2010-11-03 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 - ARRA
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
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 October 6, 2010.
3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
3 -A. Consider Request from Alameda Point Collaborative to Support their Community
Planning Efforts by Reimbursing Unpaid SunCal Consultant Expenses and
Collateralizing a $50,000 Loan for Relocation Planning Studies Should Funds from
Private Development Be Unavailable within 36 Months.
4. ORAL REPORTS
4 -A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)
representative
- Highlights of October 7 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.)
6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS
6 -A. Presentation on Request for Qualifications for a Resource Team for
Redevelopment of Alameda Point.
6 -B. Alameda Point Community Forums Reminder.
7. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
ARRA Agenda- November 3, 2010 Page 2
8. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
9. 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
747 -4800 at least 72 hours before the meeting to request an interpreter.
• Accessible seating for persons with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs) is available.
• Minutes of the meeting are available in enlarged print.
• Audio tapes of the meeting are available for review at the ARRA offices upon request.
UNAPPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
The meeting convened at 7:10 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding.
1. ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Beverly Johnson
Boardmember Lena Tam
Boardmember Frank Matarrese
Boardmember Marie Gilmore
Vice Chair Doug deHaan
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
2-A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 1, 2010.
2-B. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Jim Bustos Plumbing, Inc., Building
612, at Alameda Point.
2-C. Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Amendment to an Agreement with Russell
Resources for Environmental Consulting Services for Alameda Point Extending the Term
for 12 Months and Adding $140,000 to the Budget.
2-D. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for NRC Environmental Services, Inc.
Building 616 and Yard D-13, at Alameda Point.
Vice Chair deHaan moved for approval of the Consent Calendar. Member Tam seconded
the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5
3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
None.
4. ORAL REPORTS
4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative
- Highlights of September 2 Alameda Point RAB Meeting.
Member Matarrese was not able to attend the Sept. 2 meeting but received materials regarding
remediation activity in progress with a new technology, and a brief report on the University of
Florida study of the remediation technique.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
There were no speakers.
6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS
6-A. Presentation on "Going Forward" Community Forums for Alameda Point
Agenda Item #2-A
ARRA
11-3-2010
The Planning Services Manager gave an oral presentation on the schedule of the Alameda
Point Community Forums, an initial eight month public outreach effort of the first phase of
planning, which would end in June 2011 and restart the environmental review process. The
Planning Services Manager explained that while the City of Alameda is doing a CEQA
document EIR, the Navy will be doing a NEPA document. The Navy process won't start until
there is a project description or general description of the City's plan. The goal is eight months.
The eight -month schedule starts with a series of community outreach efforts, including
community workshops and Internet outreach. The tentative schedule of the first three meetings
is: November 9 at the Grand Pavilion, November 18 at Mastick, and December 8 in west
Alameda. These workshops and key components of each meeting will be consistent from
meeting to meeting.
The Planning Services Manager summarized the six key areas as noted in the staff report: 1)
Community Facilities, 2) Land Use Mix, 3) Streets, Parks, and Open Space, 4) Transportation
Access, 5) Architectural Character and Building Types, and 6) Historic Character and Adaptive
Reuse.
There are plans for a Tenant Forum in the spring focused on economic development strategy, a
Developer and Business Forum, and discussions with each of the Boards and Commissions. A
summary will be presented to the ARRA Board in March 2011, and a project description in June
2011.
Member Gilmore requested an overview of where Alameda and the Bay Area stand in the
commercial and industrial real estate market. The Interim City Manager discussed the
application of a citywide real estate management policy which will include the information
Member Gilmore requested about comparable leases.
Member Tam requested an evaluation of internal competition, i.e., Marina Village vs. Alameda
Point.
Member Matarrese discussed the commercialization and industrialization approach to
development at Alameda Point, stating that the markets already out there are not the typical
suburban business park, not the type of businesses that would go into Marina Village, i.e., NRC
and supporting industries, Spirits Alley, the maritime industry. Member Matarrese also
discussed the jobs housing, and that job creation should drive it, stating that Alameda Point will
never be the rest of Alameda and probably shouldn't be, because it is industrial. Alameda Point
should reflect what it was and people will look at it in a different way.
Vice Chair deHaan concurred with Member Matarrese, stating that Alameda Point has a
different architectural design and that the development should maximize the unique venue out
there, and that folks should not get caught up in that it has to look like the rest of Alameda.
Member Gilmore recommended evaluating and targeting the types of businesses and industries
that would value the asset of Alameda's own electric utility.
Member Tam inquired a status report on communications with the Navy and if they were aware
of the "Going Forward" plan, to which the Deputy City Manager — Development Services
responded in the affirmative, stating that staff met with the Navy last week. The Navy produced
conveyance objectives and stated that they want to help facilitate conveyance and interim
economic development. The Interim City Manager stated that she will meet with the Navy's top
management every 90 days for a status update.
Member Tam inquired if there was opportunity for Alameda to get funding for the EIR process.
The Deputy City Manager — Development Services responded in the affirmative, stating that
staff has discussed funding possibilities with the Navy. There are some technical issues as the
Navy has a contract for their NEPA process, and the City has a CEQA contract, but it may be
possible to combine the processes so that it is cost efficient.
Member Tam inquired if there are synergies between the sister federal agencies (Lawrence
Berkeley Lab is with the Dept. of Energy, and the Veterans Administration has close ties with
Navy). The Deputy City Manager — Development Services explained that, regarding the VA, the
Navy understands that there has to be coordination to the extent that City staff can work with
the VA to leverage their infrastructure and develop that relationship, not just in terms of
regulatory process, but also with actual physical improvements and infrastructure. With regards
to the Lawrence Berkeley Lab's requests for proposals for land to host their second campus, the
City is prepared to submit a proposal in coordination with the Navy.
The Interim City Manager added that the City is prepared to respond to the Lawrence Berkeley
Lab RFP process with a very competitive proposal. There are opportunities to have strategic
alliances as a result of the DOE and the Navy 'that makes Alameda Point uniquely competitive.
The Deputy City Manager — Development Services stated that staff will be providing the Board
with updates at the monthly ARRA meetings.
Vice Chair deHaan inquired if the Navy is willing to do phased conveyance. The Deputy City
Manager — Development Services explained that the Navy is exploring the boundaries, the pros
and cons of phased conveyance, and that the Navy is open and listening to ideas.
There was discussion from the Board about the management of the utilities at Alameda Point
and whether there was a formal decision made about it. The Assistant General Counsel —
ARRA stated that there has never been a plan that the City would operate any of the utilities at
Alameda Point other than the electric utility.
Member Matarrese requested that the facts of this matter be brought back to the Board.
7. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
None.
8. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
Member Matarrese attended the liaison committee meeting between AC Transit and the City
and discussed the series of cuts, including reduction of services for Lines 0, Line 51A, and Line
21, and the discontinuation of Line 851. He was most concerned about Line 31 (the only bus
service to the Alameda Point Collaborative and to west of Main St) which will be discontinued on
weekends. Member Matarrese requested that the City insist that Line 31 be continued on
weekends.
There was discussion by the Board of SunCal's involvement in the political arena.
Boardmembers expressed their dissatisfaction and displeasure, denouncing SunCal's efforts,
stating that the personal attacks on staff members and elected officials to influence any political
debate or election should not be tolerated.
9. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 8:09 p.m. by Chair Johnson.
Respectfully submitted,
Irma Glidden
ARRA Secretary
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
From: Ann Marie Gallant
Interim Executive Director
Date: November 3, 2010
Re: Consider Request from Alameda Point Collaborative to Support their
Community Planning Efforts by Reimbursing Unpaid Sun Cal Consultant
Expenses and Collateralizing a $50,000 Loan for Relocation Planning
Studies Should Funds from Private Development Be Unavailable within
36 Months
BACKGROUND
In July 2007, the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) entered into an
Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) with the developer, Sun Cal Companies
(Sun Cal), to entitle and facilitate conveyance and development of Alameda Point. In
2009, Sun Cal placed the Alameda Point Specific Plan and other documents regarding
the redevelopment of Alameda Point on the ballot (Sun Cal Initiative). In February
2010, voters rejected the Sun Cal Initiative; in July 2010, the ENA with Sun Cal expired.
The ARRA maintains long-term legally binding agreements (LBAs) at Alameda Point for
the reuse of 200 units of former Navy housing with three supportive housing providers
that serve the needs of the homeless, women and children in need, and veterans
(Housing Providers). These Housing Providers include the Alameda Point Collaborative
(APC), Building Futures for Women and Children (Building Futures) and Operation
Dignity, respectively. As part of the ENA process, Sun Cal approached the Housing
Providers with the concept of consolidating their housing and related facilities, which
currently occupy approximately 30 acres, onto a smaller footprint of approximately 10
acres within Alameda Point. The Sun Cal Initiative explicitly proposed the consolidation
of the Housing Providers within a smaller footprint on page 3-9 of the Alameda Point
Specific Plan.
The Housing Providers agreed there were mutual benefits to the potential consolidation
of their facilities, such as:
• The Housing Providers would gain new housing that would better serve the
needs of the community it serves, including a project designed to integrate
housing with supportive services and job training facilities;
Agenda Item #3-A
ARRA
11-3-2010
Honorable Chair and November 3, 2010
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 2 of 3
• The Housing Providers would benefit from newly constructed housing, compared
to the existing adaptive reuse of former Navy housing, which would be more
energy efficient, cost effective and blend with the surrounding community more
appropriately; and
• Potential developers would gain a more cohesive and efficient urban design on
the Housing Providers' existing footprint, as well as a financial benefit by
obtaining control of additional land on which to build, thus resulting in more
effective and efficient phasing of new infrastructure and development.
As a result, the Housing Providers agreed to conduct a community planning study to
review and evaluate the potential for relocation and consolidation, provided SunCal fund
this effort. Although the Housing Providers requested funds in advance for the study,
SunCal agreed to pay for the study only on a reimbursement basis.
The Housing Providers retained Bruce Fukuji Associates (BFA) to perform the study,
and submitted two BFA invoices for work conducted during the ENA process to SunCal
for payment. The first BFA invoice of $11,063 was paid; the second BFA invoice for
$16,162 was submitted to SunCal and has not yet been paid, despite repeated requests
by the Housing Providers for reimbursement.
As a result of SunCal's failure to meet its obligations with respect to this study, and
given the importance of this community planning process, the Executive Director of APC
submitted a letter to staff on October 18, 2010 requesting ARRA assistance to: (1)
reimburse the Housing Providers for the $16,162 BFA invoice; and (2) collateralize a
$50,000 predevelopment loan obtained by the Housing Providers from a nonprofit
organization, Corporation for Supportive Housing, to fund the completion of the Housing
Providers' community planning process should funds from a private residential
development not be available to repay the loan within 36 months (Exhibit 1).
DISCUSSION
As noted above, there are significant mutual benefits to the Housing Providers, the
ARRA, and future potential developers in exploring the consolidation of the Housing
Providers onto a smaller footprint within Alameda Point. The completion of this
community planning process, conducted in concert with the ARRA, will propose a
conceptual site plan for the potential consolidation, including project cost estimates;
identify financial, legal and planning issues that will need to be addressed in order to
implement the proposal; and develop a financing plan for design and construction,
including the potential for multiple federal, state, and regional grants. Additionally, the
findings from this planning effort are time - sensitive and could affect the vision and
project description for Alameda Point anticipated by June 2011.
Honorable Chair and November 3, 2010
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 3 of 3
As a result, staff recommends that the ARRA grant the Housing Providers' request by:
1) approving allocation of funds to the Housing Providers for the reimbursement of
BFA's invoice of $16,162 due to Sun Cal's non-performance; and
2) approving collateralization of the $50,000 predevelopment loan should private
development funds not be available within 36 months through a letter agreement
to be negotiated by the Interim City Manager.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Staff recommends funding Housing Providers' BFA invoice of $16,162 and repayment
of the $50,000 loan from APIP Fund 206 Project Area. The terms and conditions of the
loan repayment will be negotiated by the Interim City Manager.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Approve allocation of funds to Housing Providers for the reimbursement of BFA's
invoice of $16,162 due to Sun Cal's non-performance; and
2) Approve collateralization of a $50,000 loan obtained by the Housing Providers for
relocation planning studies should private development funds be unavailable
within 36 months through a letter agreement to be negotiated by the Interim City
Manager.
tfully submitted,
Jen
Deputy
tt
ity Manager
Fred Marsh
Controller
JO:di
Exhibits:
1. Letter to Staff from Alameda Point Collaborative
October 18, 2010
Jennifer Ott
Deputy City Manager.
City of Alameda
2263 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda CA 94501
Alameda
Point ■
Collaborative
•
ED
OCT 2 5 2010
CITY OF ALAMEDA
4TV MANAGER'S OPPir`
Re: Relief from Surcal.Companies' Failure to Perform and Support of Community Planning Process
for Alameda Point Collaborative
Dear Ms. Ott:
[am writing to request your assistance with to two matters: 1.) the failure of Suncal Companies
(SunCal) to meet its obligations to the Alameda Point Collaborative (APC) community; and 2) the
support of APC's interest in creating a vision for the future of the APC community at Alameda Point,
in concert with the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment (ARRA).
1) Failure of %meal to Meet its Obligations to AP€
Shortly after the ARRA selected Suncal as the potential Master Developer for Alameda Point, they
approached APC with an offer to relocate and rebuild our community in exchange for turning over
control of portions of /WC-controlled land to them. The are various advantages of conducting such a
swap:
• APC would gain new housing that would better serve the needs of the primarily
disabled homeless community it serves, including a project designed to integrate
housing with supportive services and job training facilities;
APC would benefit front newly constructed housing, compared to the existing adaptive
reuse of former Navy housing, that would be more energy efficient, cost effective and
would blend in with the surrounding community more appropriately; and
The Master Developer would gain a more cohesive and efficient urban design on APC's
existing footprint and a financial benefit by Obtaining control over additional land to
build on, resulting in=the -more effective and efficient phasing of new infrastnicture and
development
In the interest of supporting efforts to advance efforts to redevelopment Alameda Point, APC agreed to
consider the offer, arid requested funds from Suncai to support a thorough review and analysis. Suncai
agreed to retain a community planning firm of AFC's-choice to complete a planning process that
would result in a conceptual plan for relocating housing and job training services on a smaller footprint
within Alameda Point.
APC and the other supportive housing providers (Building Futures for Women and Children and
Operation Dignity) selected.the firm of Bruce Fukuji--and Associates (BFA), and began a series of
workshops and meetings -to engage the APC community in planning a consolidation and
reconfiguration.
677 West Ranger Avenue, Alameda, California 94501
510-898-7800 PHONE 510-898-7858 FAX www.apcollaborative.org
Rather than attempting to build trust with the APC community bv providing, all of the funds for
this process upfront, Suncal insisted on paying on a reimbursement basis. A first invoice from
BFA for $11,063 was reimbursed by Suncal. A second invoice from BIA of $16,162, reflecting
additional work completed on advancing the planning process was submitted to Suncal on June
22nd, but has not yet been paid. It is important to note that all work completed by BFA was
performed while the ENA was still in effect
Despite repeated communications on APC's part, Suncal has still not committed to paying the
outstanding invoice. APC believes that this constitutes a breach of contract, and an even more
important breach of trust on their part. Because this work was carried out as part of the larger
Alameda Point planning process, and because Suncal made specific references to it in their
submissions to the ARRA as part of their work under the ENA.. we are requesting that the ARRA
assist us with the reimbursement of the BFA contract, possibly with funds deposited by Suncal as
part of the ENA process.
2) Support Efforts to Plan for the APC Community's Future at Alameda Point
In the course of the community planning work completed to date, it has become clear that there
would be significant mutual benefits for both the APC con-ununity, the ARRA, and any potential
developers to rebuilding and re-lbcating the APC community within a consolidated footprint at
Alameda Point. It has also become apparent thatrnorc planning needs to occur among the
members of the APC 'community and the ARRA. To further this process, APC has secured a
Project Implementation Loan in the amount of $50,000 from the Corporation for Supportive
Housing. Normally these types of loans are paid hack after 3 years with funds from permanent
financing or project development fees that become available in the course of implementing the
project. We are committed 'to taking on this loan in order to involve OUT community in a plan for
Alameda Point, but would:request that the ARRA consider committing to repaying the loan
should no development opportunity arise within the three year time frame for the loan.
Thank you for consideration of our requests, please do not hesitate to contact me at (510)89
7849 or dbiggs@apcollaborative.org if you need any further information.
Sincerely,
ug Biggs
Executive, Director
Russell Resources, Inc.
environmental management
Alameda Point RAB Meeting on October 7, 2010
Highlights and Analysis
RAB members present: Dale Smith (Community Co- chair), George Humphreys, Joan Konrad,
James Leach, Jean Sweeney, Jim Sweeney, and Michael John Torrey.
Remediation and other field work in progress:
o At IR Site 27, just north of Pier 1, a third phase of active groundwater treatment will
occur in May 2011.
o The air sparge /vapor extraction system to treat groundwater contaminated with benzene
and naphthalene at Alameda Point OU -5 and FISCA IR Site 2 is operating.
o Most of the petroleum- contaminated groundwater treatment operation near the Atlantic
Avenue entrance has been completed. However, further groundwater treatment is being
conducted in a small area near the intersection of Atlantic Avenue and Orion Street where
higher petroleum levels persist. The Navy has removed remaining rubble from one of the
five 100,000 - gallon aviation gas tanks formerly located in the landscaped oval dividing
Atlantic Avenue near the base's east entrance. Originally, the five tanks had been
demolished in place and only partially hauled off site. The tank at which further work
was just completed had residual petroleum contamination associated with it.
o During the week of October 18` , the Navy began construction of land- support facilities
on the tarmac north of the Seaplane Lagoon for the upcoming dredging activities in the
Lagoon's northeast and northwest corners. The dredging is scheduled to occur between
January 4 and March 15, 2011.
o Additional demolition of Building 459 (the former gas station at the comer of West
Tower Avenue and Main Street) is planned for October and November to allow
excavation of metals contaminated soil.
o Building 346, a Quonset hut near the northwest comer of Building 5, has been
demolished, and radiological screening is being conducted at the site as part of the
basewide radiological surveying project. Radiological screening at other buildings around
Alameda Point also is being conducted as part of the project to rule out potential
radiological residues.
o A Navy/EPA/University of Florida field research study is in progress at Plume 4 -1,
immediately north of Building 360 near Alameda Point's east entrance. The research
focuses on better characterizing the solvent contamination in groundwater prior to
remedy selection and design. This research should improve not only the Navy's cleanup
of OU -2B groundwater, but similar contamination elsewhere.
o In situ bioremediation injections are being conducted at IR Site 26 (see fuller discussion
below).
IR Site 2 (West Beach Landfill and Wetlands) Data Gaps
In August 2010, the BCT approved the ROD for IR Site 2. This site in the southwest comer of
Alameda Point is part of the Navy's planned transfer to the Veterans' Administration. The
Agenda Item #4 -A
RRI, 440 Nova Albion Way, Suite 1, San Rafael, California 94903 415.902.3123 fax 815.572.8600
ARRA
11 -3 -2010
Page 2 of 2 Alameda Point RA6 Meeting, October 7, 2010
November 3, 2010 Highlights and Analysis
remedy consists principally of isolating the wastes and contaminated soil beneath a multilayer
soil cover. A monitoring well network will verify that objectionable groundwater contamination
does not migrate from the site in the future. At the RAB meeting, the Navy explained the data
gaps investigation it will conduct to gather information about the boundaries of the soil
contamination /waste and about geotechnical conditions in order properly to design the soil cover.
The work will involve trenching until waste is observed. RAB members expressed concern about
whether the trenching would extend deep enough to rule out the presence of waste, whether
seismic slope failures would contaminate Bay water, and whether portions of the site that were
built from Seaplane Lagoon dredge spoils had been appropriately characterized, especially for
radiological contamination and tributyltin, an antifouling agent used on hulls.
IR Site 26 (Western Hangars) Update
A localized area of groundwater contamination (VOCs or solvents) is present at the southeast
corner of Building 20, the northernmost western hangar. The Navy has completed several
episodes of in situ chemical destruction (ISCO) of the contamination and is transitioning, as
provided in the ROD, to another treatment technology —in situ bioremediation —to reduce VOC
concentrations further. Briefly, the transition involves providing an underground environment
that fosters growth of microbes that will further degrade the residual VOCs. This is done by
injecting chemicals, the bulk of which is vegetable oil to provide a food source for the microbes
(the microbes do not use the VOCs as a food; rather these contaminants are broken down
incidental to the microbes' normal metabolic activities). Once the food source is expected to last
until the VOC contamination is reduced to target clean -up levels, at which time the microbial
population will drop to trace levels.
RR!, 440 Nova Albion Way, Suite 1, San Rafael, California 94903 415.902.3123 fax 815.572.8600
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
From: Ann Marie Gallant
Interim Executive Director
Date: November 3, 2010
Re: Presentation on Request for Qualifications for a Resource Team for
Redevelopment of Alameda Point
BACKGROUND
On September 1, 2010 the Interim City Manager presented to the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) strategic planning and assessment process for "going
forward" with the redevelopment of Alameda Point. One component of the going -
forward strategy included the establishment of a consultant resource team (Resource
Team). This staff report provides a more detailed summary of the Request for
Qualification (RFQ) that staff will issue within the next few weeks to assemble a high -
quality Resource Team for assisting staff: (1) in the development of a vision and project
description for Alameda Point sufficient to commence the environmental review process
by June 2011, and (2) in the preparation of other planning and entitlement documents
required for the final conveyance and development of the property subsequent to June
2011.
DISCUSSION
The RFQ for a Resource Team for the redevelopment of Alameda Point will be broadly
disseminated to local, regional, and national sources in order to attract high - quality
professional consultant firms with expertise in the following areas:
• Land use planning and urban design;
• Sustainable, "green" design and infrastructure planning;
• Civil engineering;
• Transportation planning;
• Fiscal impact, land use economics and financial analysis; and
• Adaptive reuse and historic preservation
Staff will review the Statement of Qualifications (SOQs) submitted by interested
consultant firms and certify two to five firms for interviews with a panel comprised of
staff and independent experts. Consultants will be selected based upon criteria relevant
to their profession, but will generally include:
Agenda Item #6-A
ARRA
11 -3 -2010
Honorable Chair and November 3, 2010
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 2 of 3
1. Relevant experience with comparable large-scale urban infill and redevelopment
projects, with special consideration given to firms with base reuse and
redevelopment experience;
2. Educational and professional qualifications, including the demonstrated
management skills of project personnel assigned to the project team; and
3. Cost competitiveness of billing rates relative to other firms.
Staff will then select the firm with the highest score and negotiate an appropriate scope
of work, budget, and schedule for Alameda Point. The best consultants in each
aforementioned discipline will also be provided pre-qualified status and made available
to other City departments for future consultant work needed by the City. The RFQ may
also include a section that solicits qualifications from professional service firms not
required for Alameda Point, but necessary for City departments working on projects
elsewhere in the City.
Additionally, staff will be cost-effectively leveraging already funded existing or planned
consultant contracts relevant to Alameda Point and integrating them into the Alameda
Point planning process. These efforts include the citywide Urban Greening Plan
(described in greater detail in this evening's City Council agenda), which includes a
Parks Master Plan and Urban Farm and Garden Plan, including programming of
potential parks and urban farms at Alameda Point, as well as the already underway
transportation study funded by the Federal Transportation Authority evaluating ways in
which to improve connections between Alameda Point and the regional Bay Area Rapid
Transit district. The results of these studies are directly applicable to Alameda Point
and will be crucial in forming the desired vision for Alameda Point by June 2011.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The issuance of the RFQ will be prepared by staff and will not have a financial impact.
The financial impact of each consultant contract will be analyzed at the time the contract
is negotiated and executed, based upon pre-development funds available.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
The proposed going-forward strategy, including the creation of the Resource Team, will
assist the ARRA in the future entitlement and conveyance of land at Alameda Point
based on current planning documents, including the 1996 Naval Air Station Community
Reuse Plan and 2003 Alameda Point General Plan Amendment.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The preparation and issuance of an RFQ for the purpose of developing a proposed plan
for future environmental review is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15306 Information Collection.
Honorable Chair and
November 3, 2010
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Page 3 of 3
RECOMMENDATION
No action is required at this time. This report is for information only.
es ectfully submitted,
nni er Ott,
D pu y City Manager
Andrew Thomas
Planning Services Manager
JO:di
COMMUNITY FORUMS
November 9, 2010
Bay Farm Island - Grand View Pavilion
6:30 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.
300 Island Drive
November 18, 2010
Central Alameda - Mastick Senior Center
6:30 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.
1155 Santa Clara Avenue
December 8, 2010
West Alameda - The O'Club
6:30 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.
641 West Red Line Drive
Come .participate in small discussion groups
focusing on:
• Land Use Mix,
• Parks and Open Space,
• Transportation and Access,
• Architectural Character and Building Types,
• Historic Character and Adaptive Reuse; and
• Community Benefits at Alameda Point.
For more information:
www.AlamedaPoint-GoingForward.com
ct Refreshments will be provided ro,
Agenda Item #6-B
ARRA
11-3-2010
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
From: Ann Marie Gallant
Interim City Manager
Date: November 16, 2010
Re: Approve a Waiver of License Fees for Alameda Naval Air Museum
BACKGROUND
Alameda Naval Air Museum (ANAM) a tenant at Alameda Point manages a museum
and offers special events commemorating historically significant events related to
former Naval operations. On November 22, 1935, the China Clipper, a four - engine
flying boat built for Pan American Airways, was used to inaugurate the first commercial
transpacific air service from the City of Alameda to Manila in the Philippines.
DISCUSSION
ANAM is hosting an event on November 21, 2010 commemorating the inaugural flight of
the China Clipper. ANAM proposes staging many vintage vehicles using the fenced lot
adjacent to their facility near Building 41. They are seeking approval of a license fee
waiver from the ARRA for this event. ANAM will be required to provide insurance and
comply with all regulations for use of the event space at Alameda Point.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The license fee for this type of event is $1,000 per day for set -up and tear -down, and
$2,000 per day for event days. The total amount of the fee waiver is $3,000.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve a waiver of license fees for the Alameda Naval Air Museum.
Re
ully submitte
Leslie Little
Economic Development Director
LAL /NBM:dc
CC /ARRA/CIC
Agenda Item #2 -B
11 -16-10