Loading...
1997-08-06 ARRA Minutes UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, August 6, 1997 The meeting convened at 5:36 p.m. with Chair Appezzato presiding. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Ralph Appezzato, Mayor, City of Alameda Roberta Brooks, alternate to Vice-Chair Sandré Swanson, District Director, 9th Congressional District (arrived at 5:42 p.m.) Albert DeWitt, Councilmember, City of Alameda Barbara Kerr, Councilmember, City of Alameda Tony Daysog, Councilmember, City of Alameda (arrived at 5:50 p.m.) James Sweeney, alternate to Karin Lucas, Councilmember, City of Alameda David Brown, alternate to Wilma Chan, Alameda County Board of Supervisors, District 3 (arrived at 6:24 p.m.) Jay Leonhardy, alternate to Elihu Harris, Mayor, City of Oakland (left at 7:38 p.m.) Kathleen Ornelas, alternate to Ellen Corbett, Mayor, City of San Leandro Ex-officio: Diane Lichtenstein, alternate to Lee Perez, Ex-officio, BRAG Ardella Dailey, Ex-officio, Alameda Unified School District Absent: None CONSENT CALENDAR None. ACTION ITEMS Chair Appezzato announced two changes to the agenda: (1) item #3-A was being pulled at the request of Member Kerr, who had removed her name from consideration as a member of the RFP committee for West Housing; and, (2) item 4-C would be called first in consideration for the consultant’s time. 3-A. Recommendation that a member or members of the ARRA governing body be included on the selection panel for a property manager for all or a portion of Alameda Point West Housing. Pulled. 4-C. Presentation by D. Paul Tuttle on public trust appraisal results. Mr. Tuttle explained that the four steps in the appraisal process were to (1) determine property value; (2) identify the trade parcels; (3) negotiate the trade; and, (4) finalize the land swap. Mr. Tuttle informed the ARRA that the appraisal process was scheduled for completion the first week of September with the final report due the end of September. Speaker: Arthur Feinstein, Executive Director of the Golden Gate Audubon Society, urged the ARRA to look at the whole package at once rather than parcel by parcel. Mr. Tuttle explained that the approach was not piecemeal but was designed with a holistic set of parameters. 3-A _recycled paper 1G:\CITYCLRK\MINUTES\ARRA MINUTES 1994-2010\1997\1997-08-06 ARRA MINUTES. 3-B. Discussion of the July 28, 1997 restricted-use airfield workshop with any follow-up direction to staff; final action to be deferred to a future meeting (no staff report). Executive Director Miller explained that in order to prepare a report that will reflect the true economic picture for an airfield, direction from the board is needed, as the scenarios range from maximum use of 10-20 flights a day (option A) down to just air shows and fly-ins during the off- Tern nesting season. To continue the process, the next steps would be to issue an RFP, find an operator to operate the field under specific parameters as outlined by Fish & Wildlife and the ARRA governing body, and then—if option A is chosen—to get letters of intent from firms interested in leasing the hangars. With that information, an economic profile could be compiled that would accurately reflect costs and revenues. Due to the staff work and expense involved (OEA would not fund an RFP, it would have to be City money), it would be helpful to have a sense of the governing body’s thinking. Because the final decision will be land-use related, it will require a “super- majority,” or a minimum of three votes of the City Council members on the governing body in order to pass. Therefore, if there are already three City Council members who are not interested in entertaining the idea of a limited-use airfield, staff will not proceed with this costly and time- consuming process. If ARRA members need more information in order to make their decision, then staff would proceed. Ms. Miller added that Joe Davis, (the only party to date to make a formal submission to operate the airfield) has offered to conduct a 2–3 month demonstration period during which he would fly in the types of aircraft being considered within the proposed time frame (conditions to be set by ARRA and Fish & Wildlife) to assess the noise impacts. This would include noise monitoring at strategic impacted areas. Executive Director Miller wrapped up with a request to “take the pulse of the board” on whether to pursue or not pursue. Chair Appezzato concurred, adding that there would be an emphasis on the five City Council members in light of the “super-majority” nature of any final decision. Chair Appezzato stated that he would like the information gathering process to go forward in light of his questions on the economic feasibility of an airfield, whether or not other uses of the hangars/specialized buildings would generate equal revenue, and whether it would have community support. His preference would be for a less intense use of the airfield. Member Daysog stated that while he felt that three years ago the City decided against a full-service airport and they should stand by that decision, he was interested in studying the least level of activity, using the airfield for educational, cultural, and historical events such as air shows if they pass the EIR. Member Kerr felt there was not enough information to make a decision and more dialogue with Fish & Wildlife was necessary as it seems they want to control the whole base. The airfield is a huge capital asset and she instinctively feels that the hangars would bring in more with the runways operational. She added that not everyone at Ballena Bay feels that bringing the airfield back will cause more noise and that after the field was shut down, the first winter storm resulted in a reverse pattern from SFO that resulted in much worse noise. Alternate Sweeney stated that it was not an easy “yes or no.” The West End and BFI are “reeling” under an increased noise level from the Oakland Airport, which is in the process of expanding. This leads to concern over the “cumulative” effect of operating the airfield. BTC (Base Transition _recycled paper 2G:\CITYCLRK\MINUTES\ARRA MINUTES 1994-2010\1997\1997-08-06 ARRA MINUTES. Coordinator) Norma Bishop stated that ARRA, working with Fish & Wildlife, would impose its own restrictions to define the use intensity, noise levels, and traffic patterns. She added that the demonstration project proposed by Mr. Davis would provide part of the data necessary to identify objectives. Alternate Sweeney stated that very good noise evaluations were extremely important as NAS is flanked by family neighborhoods. He stressed that it is very important to know what the risks are from air shows—both safety and noise—and questioned the profitability of an airfield without having air shows. He also questioned the ability to close the airfield in the future without lawsuits. The base should be developed to its “highest and best use” and it does not specify an airfield. Member Daysog stated that he needed more information to make a judgement and there should be compatibility with the vision of both businesses close by and the vision for the area. Alternate Leonhardy stated that more information is needed to see whether an airfield is worth pursuing. Parameters must be set that define what the community is willing to live with. That information is necessary in order to put out an RFP and to give prospective tenants the information they need to assess whether or not it meets their needs. Alternate Ornelas asked if it wasn’t premature to debate without Fish & Wildlife setting its restrictions. Executive Director Miller stated that Fish & Wildlife has agreed to work with the community on desired uses and it is up to the ARRA to let Fish & Wildlife know what we desire. Alternate Brooks stated her position that a demonstration project would be the cheapest and most effective way to proceed. Member Kerr agreed that a trial was an appropriate and effective way to test the airfield concept. Alternate Brooks added that a concern was what the runways will look like if they are not maintained. Chair Appezzato asked if Executive Director Miller felt she had enough information and she answered affirmatively. Speakers: Charles Palin stated that the two air shows pointed out where there were crowd fatalities were in Europe where they allow stunts over the crowds and perpendicular to the runways; in the U.S. there are regulations to limit danger to crowds. Mr. McCoy, an Alameda resident, cited an article in the Journal and the Tribune about airfields being bad for neighborhoods. His house in the West End had an active offer that was canceled right before it was presented to him because of this article and property values might be lowered by 20 percent if the airfield is activated. Lou Gloyne, 11-year resident of Alameda and volunteer with the Confederate Air Force, stated they are ready, willing, and able to bring the figures on safety, attendance, etc. and work on safety issues. Kurt Bohan commented that the article referenced by Mr. Palin used scare/terrorist tactics instead of facts. Arthur Feinstein, Golden Gate Audubon Society (GGAS), stated that the GGAS opposes operation of a limited use airfield because it is inevitable that Least Terns will be injured and killed and outside their breeding season, water birds and shorebirds roost on the runway and will be injured. Member Kerr requested staff to provide the board with any available documentation on what effect the Navy’s sweeping of runways had on the birds. _recycled paper 3G:\CITYCLRK\MINUTES\ARRA MINUTES 1994-2010\1997\1997-08-06 ARRA MINUTES. Barbara Tulaya, Alameda resident, encouraged the board to pursue other uses for the hangars as lucrative as an airfield and suggested a workshop similar to the limited-use airfield be held for others to present alternative uses for the hangars. Bill Tuohy, EBCRC, stated he has acted as the main administrative conduit for all airfield research and studies to date and is in constant contact with OEA (Office of Economic Adjustment) who fund the base reuse effort. He further stated that “OEA is not inclined to fund an endless parade of studies.” This last airfield study and the facilitator for the workshop are the end of the funding for this effort as they feel it is time for the ARRA to make some decisions. Second, a position must be formulated in order to negotiate with respect to tenants. Bill Smith, an Emeryville citizen, stated that the hangars and other buildings might be used to attract new industries and stated that flying jeeps, which cost a million dollars each, can be used along with the airfield, antiques, and the Hornet to attract tourism. Wayne Wilkinson, an airfield proponent, made four points: (1) the letter signed by seven wildlife biologists states that “the maintained airfield provides little forage for predators” and that any change to the configuration of the airfield may irrevocably affect the success of the Least Tern; (2) timing and revenue–no permits are required if there is no substantial change in the usage of the hangars; (3) if fire suppression systems have been certified within the last five years and water pressure is adequate, no permits are required so revenue starts immediately; and, (4) on April 18 & 19, WWII bombers were flown in and people came out in big numbers for clean, upscale activities. Richard Neveln, a concerned citizen, suggested that staff contact Oshkosh and other communities that have hosted air shows for information on their profitability, safety, numbers, etc. ORAL REPORTS 4-D. Oral report from the BRAG updating the ARRA on current activities. Alternate Diane Lichtenstein encouraged everyone to attend the Town Meeting to be held on September 25 at 7:00 p.m. at the cafeteria at Historic Alameda High School. She thanked the Alameda Journal for their continuing generosity to the BRAG and the community. On August 12 the Alameda Journal will feature a half-page BRAG Times and the September 5 issue will include a four- page insert in the Alameda Journal to identify and summarize current base reuse issues in base reuse in advance of the September 25 Town Meeting. On September 7, the BRAG will participate for the fourth year in the “Victoria in the Park” event with a booth and information. Mrs. Lichtenstein stated that the BRAG is interested in developing an interim reuse strategy, working out a marketing plan to maximize income. At its last meeting, BRAG had recommended that Dennis Taylor be appointed as Vice Chair of the Economic Development Committee and that recommendation should appear on the next ARRA agenda. 4-E. Written report from the Executive Director. Executive Director Miller reminded the group that the following Tuesday, August 12 at 7:00 p.m. in the cafeteria at Historic Alameda High School, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is holding their first open house and public meeting on a proposed management plan (which has not been completed by F&W). Four strong proposals have been received in response to the RFP for West Housing. Final interviews and a recommendation will be made to the ARRA at the September meeting. At the NAID conference, ARRA was presented with a “Best of Show” award for its marketing brochure. ARRA staff will be closed on August 8 and August 11 for the move from Building 90 to Building 1; the phone number will remain the same. 4-F. Oral report from the Executive Director (non-discussion items). _recycled paper 4G:\CITYCLRK\MINUTES\ARRA MINUTES 1994-2010\1997\1997-08-06 ARRA MINUTES. Chair Appezzato stated that the visit by the Secretary of Defense and Assistant Secretary of the Navy went very well. He read the letter from the Secretary of Defense expressing his thanks for the roundtable and tour of new businesses, stating that he was “deeply impressed with the can-do attitude of business and community leaders involved in the project” and refers to Alameda as “the Crown Jewel of my case for further cuts in defense infrastructure” and closing with a pledge to “working with you to insure the task at Alameda and Oakland come to a successful closure.” Executive Director Miller introduced Tinina Takemoto, the new receptionist for the joint City caretaker/ARRA offices in Building 1 and Assistant ARRA Secretary and announced that next month the ARRA will meet in the new City Council Chambers. Norma Bishop stated that the Navy sent a letter to the Restoration Advisory Board that outlines a working resolution to the two-year dispute between the Navy and the California EPA on the screening methodology to determine which parcels are contaminate. The Navy will dual-track screening of the parcels, using the Navy’s methodology concurrent with the application of risk assessment protocols defined by USEPA Region 9 and California DTSC. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) Steven Starr, Western Aerospace Museum, asked the board to factor in the educational and historical value of the airfield when making their final decision. Barbara Baack, Naval Air Alameda Museum, assured the ARRA that in her years as Public Affairs Officer for the Naval Aviation Depot, she was amazed at how compatible the use of the airfield and the birds were. The facts do not support any harm to the birds by the aircraft nor do they indicate plummeting real estate values from the Navy operating the airfield. Kurt Bohan, airfield proponent, stated that operating an airfield will provide jobs for skilled, displaced workers, that aviation repair is necessary to the community, and that ARRA should tell the Navy not to take the Hush House muffler building needed for the quiet repair of planes. Bill Smith, Emeryville resident, discussed the economics of base reuse, multimillion dollar machines at the base, and needed legislation. Doug deHaan, BRAG member, thanked the ARRA for its effort and discussed the RAB’s efforts for environmental remediation. The ARRA’s quick action in sending out letters to the Navy helped in reaching the excellent agreement between the Navy and California EPA to resolve the dispute in screening methodology differences. He cautioned the board that there is legislation going forward at the state level requesting that the state take the lead and the ARRA should remain aware of this ongoing situation. COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNING BODY None. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by Chair Appezzato at 7:59 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Margaret E. Ensley ARRA Secretary _recycled paper 5G:\CITYCLRK\MINUTES\ARRA MINUTES 1994-2010\1997\1997-08-06 ARRA MINUTES.