48.00 48.00 56.79 113.58 1 28.49 28.49 Material: 190.07 0S0£££90TS TO :0T 8002/LI/01 Work Order 11022 Invoice 144366 Reprint 10/17/2008 11022 09:50:26 Date Description 11/30/2007 216 REPAIR BILGE PUMPS 3 STEERING CYL, SALTED UP Hours 1.00 Labor: Subtotal: (T/M) Price 98.00 98.00 $288.07 0% com STEERING CYLINDER ALL SALTED UP AND WILL NOT COME OFF 0 MOTOR. FRONT HELM LEAKING AND WILL NOT WORK PROPERLY AT RPM Part Number TLHHC5345 88-6004 4 : 4 Description PIVOT FRONT MOUNT SEA STAR HYDRAULI LT. INSTALL VHF RADIO List Qty 1 2 Pride 677.00 16.59 Material: (T/M) LD HIGH Ext Price 677,00 33.18 710.16 0% comp INSTALL Part Number 1 10-2161 27-1500 Date 12/01/2007 NEW VHF RADIO PACKAGE Description ICOM M422 VHF RAD MOUNT, STAINLESS CLAMSHELL VENT 1- 1-1/2 Description 216 INSTALL VHF RADIO KIT Date Brought In: 11/26/2007 Date Promised : 12/17/2007 Date Completed : 12/01/2007 Date Invoiced : 12/01/2007 30IAN35 List 59_99 Qty 1 1 1 Price 399.00 49.99 4.59 Material: Hours 1.50 Labor: Subtotal: Total Material: Total Labor: Tax: Total. Amount: OSOECENT9 Ext Price 399.00 49.99 4.59 453.58 Price 147.00 147.00 $600.58 -114278.83 $1813.00 $1249.40 $17341.23 t1-053 OLIO TO:OT 800Z/LT/0T 10/1E/2000 09:00 5105333050 eVa Vfhi1(,/1 1qC1 t•IW .r[A4TI'S k(A‘ 61 I% 6-3 OUTBOARD MOTOR SHOP c—fszsla SERVICE OPEN M-F 8:30AM - 5:30PM SAT 9:00AM - 5:00PM CLOSED SUNDAY 333 KENNEDY STREET OAELAND, CA. 94606 (510)-533-9290 Work Order 11015 Invoice 144478 Reprint 11015 12/05/2007 102453 NRC ENVIROMENTAL SERVICES 1605 FERRY PT OIL SPILL ATTN:MARCUS ALAMEDA, CA 94501- 510-719-0076 WK#510-749-1390 PAGE 01/05 08:5440 Year/Make: BOSTON WHALER Model: 25 GUARDIAN Loa: 0 CG Number: Q11 Hrs: Serial No 3031293 Vessel: E200TXEOC/G03948099P Warr: / / INVOICE FOR WORK PERFORMED FOR BOAT/VESSEL E200TXEOC/G039480991) & OWNERS 1 : CHECK OUT (T/M) 0% comp PO#250434 JOB #31532. LEAK TESTED BOTH ENGINES PORT OK FOUND COIL LEADS MISROUTED CORREcTED, CHECKED STBD SIDE OK ALSO CORRECTED ROUTING OF COILS LEADS. CHECKED GEAROIL ON BOTH. ENGINES NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. PORT WON'T START NO SPARK TO #3 & 45 CYLINDER, STBD. WON'T START CARBS LOADED UP WITH OIL. WATER TESTED AFTER ALL REPAIRS PERFORMED STBD ENGINE POPS OUT OF GEAR UNDER A LOAD. Date Description Flours Price 11/30/2007 214 check out 2.00 196.00 12/04/2007 214 WATER TEST 1.50 147.00 Labor: 343.00 2 : 2 : ELECTRICAL (T/M) 0% comp CHECKED BATTERIES BOTH BAD INSTALLED 2 NEW BATTERIES & REPLACED 1 NEGATIVE BATTERY CABLE THAT WAS BAD. RUNNING LIGHTS INOP CHECKED FOUND FUSE HOLDER CORROIDED REPLACED & RETESTED OK. Part Number Description List Qty Price Ext Price BAT-4 24M-XBD HIGH OUTPUT 2 89.95 179.90 SHOP LUGS/WRAP/2' CABLE 1 18.00 18.00 54-3500 PERRO FUSE PANEL FU 1 8.99 8.99 Material; 206.89 Date Description Hours Price 11/20/2007 221 BATTERIES/LUGS 1.00 98.00 12/05/2007 214 RUNNING LIGHTS 0.50 49.00 Labor: 147.00 Subtotal: $353.89 3 : 1036 : TUNE AND LUBE, V4-V6 CARS (T/M) 0% comp PORT ENGINE LEAK TESTED OK NO SPARK TO #3 & #4 SPARE, CHANGE GEAR OIL AND WASHERS, PRESSURE AND VACUUM CHECK LOWER UNIT, CHECK SYNC AND LINK, REPLACE PLUGS, LUBE MOTOR, LUBE STEERING, CHECK PROP AND SHAFT, REPLACE FUEL FILTER, TEST RUN AND CHECK SHIFT AND RUNNING TEMPERATURE. TORQUE HEADS, EXIIceAl 6-3 vi„ct i8/16/2@ 8 09:00 Work Order 11015 10/16/2008 5105333050 Invoice 144476 SERVICE PAGE 02/05 Reprint 11015 08:54:40 * NEXT SERVICE SHOULD RE PERFORMED AFTER ONE SEASON OR AFTER * APPROXIMATLY 100 HOURS OF RUNNING TIME Part Number QL78YC 502906 311598 SHOP RF3H=ZZ Description SPARKPLUG FUEL FILT 10 MIC WASHER 10 PK. GEAROIL /GREASE HAZARD WASTE Description 214 service List Qty 6 1 2 Price 5.72 9.98 0.95 1 18.45 1 1.79 Material: Ext Price 34.32 9.98 1.90 18.45 1.79 66.44 Date Hours Price 11/30/2007 2.00 196.00 Labor: 196.00 Subtotal: $262.44 4 1036 TUNE AND LURE, V4 -V6 CARS (T /M) 0% comp Pa STBD. ENGINE LEAK TESTED OK CHECKED SPARK, CHANGE GEAR OIL AND WASHERS, PRESSURE AND VACUUM CHECK LOWER UNIT, CHECK SYNC AND LINK, REPLACE PLUGS, LUBE MOTOR, LUBE STEERING, CHECK PROP AND SHAFT, REPLACE FUEL FILTER, TEST RUN AND CHECK SHIFT AND RUNNING TEMPERATURE. TORQUE HEADS, * NEXT SERVICE SHOULD BE PERFORMED AFTER ONE SEASON OR AFTER * APPROXIMATLY 100 HOURS OF RUNNING TIME Part Number QL78YC 502906 311598 SHOP HHHZZZ Date 11/30/2007 Description SPARKPLUG FUEL FILT 10 MIC WASHER 10 PK. GEAROIL /GREASE HAZARD WASTE Description 214 service List 5 1078 . WATER PUMP (V6 - V8) PORT ENGINE REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER PASSAGES IN LOWER UNIT. TEST RUN AND TEMPERATURE. Part Number 5001595 PA�o3 e293 Description KIT AY,WATER PUMP Qty 6 1 2 1 1 Price 5.72 9.98 0.95 18.45 1.79 Material: Ext Price 34.32 9.98 1 .90 18.45 1.79 66.44 Hours Price 2.00 196.00 Labor: 196.00 Subtotal: $262.44 (T /M) 0% comp PUMP ASSY. CLEAN WATER CHECK OPERATING List Qty Price 1 77.33 Material: Ext Price 77.33 77.33 10/16(2008 09:00 5105333050 SERVICE PAGE 03/05 Work Order 11015 Invoice 144478 10/16/2008 11015 Date Description 11/30/2007 214 water pump 6 1078 : WATER PUMP (V6 - V8) Reprint 08:54:40 Hours Price 2.00 196.00 Labor; 196.00 Subtotal: $273.33 (T/M) Q% comp Pa STBD. ENGINE REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER PUMP PASSAGES IN LOWER UNIT. TEST RUN AND CHECK TEMPERATURE. ASSY. CLEAN WATER OPERATING Part Number Description List Qty 5001593 KIT AY,IMPELLER Date Description 11/30/2007 214 water pump : 3 : steering HYDRALIC STEERING RAM HAS NICKS ON IT REMOVED HELM & R? HAD TO USE A TORCH TO FILLED SYSTEM & BLEED USED ONE. Part Number 88-6220 SHOP SHOP Date 12/03/2007 Part SHOP Date Price 1 41.98 Material: Hours 2.00 Labor: Subtotal: (TM) & HELM LEANING. WE Ext Price 41.98 41.98 Price 196.00 196.00 $237.98 0% comp GET APART, INSTALLED NEW RAM & HELM, CHANGE 1 ANCHOR ON STEERING WITH A GOOD Description SEASTAR KIT-HOSES $ USED STEERING ARM FLUID Description 214 STEERING 4 : throttle/shift PORT THROTTLE & SHIFT ARMS STRIPPED REPLACED WITH USED ARMS. REPLACED STBD THROTTLE ARM WITH A GOOD USED ONE AS OLD ONE WAS CORROIDED. ALSO REPLACED MISSING BOLT ON POWERHEAD BASE. STBD SHIFT ARM MISSING BUSHING REMOVED ARM & REPLACED BUSHING & COTTER PIN. Number Description List Qty Price USED SHIFT/THROTTLE 1 40.00 Material: List Qty 1 1 Price 1149.99 10.00 18.55 Material: Hours 5.00 Labor: Subtotal: T M) Ext Price 1149.99 10.00 18.55 1178.54 Price 490.00 490.00 $1668.54 0% com Description 12/03/2007 214 SHIFT/THROTTLE 9 : 5 STBD ENGINE Hours 3.00 Labor: Subtotal: (T/M) STBD ENGINE WON'T START AS GARBS FULL OF OIL DRAINED OUT Ci74770-fl2 et'? Ext Price 40.00 40.00 Price 294.00 294.00 $334.00 0% comp OIL & 10/16/2008 09:00 5105333050 SERVICE PAGE 04/05 Work Order 11015 Invoice 144478 Reprint Pa 10/16/2008 11015 08:54:40 RUN CLEANER IN CARBS. NOW ENGINE STARTS RAN FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME THEN HORN WENT OFF TESTED FOUND VRO BAD INSTALLED NEW VRO & CLEANED UP CARBS. CHECKED OIL TANK, FILLED & PURGE TANK. WATER LEAKING FROM ENGINE WE REMOVED LOWER PANS FOUND EXHAUST HOSE LEAKING WE REMOVED INSPECTED OK REINSTALLED & TIGHTENED CLAMP RETESTED ON FLUSHER OK REINSTALLED LOWER PANS. Part Number Description List Qty Price Ext Price 5007089 ANODE AY 1 26.39 26.39 5004558 5007420 VRO 1 345.00 345.00 oIL3 XD30 TCW 3 BULK 1/2 2 9.50 19.00 Material: 390.39 Date Description Hours Price 12/03/2007 214 STBD ENGINE 4.50 441.00 Labor: 441.00 Subtotal: $831.39 10 : 6 PORT MOTOR (T/M) 0% comp PORT MOTOR RESET LINKAGE THROTTLE 'PLATES. NO SPARK TO #3 & #5 CHANGED OUT RECEPTICLES. RAN ENGINE LEAN POPPING HAD TO REMOVE CARBS, DISASSEMBLED, CLEANED OUT, REASSEMBLED, REINSTALLED & ADJUSTED_ TIMER BASE STUCK REMOVED FLYWHEEL CLEANED & LUBED TIME BASE REINSTALLED FLYWHEEL. GROMMET LEAKING ON EXHAUST HOUSING REPLACED. POWERHEAD LEAKING AT BASE GASKET REMOVED POWERHEAD CLEANED UP SURFACES & REINSTALLED POWERHEAD WITH NEW GASKET. CHECKED OIL TANK FILLED & PURGE. RETESTED ON FLUSmER VRO FAILED REPLACED. Part Number Description List Qty Price Ext Price 5007420 KIT AY,F PUMP&LMTR 1 345.00 345.00 Shipping freight 1 8.55 8.55 333879 GASKET, PWHD-ADPT 1 18.69 18.69 345586 GROMMET & INSERT 1 58.14 58.14 301967 0 RING M 1 3.61 3.61 512256 PIN 481817-AE44 M 3 1.67 5.01 OIL3 XD30 TCW 3 BULK 1/2 2 9.50 19.00 Material: 458.00 Date Description Hours Price 12/03/2007 214 PORT MOTOR 12.50 1225.00 Labor: 1225.00 Subtotal: $1683.00 11 7 : trailer (T/M) 0% comp install heavy duty tongue jack & changed coupler on frant of trailer. Part Number Description List Qty Price Ext Price FUA256C 2 5/16 COUPLER , 1 142.30 142.30 FUHD2500 HD TONGUE JACK 1 105.32 105.32 41-1854 ANCHOR SHACKLE, 3/8 2 2.60 5.20 Material: 252.82 bu3cPA")0- -z 10/16/2008 09:00 5105333050 SERVICE PAGE 05/05 Work Order 11015 Invoice 144478 Reprint 10/16/2008 11015 Date Description Hours 12/04/2007 214 TRAILER 1.00 Labor: Subtotal: 12 : 8 STBD ENGINE LOWER (T/M) 08:54:40 Price. 98.00 98.00 $350_82 0% comp Pa STBD. ENGINE (COUNTER ROTATION) LOWER UNIT POPS OUT OF UNDER A LOAD. WE INSTALLED A GOOD USED LOWER UNIT TOOK WATER PUMP OFF OLD LOWER & PUT ON USED LOWER CHANGED GE & REWATER TESTED. Part Number Description SHOP USED LOWER COUNTER SHOP GEAROIL/GREASE List Qty Price 1 1800.00 1 18.45 Material: Date Description Hours 12/05/2007 210 LOWER/RETEST 2.00 Labor: Subtotal: GEAR NEW AR OIL Ext Price 1800.00 18.45 1818.45 Price 196.00 196.00 $2014.45 Brought Ili: Promised Completed Invoiced Date Date Date Date $0.00 ttoc,pA-3 '3 k ct 11/20/2007 12/11/2007 12/05/2007 12/05/2007 Total Material: Total Labor: Tax: Total Amount: $4597.28 $4018.00 $401.95 $9017.23 Reprint summary of Invoice **144084** 11/23/2007 by 105 for 102453 Work ()Vier **11016 ** NRC ENVIROMENTAL SERVICES Phone: 510-719-0076 1605 FERRY PT Fax: 510-749-4150 OIL SPILL ATTN:MARCUS Contact: DON 719-0076 kevin ALAMEDA CA 94501- Part Number Description Qty Price Ext Price 1 GEAR OIL AND LUBE 1 20.00 20.00 175158 VALVE 6PK 1 6.68 6.68 26-1040 HEAD & POLE ASSEMBLY, 1 29.39 29.39 311598 WASHER 10 PK. 2 0.95 1.90 317245 SPRING M 1 2.74 2.74 318395 VALVE 2 3.61 7.22 512256 PIN 481817-A844 M 4 1.67 6_68 512478 COVER IGN COIL M 1 3.71 3.71 582365 SP PLUG LEAD AY 3 12.77 38.31 584561 KIT AY,IGN COIL M 1 36.21 36.21 HHHZZZ HAZARD WASTE 1 1.11 1.11 Labor DIAG, GET RUNNING 375,00 321932 GASKET THRMST 10PK 7 0.66 1.32 332369 GASKET DRL 10PK 2 0.74 1.48 5005440 THERMOSTAT AY 2 25.11 50.22 Labor REPL THERMOS,LINK 294.00 Labor WATER TEST, DELY 147.00 Charge to Account 102453 otA4 f3coc, ozu '34+ Subtotal: Sales Tax (Area 1); INVOICE TOTAL: 1022.97 18.01 1040.98 1040.98 On - t h e -water marine sales and services. Where the professionals shop! door Motor sA 333 Kennedy Street, Oakland, CA 94606 O" www.oulboardrnotorshop.com Moro the Prorossionals Shop! Phone 510.533.9290 a Fax 510.533.3374 k5S1- .".41-.$,••••14. 1. • •-ei s • ;.!..3 I '•7 t: 0-1 t-4-1 • ...(\ • cs:. • • ''• x• •I• "• • r, • t, .; t. • • f.i.• t Z. ;•.”.•..1: 114 ; • • • 1 • ; • •• ; ; ; • • 1 ; • %-• • ; . ' • ;• -.;.• • : •••'• '•• •-,t• ':.q h•-", • •'• • ' • •, ,• • • •••-` • 4; ' )1 •- • •:••.11 1,s'C: 1.; • .1` •.• • , i•.•1 • . ? , , ••:•t t• • .rt•-• i ■ ..r r•k 'i • • • c-).1,' ' 1,;•:; " : • • ".' • ,'• ...1"-*••.•i • T ' ! 1,-, • . :''.7 ; 1. `I''';' ••-•.' '... i' • i . ..; i• •., - ':.'i- ' ::` • t•• L. ! r*i.- ' l':4"•' • . ' ' . ' .?:.. •'. /3 '.' " . •-•:-:•.. •' /4.... ...-t • . (.... : .-•.' •''-r... --. 1 ';•.-4.; ,':.•`• r;P•I'.-1:' 'i '',,'; , \-1.4...- '-, .., ' - , •,. ..-y 7.(::',.; r..C1 11. tc.. f " ...J...• ... . V%. ".1.'..1.“ I' : i.:•' ;:.• ...i ,, / -'•'..?:".i.:... y.:. • t f";-; ::'.4' f-i• ;.:-. ii.: ,. r. " ':.••':i f•7i...", Pi'. r' ' r. •r•:'..‘.L.' . ''.' ,:•;1:iJ,. 44i,..` i'r, ' ' 1".. ?.. ,,q•‘...i." '.-• t. . % .1 •:;• ': ,: .".••-* ••:;••; ' 4.7', 4 r-• ; 1•`-''.`1" i+ r '".; .';•: 14 ')..ii-''1' ? 1 •--i ?",.;•..,-i..; 7' i a . :.=.-`3 , c.,;-::. .:;• ; 1•."' ?t-t • •;;;;;‘, 1*.." • e"" • T powc,6nrz_E-,1-1 v)() 4. 2 l`A 3 • 2. •• ' •:".• 1 ..t.:":•-• . : Received by: X Unless otherwise specified, payment of this invoice is due an the 15th of the month following dote of purchase. Purchaser agrees to pay 3 .5% per month interest on all post due balonces, annual percentoge rote of 16%, and all reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred in collection of this account, if necessary No refunds on installed parts, special orders, electrical parts or carburetor assembilus. Returns subloo to 1 5% im.drog ehorgo. All 'claims and refunded goods must be accompanied by this invoice t'-to returns accented offer 30 days from dote of invoke. an•the -water marine sales and services. Where the professionals shop! t. Cad MOO/. sA Whore The Profc,.. toue1s Shop! 0 I 333 Kennedy Street, Oakland, CA 94606 www.outboardmotorshop.com Phone 510.533.9290 ® Fax 510.533.3374 •, it 4r s - t" .. • tU(...c62-Z.2,(4- -2294- -6+ -f.a.S _k (rte.;. ,:. r, ..rS .$ .. Received by: X Unless otherwise specified, payment of Iles invoice is duo on the 151h of the month fallowing data of purchase. Purchaser agrees lo pa}`' 1.5% per month interest on all post due bolonees, annual percentage rote of 19 %, and di rea onnblo costs and fvndonor4ru cy fees must cu be red in collection by his s account, e. , ireturns e�eplo refunds on days from installed ports, of invoke. electrical ports or corburetor assemblies. Returns subject to 15% handling City of Alameda Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: Debra Kurita Executive Director Date: January 7, 2009 Re: Alameda Point Update — Presentation of the Alameda Point Draft Redevelopment Master Plan BACKGROUND On July 18, 2007, the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA), Community Improvement Commission (CIC), and City Council approved an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) with SunCal Alameda Point LLC (SunCal) for the redevelopment of Alameda Point. The 24 -month ENA established key performance milestones, provided for reimbursement of ARRA staff and third party costs, identified activities to be completed by third party entities, and specified key personnel assigned to the project. The ENA was amended in March 2008 to provide more time to complete two tasks: preparation of the Development Concept and related documents, and preparation of the draft master plan. In addition, SunCal was required to deposit $350,000 a quarter, and spend $117,000 a month, for consultant costs to ensure progress on developing the required documents. The ENA was further amended in October 2008 to allow a transfer of ownership interest in SunCal to a new entity that is providing project financing. As part of approving the second amendment, the deadline for submitting the draft master plan was extended 30 days to December 19, 2008. On September 19, SunCal submitted the Development Concept and related documents, including a business plan, infrastructure plan, draft update of the Sports Complex Master Plan, and draft project pro forma. SunCal gave presentations on the Development Concept to eight boards and commissions during October to receive feedback, and they presented it to the ARRA Board on. November 5 and November 18. SunCal evaluated the comments received from City boards and commissions and the ARRA as part of preparing the draft master plan. DISCUSSION On December 19, 2008, SunCal submitted its Alameda Point Draft Redevelopment Master Plan (Master Plan), a Sports Complex Master Plan Update (Update), and a Business Plan for the proposed project outlined in the master plan. In addition, the City retained Fehr and Peers to Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority January 7, 2009 Page 2 of 2 prepare a Transportation Strategy to support the land uses identified in SunCal's Master Plan. The Master Plan and Update, along with the Transportation Strategy, are public documents. Pursuant to the terms of the ENA, the Business Plan is a confidential document. The public documents were posted on the Alameda Point web site (www.alameda- point.com) and made available at the Alameda Free Library on Monday, December 22, 2008. All of the documents, including the Business Plan, were transmitted to the ARRA Board members under separate cover. SunCal is presenting its Master Plan and Update to the ARRA Board at its January 7, 2009 meeting. Submittal of the Master Plan and related documents is a mandatory milestone pursuant to the ENA. These documents are a further refinement of SunCal's land plan and assessment of financial feasibility. The Master Plan addresses design principles, the land plan, transportation, sustainability, infrastructure, and next steps. The Business Plan includes the current project pro forma and its supporting documents. Following the presentation of the Master Plan to the ARRA Board, SunCal will continue to fulfill its obligations under the ENA, including supporting negotiations with the Navy for a conveyance term sheet, finalizing an exchange agreement for Public Trust properties, refining the proposed land plan and project pro forma, and continuing due diligence in such areas as historic preservation and environmental clean -up. SunCal's next mandatory milestones are a ballot initiative determination, a written election to submit an entitlement application or pursue a ballot initiative, due on April 30, 2009, and a finalized Navy conveyance tern sheet due on July 31, 2009. FINANCIAL IMPACT This staff report is for information only and no action is required. Therefore, there is no financial impact on the ARRA and General Fund budgets. RECOMMENDATION Receive public comment and provide feedback on SunCal's Alameda Point Draft Redevelopment Master Plan. ly submi eslie Little Development .+ rvices Director Debbie Potter Base Reuse and Community Development Manager DK /LAL /DP:dc City of Alameda Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: Debra Kurita Executive Director Date: January 7, 2009 Re: Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)/Navy Presentation Regarding the Navy /VA Federal -to- Federal Transfer at Former NAS Alameda BACKGROUND In 1993, when the Navy announced that it was closing Naval Air Station Alameda, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USF &W) formally submitted a request for a Federal -to- Federal transfer of the western portion of the former base. USF &W requested a transfer of approximately 550 acres of dry land and 100 acres of submerged lands to provide a refuge for two endangered species, the California Least Tern and the California Brown Pelican. The Navy and USF &W were unable to reach agreement on the terns of a Fed -to -Fed transfer and in 2004, the Navy began discussions with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) about the opportunity for a Fed -to -Fed transfer to meet the VA's goal of a permanent location for VA facilities to serve Bay Area veterans. In November 2006, the VA formally requested a property transfer from the Navy. The VA made a presentation to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) at its December 5, 2007 meeting. The VA proposed developing 113 acres of the 550 -acre site with a columbarium, a community hospital that would serve the community as well as veterans, a medical office building and a VA out - patient clinic. The remainder of the site would be devoted to protecting and maintaining the least tern colony. Since December 2007, the VA has been: 1) working with the Navy on a Memorandum of Understanding regarding the terms and conditions of the proposed transfer, 2) preparing for the anticipated consultations under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act with the USF &W, as required for Federal agencies when an endangered species may be impacted by property transfer and /or development, and 3) preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) as required pursuant to the National Environ rental Policy Act (NEPA) to determine any environmental impacts of the proposed property transfer and /or development. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority January 7, 2009 Page 2 of 3 The VA and Navy held a public information meeting on December 18, 2008, and a request was made at that time that the presentation be made to the ARRA Board at its January 7, 2009 meeting. The presentation is for informational purposes and no action is required. DISCUSSION The December 18, 2008 public information meeting was held aboard the USS Hornet and approximately 100 people attended the meeting. The VA and Navy made a power point presentation regarding the proposed project and answered questions from the audience. The power point presentation was posted on the Alameda Point web site (www.alameda- point.com) on December 22, 2008. A shortened version of the presentation will be made to the ARRA. A copy of the presentation is attached to the staff report. The public information meeting was conducted consistent with NEPA. The VA and Navy outlined the need for the project, the proposed land plan, the alternative land plans that will be analyzed as part of the NEPA process, and the key environmental resources that will be considered in the EA. Several audience members asked questions and provided comments. The VA and Navy also outlined a schedule for completing the environmental review for the proposed property transfer. The initial public comment period concludes on January 20, 2009. The draft EA will be published in Spring 2009. There will be another public comment period on the draft EA, and the final EA will be published in the Summer 2009. Staff anticipates submitting comments during the initial public comment period requesting the VA and Navy to analyze the project impacts on public services and facilities, particularly transportation and municipal services. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no financial impact from receiving a presentation from the VA and Navy on the proposed Fed -to -Fed transfer of a portion of NAS Alameda. RECOMMENDATION for information only and no action is required. ubm Leslie Little Development Services Director By i eb •e Potter Base Reuse and Community Development Manager Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority DK/LAL /DP:dc Attachment 1. VA/Navy Power Point Presentation January 7, 2009 Page 3 of 3 PRESENTATION TO ARRA JANUARY 7, 2009 NAVY /VA FED -TO -FED TRANSFER FORMER NAS ALAMEDA Meeting Agenda Introduction Presentation Navy Overview VA Overview Proposed Action and Alternatives Environmental Issues Public Involvement and Next Steps Questions & Answers Presentation to ARRA — 01/07/09 Proposed VA Facilities NAVY OVERVIEW mss, NAS Alameda closed in 1997 Dispose property at NAS Alameda as approved by the BRAC Commission USFWS requested Fed -to -Fed transfer of former airfield far proposed wildlife refuge in December 1996. In 2003, the Navy and the USFWS reached an impasse regarding transfer of this real property. Since then, the Navy has been working with other federal agencies and the local redevelopment authority to find a property recipient. The proposed action: a Fed -to -Fed property transfer of approximately 549 -acres of property at NAS Alameda from the Navy to VA. FED-TO-FED TRANSFER FORMER NAS ALAME • VA seeks pemtanent location for VA facilities to serve Bay Area 'Aetelans • 2004 Nary makes VA aware of opportunity for fed - to-fed transfer of property at NAS Alameda. • November 2004 VA Secretary Principi sent Formal Letter of Intent to Nary expressing VA's interest in acquiring property at the former NAS Alameda. • December 2005 VA and Navy initiate series of meetings with USFWS regarding transfer parcel • May 2006 VA Feasibility Study of Transfer Parcel completed • November 2006 VA Secretary Nicholson makes formal Transfer Request to Navy • VHA State -of- the -art VHA Outpatient Clinic to serve veterans in Northern Alameda County • NCA VA Columbanum to serve Veterans in the Greater Bay Area • VBA VBA Support Office tera AVY. VA D 7d'x,ED'<iRAfa5PER VHA Mission Serve the needs of America's veterans by providing primary care, specialized care, and related medical, surgical, mental health and social support services. Presentation to ARRA — 01/07/09 Af.NMEDA' AVYPVA 6007'0=600 TRANSFER 6OR ER NASAL.. • "One VA" provides VHA, VBA, and NCA services at one location to better meet the needs of the veteran population in the Bay Area. • Enable VA staff to help veterans more quickly and effectively • Enable VA staff to function as a single service entity VHA needs in VA Sierra Pacific Network (Northern California /Northern Nevada) • Serves 1.1 million Veterans • Over 300,000 Patients • Six major Medical Centers • 27 Outpatient Clinics 2 VA Outpatient Clinic (OPC) 221 t 585 Luther King Ix Way, Oakland 19E10k leased building — The OPC will remain at its existing location 0 a leased building in downtown Oakland, -- In 2008, the lease was extended to 2018 Mental Health /Substance Abuse Clinic (MH /SA Clinic) 2500 W. 14th Strew Oakland Vh 11.nra Building In 2000, MHiSA Clinic will be relocated from the Oakland Army Rase to a new interim leased location in downtown Oakland approximately three blocks from the existing? OPC NCA Mission The National Cemetery Administration honors veterans with final resting places in national shrines and with lasting tributes that commemorate their service to our nation. Presentation to ARRA — 01/07/09 Total Veteran Population: 33,895 Source: 2000 US Census extrapolated to 2007 Services currently offered at the O aidand OPC and MH /SA clinics would be provided at one state.ebthe -art OPC at Alameda Point. and would include the following: • Primary Care • Urgent Care • Women's Health • tvledical /Surgical Subspecialties • Pharmacy • Laboratory and Radiology • Physical Therapy/ Occupational Therapy • Eye Clinic • Outpatient Mental Health • Substance Abuse Programs • Dental • Joint VA/DOD Ambulatory Surgery • DOD Arbulatory Care Clinic 3 • Sacramento Valley National Cemetery Dixon, CA • San Joaquin Valley National Cemetery Santa Nelia, CA • Golden Gate National Cemetery San Bruno, CA • San Francisco National Cemetery San Francisco, CA Navy Disposal of the property: The disposal action would consist of a Fed -to -Fed property transfer of approxirnately 549 - acres of property at NAS Alameda from the Navy to VA. VA • Acquire the property from the Navy via Fed -to -Fed Transfer Development of VA facilities to serve Bay Area veterans • Enhanced -Use Lease: A public private partnership program to provide an in- patient community hospital on the site that would be available to VA patients and the community. VHA Outpatient Clinic Siting Criteria • located within a 30 min drive OPC Location Area: • North - Alameda/ Contra Costa County line • East - Alameda/ Contra Costa County line • South - 95"' Avenue, Oakland • West - San Francisco Bay Other Considerations • Area with dense veteran population • Proximity to local civilian hospitals • Access to public transportation • Avoid locating under flight path of airports due to issues related to post - traumatic stress syndrome Space /Acreage Requirements 107,000 gross square feet (gsf) 15 acres VBA Support Office 5,000 gsf Presentation to ARRA — 01/07/09 • "One VA" provides VHA, VBA, and NCA services at one location to better meet the needs of the veteran population in the Bay Area • Enable VA staff to help veterans more quickly and effectively • Enable VA staff to function as a single service entity Service Area (Catchment Area) Coiumbaria that would serve 90% of the San Francisco Bay Area veterans within 75 miles of their residence Space /Acreage Requirements 50 acres Other Considerations • Area with dense veteran population • sufficient for at least a 40 -year projection within a 75 mile radius of the projected site • shape of property; aesthetics • accessibility • availability of water and utilities • compatible surrounding land uses • quality of sails • topography • restrictions on development 4 Alternative 1 - "One VA" at Alameda Point Alternative ALL VA FACILITIES LOCATED ON TRANSFER PARCEL VA would acquire 549 -acre parcel from Navy via Fed -to -Fed Transfer and a 113 -acre portion of the site would be developed with the following; • NCA Columharia Cemetery (53 acres) • VHA Outpatient Clinic (107,000 sq. ft115 acres) • Community Hospital with helipad — EUL (.25000 sq. 5125 acres) • VA Support Offices / Medical Office Buildings (100,000 sq. 11/28 acres) Other Proposed Uses • Nature Center • Bay Trail • Use of existing bunkers for storage of emergency suppl ies NAVY /VA FED -TO -FED TRANSFER FORMER NAS ALAMEDA 24 Alternative 2: NCA Cemetery on Parcel + VHA Clinic at other Alameda Point Site NCA CEMETERY ON FED -TO -FED TRANSFER PARCEL VHA OUTPATIENT CLINIC AT OTHER ALAMEDA POINT SITE • VA would acquire 549 -acre parcel from Navy via'Fed -to-Fed Transfer • NCA Cemetery developed on 549 -acre transfer parcel • VHA Outpatient Clinic established at another location at Alameda Point • VA Regional Offices would remain in Oakland • No community hospital or medical office space proposed; VA would not likely pursue EU!. opportunities • To implement this alternative. VA would need to purchase or lease property elsewhere on Alameda Point NAVY /VA FED•TO•FED TRANSFER FORMER NAS AIAMED Alternative 3 •-- Possible OPC Sites in Oakland Presentation to ARRA — 01/07/09 Alternative 1— Preferred Alternative Alternative 3 — NCA Cemetery on Parcel + VHA Clinic in Oakland NCA CEMETERY ON FED -TO -FED TRANSFER PARCEL VHA OUTPATIENT CLINIC IN OAKLAND VA would acquire 549 -acre parcel from Navy via Fed -to -Fed Transfer NCA Cemetery developed on 549 -acre transfer parcel VHA Outpatient Clinic established at a location in Oakland VA Regional Offices would remain in Oakland No community hospital or medical office space proposed; VA would not likely pursue EUL opportunities To implement this alternative. VA would need to purchase or lease property in Oakland NAVY /VA FED -TO -FED TRANSFER FORMER NAS ALAMEDA ALTERNATIVES 2 and 3 VA Columbaria -only a Fed -t, -Fed Transfer Parcel •N,• { 5 Alternative 4 No Action Alternative Fed-to -Fed transfer would not take place; no VA facilities would be constructed on the site. Property would remain in Navy ownership until another property recipient could be identified. On -site activities would be limited to maintenance, cleanup, and other actions associated with the Navv's caretaker status of the site. VHA Healthcare and VBA benefits services would remain at the current locations. NCA Cemetery Services - San Francisco Bay Area veterans would use the San Joaquin National Cemetery in Santa Nella. CA, located approximately 100 miles away, the Sacramento Valley National cemetery located 65 miles away, or a private cemetery. NAVY /VA FED -TO -FED TRANSFER FORMER NAS ALAMEO r. '43 Installation Restoration Program PURPOSE: Identify, investigate, characterize, and clean up hazardous substances Reduce risk to human health and the environment from past disposal operations and spills /releases Consistent with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Complete necessary environmental work and obtain site closure from regulatory agencies Presentation to ARRA — 01/07/09 Principal Environmental Resources Considered in the EA • Biological Resources • Transportation • Hazardous Materials & Waste • Geology and Soils • Water Resources • Utilities • Public Services • Land Use • Noise • Visual Resources • Air Quality • Cultural Resources • Socioeconomics & Environmental Justice California Brown Pelican 6 • IR Program Flow Diagram tonitAN nnrs; fsd Fritts • Total acreage: 439 acres • Site Investigation Completed • Supplemental Site Investigation — late 2009 - Surface stains Washdown areas — Electrical transformers and arresting gear structures — Area north of IR Site 2 (Panhandle area) • Submit closure plan based on results - 2010 IC` ' VO • Initial Public Comment Period (until 1/20/09) • Publication of Draft EA (Spring 2009) • Draft EA Public Comment Period (Spring 2009) • Public Notice of Availability and FONSI (Summer 2009) • Total acreage: 110 acres — West Beach Landfill - 77 acres — West Beach Wetlands - 33 acres • Completed Remedial Investigation /Feasibility Study • Proposed Plan /Public Comment — Feb 2009 • Record of Decision — December 2009 • Prepare Engineering Design and Implement Rernedy — 2010 - 2013 Presentation to ARRA — 01/07/09 7 _ . AW/VA RD-TO-FEVTRANSPER FORMER ALMODA Thank you! Presentation to ARRA — 01/07/09 8 Russell Resources, Inc. environmental management Alameda Point RAB Meeting on December 4, 2008 Highlights and Analysis RAB members present: George Humphreys (outgoing co- chair), Fred Hoffman, Joan Konrad, Jim Leach, Kurt Peterson, Dale Smith (incoming co- chair), Jim Sweeney, Jean Sweeney, and Michael John Torrey Peter Russell, the ARRA's environmental consultant, did not attend, because much of the meeting was a year -end pot luck gathering, with few business matters on the agenda. The information presented here is from draft meeting minutes prepared by the Navy. The discussion below supplements the draft minutes with technical evaluation and analysis. Remediation and other field work in progress: • debris pile removal along north shore of Seaplane Lagoon -- continuing • removal of radiologically impacted storm drain outside Building 5 • groundwater petroleum remediation system near Atlantic Avenue entrance continuing • groundwater treatment at IR Site 14 (former fire training area in Northwest Territory) — continuing • the petroleum remediation system at the southern end of the western hangar row is continuing to extract much more jet fuel than was expected New RAB Community Co- Chair: Dale Smith was elected RAB Community Co -Chair for 2009. Navy presentation of FY09 projects • Sites with remedial action planned for FY09 or in progress: o IR Site 14 (former fire training area in Northwest Territory): Groundwater at this site is being cleaned to eliminate unacceptable risks from indoor vapor intrusion with residential use, even though it is Public Trust land and residential uses are not permitted. o IR Sites 5 (Building 5, Aircraft Rework Facility) and 10 (Building 400, Missile Rework Operations): Historically, dial painting wastewaters were discharged into drains connected to the storm sewer system. The Navy is resuming replacement of affected storm sewers and associated soil. A several- hundred -foot segment of radiologically impacted storm drain line is under structural supports inside Building 5. The Navy claims structural considerations preclude removal of this drain line while the building in place. Upon further investigation, this might be determined not to be the case. Either the Navy must remove a portion of the building to address this remediation now, or required cleanup must be conducted in the future, once Building 5 is demolished. o IR Site 17 (Seaplane Lagoon): The ARRA urged the Navy to investigate the debris piles along the north shore of the Seaplane Lagoon for many years. The Navy's ensuing investigation showed widespread contamination, which is now RR1, 440 Nova Albion Way, Suite 1, San Rafael, California 94903 415.902.3123 fax 815.572.8600 Page 2 of 3 Alameda Point RAB Meeting, December 4, 2008 December 18, 2008 Highlights and Analysis being excavated and hauled offsite. Following completion of the storm drain line cleanup (discussed above) and removal of the debris piles, the Navy will clean up contaminated sediments in the northeast and northwest corners of Seaplane Lagoon by excavation and disposal offsite. o IR Site 26 (Western Hangar Zone): The Navy has completed its first phase of groundwater treatment to remove solvents. However, during the initial cleanup, the Navy discovered unexpected petroleum contamination, which made the treatment much less effective. The Navy is rethinking how to implement the next phase of groundwater cleanup at this site. Cleanup will allow unrestricted reuse. o IR Site 27 (Dock Zone): This fiscal year the Navy will begin groundwater cleanup to remove solvent contamination and allow unrestricted reuse. Pilot testing will precede full -scale groundwater treatment. o IR Site 28 (Todd Shipyard): Metals contamination in soil and groundwater at this site threatens organisms in Oakland Inner Harbor. Contaminated soil will be excavated and disposed offsite. Groundwater will be treated to immobilize dissolved metals. The pilot testing phase is in progress. This site is already clean enough for residential reuse, even though such reuse is not planned. o OU -1 Sites • IR Site 6 (Building 41, Aircraft Intermediate Maintenance Facility): The Navy will remove an oil -water separator and treat groundwater to lower solvent contamination to drinking water standards. Although cleanup has yet to begin, once completed the site will be available for unrestricted reuse. • IR Site 7 (Navy Exchange Service Station): The Navy formerly operated an incinerator at this site, which resulted in heavy contamination of soil, primarily with metals. The Navy will excavate metals contamination, with offsite disposal, to allow unrestricted reuse. Cleanup of petroleum in soil and groundwater at this site is mostly completed. • IR Site 8 (Building 114, Pesticide Storage Area): Soil removal with offsite disposal will make this site suitable for unrestricted reuse. Relatively minor groundwater petroleum contamination is being addressed, but closure of this issue likely will not occur in FY09. • IR Site 16 (C -2 Cans Area, Shipping Container Storage): In this area, the Navy will remove oil -water separators, excavate pesticide contaminated soil in the south, and lead contaminated soil in the north. The Navy will conduct further treatment of groundwater solvent plumes —one in the south and one in the north. • Sites with remedial decisionmaking planned for FY09: o IR Site 35 (West Housing Area): This site is the bulk of EDC -5 and includes most of the historic residential areas. Much of this site likely will be reused for future residences. This site has relatively minor contamination and it will be cleaned to allow unrestricted reuse. o IR Site 1 (1943 -1956 Disposal Area): This "landfill" in the northwest corner of the former base is currently at the draft ROD stage of clean -up decisionmaking. 440 Nova Albion Way, Suite 1, San Rafael, California 94903 415.902.3123 fax 815.572.8600 Page 3 of 3 Alameda Point RAB Meeting, December 4, 2008 December 18, 2008 Highlights and Analysis The Navy has yet to respond to the ARRA's letter concerning additional investigation to evaluate whether the landfill is still present. o IR Site 2 (West Beach Landfill and Associated Wetlands): This landfill, to the south of IR Site 1, is proposed to be transferred to the Veterans' Administration. This site is the likely recipient of wastes relocated from the former IR Site 1 landfill. o IR Site 24 (Pier 1 and 2 Sediments): A small area of contamination under Wharf Road likely will be remediated by excavation and disposal offsite. Cleanup of this site is challenging due to limited access under the road built over the water. • Other sites are still in the investigation and feasibility study stages of the CERCLA process. These include most prominently OU -2A, which includes the former petroleum refinery; OU -2B, the area immediately south of Atlantic Avenue, which includes heavy solvent contamination of groundwater associated with Buildings 163 and 360; and OU- 2C, the area around Building 5, which also includes heavy solvent contamination of groundwater. The Navy has conducted several removal actions and pilot tests in these areas, but much work remains to clean up the extensive solvent contamination. • The two major petroleum sites remaining on the base are currently undergoing active remediation —one at the southern end of Western Hangar Row (CAA -C), and one near the Atlantic Avenue entrance to the former base (CAA -3). Many other petroleum sites have yet to be formally closed through the Water Board's regulatory process, but little if any further active remediation is expected to be needed. The closure of two such petroleum sites, AOC -23G and CAA -6, is needed to remove institutional controls restricting digging from PBC -1. PBC -1 recently received a FOST (Finding of Suitability to Transfer) determination as a prelude to transfer. PBC -1 is the site of the planned sports complex. Progress Pie Charts Anna -Marie Cook, the US EPA's project manager for Alameda Point, presented two pie charts (attached) that illustrate the status of environmental cleanup at the former base. • Alameda Point Designated Reuse: This chart shows the acreages for restricted and unrestricted reuse for the portions of the base that have already had clean -up decisions made for them. Of the 845 acres with reuse already decided, only 100 acres have reuse restrictions. Whenever possible, Alameda Point is being cleaned for unrestricted reuse. • Alameda Point Investigation and Cleanup: This chart shows the amount of land at Alameda Point in each stage of the CERCLA process. The acreage of the segments in the left half of this chart approximately equals the total acreage on the first chart. These segments are areas for which clean- decisions have been made, determining suitability for unrestricted reuse. The large yellow segment, labeled Site Investigations, is primarily composed of the runways parcels proposed to be transferred to the Veterans' Administration. 440 Nova Albion Way, Suite 1, San Rafael, California 94903 415.902.3123 fax 815.572.8600 esnaj 13043I4s9y Jo; pales • 0 73 C c CD CO CD a) a) — o • cca ID. 73 • 3 0 0 L. 0 • CD fa CO 73 ,..,. c o cn 0 0 NMI 800Z -legal iv .gs. CI CO 0 0 0) 0) 0 0 -61 Fr; to cn (1) co c2. 01 a) co -0 0 (7) 9. 0 = t,MKIMMEM r÷ "rizxx-o-nzu) oo 0030 a) 7-7 w>mo---c;r0g)) 3 -5 a a) Ho 0 a) =um = taZ —0 CD CO X 22 c) Cp 5(6* a) 0 o) c•-• < a 0 5 ) co 0 = ,...,- 0 —. wan 0-) 15) o " m 0) CL cn a 0 0 ZA- FD 113 0 = C T.5 r -1 _. cn 4=.• 6 co CO N., co 0 co cl) ii; co o co a cn 0 w