2006-07-26 Joint CC CIC PacketCITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY - - - JULY 26, 2006 - - - 6:30 P.M.
Time: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 6:30 p.m.
Place: City Council Chambers Conference Room, City Hall, corner
of Santa Clara Avenue and Oak Street
Agenda:
1. Roll Call
2. Public Comment on Agenda Items Only
Anyone wishing to address the Council on agenda items only,
may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per item
3. Adjournment to Closed Session to consider:
3 -A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: 2900 Main Street
Negotiating parties: City of Alameda and Alameda Gateway,
Ltd.
Under negotiation: Price and terms
4. Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session, if any
5. Adjournment
Beverly Johnson, Mayor
CITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY - - - JULY 26, 2006 - - - 7:00 P.M.
Location: City Council Chambers, City Hall, corner of Santa Clara
Avenue and Oak Street
Public Participation
Anyone wishing to address the Council /Commission on agenda items
may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per agenda item when the
subject is before the Council /Commission. Please file a speaker's
slip with the Deputy City Clerk if you wish to speak.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
MINUTES
Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission
(CIC) Meetings held on July 5, 2006, and Special CIC Meetings
held on July 5, 2006 and July 14, 2006. (City Clerk)
[Community Improvement Commission]
AGENDA ITEMS
1. A. Recommendation to award Design -Build Contract in the amount
of $9,104,000 to C. Overaa & Co. for the Civic Center
Parking Garage, CIP No. 90 -19;
B. Recommendation to award Construction Contract in the amount
of $8,800,000 to C. Overaa & Co. for Rehabilitation and
Restoration of the Historic Alameda Theater;
C. Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Execution of U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Contract
for Loan Guarantee Assistance Under Section 108 of the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as Amended,
42 U.S.C. Section 5308; Execution of Brownfields Economic
Development Initiative (BEDI) Grant Agreement; and Issuance
of Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program Variable Rate Note;
and recommendation to authorize execution of Cooperation
Agreement between the City and Community Improvement
Commission; and
D. Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Summary Vacation of
a Portion of the Central Avenue Public Right -of -Way
pursuant to Chapter 4 of the Streets and Highways Codes.
(Development Services)
2. Recommendation to authorize substitution of Surety Bond
for 2003 Merged Area Bond Issue Cash Reserve Account
consistent with Bond Indenture. (Development Services)
ADJOURNMENT
Beverly Johnson, Mayor
Chair, Community Improvement
Commission
• For use in preparing the Official Record, speakers reading a
written statement are invited to submit a copy to the City Clerk
at the meeting or e -mail to: lweisige @ci.alameda.ca.us
• Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please
contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD number 522 -7538 at
least 72 hours prior to the Meeting to request an interpreter
• Equipment for the hearing impaired is available for public use.
For assistance, please contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD
number 522 -7538 either prior to, or at, the Council Meeting
• Accessible seating for persons with disabilities, including
those using wheelchairs, is available
• Minutes of the meeting available in enlarged print
• Audio Tapes of the meeting are available upon request
• Please contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD number 522 -7538
at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to request agenda
materials in an alternative format, or any other reasonable
accommodation that may be necessary to participate in and enjoy
the benefits of the meeting
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL,
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA), AND
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING
WEDNESDAY- -JULY 5, 2006- -5:30 P.M.
Mayor /Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 5:40 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers / Board Members /
Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor /Chair Johnson - 5.
Absent: None.
The Special Joint Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to
consider:
ARRA Conference with Real Property Negotiators; Property: Alameda
Naval Air Station; Negotiating parties: ARRA and Navy; Under
negotiation: Price and terms.
(06- CC) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators:
Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations:
Alameda City Employees Association, International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers, and Management and Confidential Employees
Association.
(06- CC) Conference with Property Negotiators; Property: Fruitvale
Railroad Bridge; Negotiating parties: City of Alameda and Army
Corp. of Engineers; Under negotiation: Price and terms.
* **
Mayor /Chair Johnson called a recess at 7:40 p.m. to hold the Regular
Meeting and reconvened the Special Joint Meeting at 9:56 p.m.
* **
(06- CIC) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation;
Name of case: Community Improvement Commission v. Cocores
Development Company.
(06- CC) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation;
Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section
54956.9; Number of cases: One.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Joint Meeting was
reconvened and Mayor /Chair Johnson announced that regarding Alameda
Naval Air Station, direction was given to Real Property
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
July 5, 2006
1
Negotiators; regarding Conference with Labor Negotiators, Council
received a briefing from Labor Negotiators and gave direction on
settlement parameters; regarding Fruitvale Railroad Bridge, Council
received a briefing from Real Property Negotiators and gave
direction to Negotiator; regarding Existing Litigation, the CIC
received a briefing from Leal Counsel and gave direction on
settlement parameters; and regarding Anticipated Litigation,
Council received briefing from Legal Counsel and gave direction.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor /Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Joint Meeting at 12:30 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
Secretary, Community Improvement
Commission
The Agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
July 5, 2006
2
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL,
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY- -JULY 5, 2006- -7:31 P.M.
Mayor /Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 9:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present:
MINUTES
Councilmember /Board Members /Commissioners
Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and
Mayor /Chair Johnson - 5.
Absent: None.
(06- CC /06- CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council,
Community Improvement Commission, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Meeting
held on June 20, 2006, and the Special Joint City Council, Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement
Commission Meeting held on June 20, 2006. Approved.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of
the minutes.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion,
which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.
AGENDA ITEMS
(06- CC /06- CIC) Discussion of City Attorney / /General Counsel
Legal Services and staffing options.
Mayor /Chair Johnson stated she was reluctant to add positions; the
Administrative Management Analyst's duties are a Council priority;
she does not want to increase staff, but there is a rational for
the position; freezing positions was not done strategically in the
past; expanding the number of employees is not the intended
direction even if the Council /Commission decides to fill the
position; reviewing staffing levels is a long -term process.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner deHaan stated he has
concerns about filling the position; the task should be handled by
various departments; he is still working through the process of
where the position sits; he prefers to have the position closer to
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
July 5, 2006
1
the operational side; he is concerned with the job title;
Management Analyst would be more appropriate; he realizes there is
a deficit.
Mayor /Chair Johnson stated there should be a review on whether Risk
Management should be in the City Attorney's office.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner deHaan stated there is an
immediate need; an organizational chart was requested; inquired
whether the matter could be held over for one more meeting.
The City Attorney /Legal Counsel responded in the affirmative;
stated the position is in the recommended budget; the matter could
be held over, and no action would be taken.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner deHaan stated holding the
matter over would provide an opportunity for additional review.
Mayor /Chair Johnson requested an explanation of the position's
duties and a review on how other cities handle workers'
compensation.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner deHaan concurred with
Mayor /Chair Johnson.
Vice Mayor /Board Member /Commissioner Gilmore noted the staff report
states that the position is not a General Fund position; inquired
whether the position actually would be a General Fund position
because other departments funded by the General Fund would pay for
the position, to which the City Attorney /Legal Counsel responded in
the affirmative.
The City Manager /Executive Director stated a portion comes from
other funds as well.
Mayor /Chair Johnson and Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner
Matarrese suggested continuing the matter.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner deHaan concurred with
Mayor /Chair Johnson and Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner
Matarrese with the caveat that the position not be excluded from
the budget.
Mayor /Chair Johnson stated on- going, strategic review is needed.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner Matarrese stated the
Council /Commission needs to be provided with an organization chart,
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda 2
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
July 5, 2006
an outline of other duties the position might serve, and a rational
for the position being where it is now along with some possible
alternatives when the matter returns.
(06- CC) Resolution No. 13899, "Approving and Adopting the
Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2006 -2007 and Appropriating
Certain Moneys for the Expenditures Provided in Said Fiscal Year."
Adopted;
(06- CIC) Resolution No. 06 -144, "Approving and Adopting the
Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2006 -2007 and Appropriating
Certain Moneys for the Expenditures Provided in Said Fiscal Year."
Adopted; and
ARRA Resolution No. 38, "Approving and Adopting the Operating
Budget for Fiscal Year 2006 -2007 and Appropriating Certain Moneys
for the Expenditures Provided in Said Fiscal Year." Adopted.
The City Manager /Executive Director provided a brief presentation.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner Matarrese stated the budget
was presented very clearly; he is concerned about the General Fund
revenue; requested that revenue increases or decreases above or
below projections be categorized as reliable or unreliable at the
sales tax mid -year review; stated the sales tax is still lagging
and should be watched carefully; revenue increases or decreases can
be included in the ten -year modeling and projections to evaluate
how to adjust expenditures moving forward.
Mayor /Chair Johnson inquired whether information was available on
sales tax projections.
The Finance Director responded the June quarterly report should be
received by the first of August; the Sales Tax Consultant prepares
the analogies and summary results; she would try to get the reports
sooner.
Mayor /Chair Johnson stated there is a commitment to continue with
conservative budgets; the budget increase is less than projected
growth in revenue; an Alameda Power and Telecom briefing has not
been done.
Vice Mayor /Board Member /Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether a
joint meeting has been scheduled with the Golf Commission.
The City Manager /Executive Director responded various joint
meetings would be scheduled.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda 3
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
July 5, 2006
Vice Mayor /Board Member /Commissioner Gilmore requested an
explanation for the loss in Golf revenue in Fiscal Year 1996 -1997;
stated that she is concerned with redoing the Clubhouse; money has
been made in only five of the past ten years.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner deHaan commended staff for
putting the budget together in a good, orderly manner; stated all
golf courses have had a steady down trend; coming out of
construction and into operation is an important phase for Alameda
Power and Telecom; competitiveness makes it more difficult to break
even; enterprise areas have been successful in the past; the
Greater Alameda Business Association (GABA) would like to request
funding as part of the mid -year budget review; GABA has extended
membership to Harbor Bay; the ten -year forecast is extremely
important to ensure key elements are addressed; requested that the
ten -year forecast tool come to the Council in the next month or
two; the ten -year forecast does not need to be completely refined;
suggested reviewing possible funding streams for a $20,000 to
$30,000 initial analysis of the auxiliary pumping system; stated
that he is looking forward to sidewalk and tree discussions by mid-
year review; programs should be put in the needed state of repair
if additional funding materializes; he appreciates the Police and
Fire Department's attrition concerns; he would like to have a
better understanding of attrition taking place over the next two or
three years, including forecasting.
Vice Mayor /Board Member /Commissioner Gilmore requested information
on how the City has been impacted by the Metropolitan Golf Course
in terms of playing and the banquet facility.
Mayor /Chair Johnson responded the banquet facility is very small.
Vice Mayor /Board Member /Commissioner Gilmore stated the banquet
facility is being expanded to accommodate 200 people.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner deHaan stated that San
Leandro's banquet facility is very small; the good news is that the
rainy season is over; Jim's has been fairly successful at the golf
course; Jim's serves the same menu as the restaurant on Lincoln
Avenue.
Mayor /Chair Johnson stated discussion on the proposed, new
Clubhouse should be addressed at a joint meeting; suggested that
the turf management plan be renamed the turf /field management plan.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner Daysog stated the current
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda 4
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
July 5, 2006
budget process was seamless and transparent; three components are
involved with approving the operating budget: City Council,
Community Improvement, and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority; that he is not ready to endorse shifting from
retail /office redevelopment to residential redevelopment [at the
Fleet Industrial Supply Center], which has a $6.9 million cost;
suggested that the resolutions be adopted separately.
Mayor /Chair Johnson stated the budget adoption should move forward
and the Alameda Power and Telecom briefing should be scheduled.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner Matarrese stated a follow -
up joint meeting [with the Public Utilities Board] is needed to
address unanswered, time - dependent assessment and evaluation
questions raised at the last joint meeting.
Mayor /Chair Johnson stated scheduling a joint meeting might take
longer; scheduling a briefing first would allow for better
preparation; both a briefing and joint meeting should be scheduled.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner deHaan inquired whether
quarterly reports are provided.
The City Manager /Executive Director responded that information
provided to the Public Utilities Board would be shared.
Councilmember /Board Member /Commissioner deHaan stated quarterly
reports should be the minimum; key indicators need to be reviewed.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the City Council
resolution.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
Commissioner Matarrese moved adoption of the Community Improvement
Commission resolution.
Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Chair Johnson - 4. Abstentions: Commissioner Daysog
- 1.
Board Member Daysog moved adoption of the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority resolution.
Board Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda 5
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
July 5, 2006
unanimous voice vote - 5.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor /Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Joint Meeting at 9:36 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
Secretary, Community Improvement
Commission
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority,
and Community Improvement Commission
July 5, 2006
6
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY- -JULY 5, 2006- -7:32 P.M.
Chair Johnson convened the meeting at 9:37 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present: Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Chair Johnson - 5.
Absent: None.
MINUTES
(06- ) Minutes of the Annual Community Improvement Commission
Meeting held on June 20, 2006. Approved.
Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the minutes.
Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
AGENDA ITEM
(06- ) Recommendation to authorize the Executive Director to
execute a Contract in the amount of $840,000.00 with Bellecci and
Associates for plans, specifications, and engineering for the
Tinker /Webster Extension Project (Tinker Extension Design CIP
Project No. 04 -105).
Commissioner Matarrese inquired why no other bidders are listed for
the project.
The Redevelopment Manager responded the project went out to bid in
1999 and received two or three bids; stated the Contract was
awarded to Bellecci and Associates and then was put on hold.
Commissioner Matarrese inquired why the project was not re -bid.
The Redevelopment Manager responded Bellecci and Associates has
been working on the project; stated the City entered into a $74,000
Contract to complete the project report for CalTrans.
Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether restarting with another
firm would not be cost - effective.
The Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative; stated
Bellecci and Associates developed all the base drawings.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Meeting 1
July 5, 2006
Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the City owns the base
drawings, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the
affirmative.
Chair Johnson inquired whether 1999 figures were being used, to
which the Redevelopment Manager responded the figures were revised.
Commissioner Daysog inquired whether the $840,000 figure was
submitted in 1999.
The Redevelopment Manager responded the figure was close to
$840,000; Public Works decided to complete only 65% or 75% of the
design drawings because of budget problems at the time; Public
Works reduced the scope of work.
Commissioner Daysog inquired whether the scope of work was reduced
then or now, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded then.
Commissioner Daysog inquired whether the scope of work had been
increased, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the
affirmative.
Chair Johnson stated re- bidding is a matter of fairness.
The Public Works Director stated Bellecci and Associates is the
most knowledgeable firm; another engineering firm would need to
become familiar with the design.
Chair Johnson stated the issue is a matter of compliance with the
competitive bidding process.
The Public Works Director stated staff is trying to expedite the
project; timelines are tied to another project.
Chair Johnson stated the City is obligated to be fair and comply
with the bidding process.
Commissioner Daysog noted the City put the project on hold.
Commissioner Gilmore stated the City approved the Contract in 1999,
the project was put on hold in 2002; the project restarted in 2005;
inquired why the Contract did not come back to the Commission in
2005.
The Public Works Director responded there still was money in the
Contract.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Meeting
July 5, 2006
2
The Redevelopment Manager stated the City has a Contract with
Bellecci and Associates for the project report but does not have a
Contract for plans, specifications, and engineering.
Commissioner Daysog stated the project was put on hold because of
the City's policy decisions regarding retail.
Commissioner Matarrese stated the bid was put out, but the Contract
was not executed; the City is now considering awarding an $840,000
Contract without a bidding process.
Commissioner Gilmore inquired whether the price and scope are the
same as in 1999, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded the
price is the same but the scope was reduced in 1999.
Commissioner deHaan stated the matter should return at another
meeting; the original Contract and background should be provided.
The Development Services Director stated staff could come back to
the Commission with additional information; it is important to not
lose embedded data; the engineers constantly work with the City;
continuity should be discussed before changes are made.
Commissioner Matarrese stated the explanation provided by the
Development Services Director was what he was seeking.
Commissioner Gilmore stated the staff report does not address
continuity or amount of the Contract.
Chair Johnson inquired whether waiting two weeks causes a detriment
or whether moving forward tonight would be better.
The Development Services Director responded that she would be happy
to provide additional information to the Commission.
Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the cost of switching to
another firm exceeds the amount of savings.
The Development Services Director responded in the affirmative;
stated the staff recommendation is the best and only way to go.
Chair Johnson stated the Commission should move forward with the
staff recommendation.
Commissioner Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Commissioner Daysog inquired whether knocking down the walls of the
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Meeting 3
July 5, 2006
Tube would be analyzed.
The Redevelopment Manager responded Public Works provided a report
to the Commission on the matter.
Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Commissioner deHaan stated the project had a lot
of miscues; he has no idea how much money has been spent or what
was the original bid amount; staff reports need to be detailed.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Commissioners Daysog, Gilmore, Matarrese, and
Chair Johnson - 4. Abstentions: Commissioner deHaan - 1.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 9:56 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
Secretary
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Meeting
July 5, 2006
4
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING
FRIDAY- -JULY 14, 2006- -10:00 A.M.
Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 10:15 a.m.
Roll Call - Present: Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese,
and Chair Johnson - 4.
Absent: Commissioner Daysog - 1.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(06- ) Conference With Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name
of case: Community Improvement Commission v. Cocores Development
Company.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Chair Johnson announced that direction was given to Legal
Counsel to settle the eminent domain lawsuit within specified
parameters; stated the Commission is happy to announce that the
litigation has been settled and the Commission will purchase the
historic Alameda property for $3.2 million, which is inclusive of
all costs and interest; the stipulated judgment is expected to be
signed by the Judge on Friday, July 21, at which time the document
will be a public record.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 11:00 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
Secretary
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
August 1, 2006
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
From: Debra Kurita
Executive Director
Date: July 26, 2006
Re: (1) Recommendation to Award Design -Build Contract in the Amount of
$9,104,000 to C. Overaa & Co. for the Civic Center Parking Garage, No.
P.W. 90 -19; (2) Recommendation to Award Construction Contract in the
Amount of $8,800,000 to C. Overaa & Co. for Rehabilitation and
Restoration of the Historic Alameda Theater; (3) Recommendation to
Authorize the Execution of U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Contract for Loan Guarantee Assistance under
Section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 5308; Execution of Brownfields Economic
Development Initiative (BEDI) Grant Agreement; Issuance of Section 108
Loan Guarantee Program Variable Rate Note; and Cooperation
Agreement between the City of Alameda and the Community
Improvement Commission; and (4) Recommendation to Authorize the
Summary Vacation of a Portion of the Central Avenue Public Right -of -Way
Pursuant to Chapter 4 of the Streets and Highways Codes.
BACKGROUND
The Community Improvement Commission (CIC) of the City of Alameda approved a
Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with Alameda Entertainment
Associates (AEA) for the historic Alameda Theater, Cineplex, and Parking Garage
Project on May 3, 2005. On May 17, 2005, the CIC approved a Resolution of Necessity
to acquire the historic Alameda Theater property by eminent domain, and on July 19,
2006, the CIC settled the lawsuit over the value of the theater with the previous property
owner. In addition, the City was awarded a Brownfield Economic Development Initiative
(BEDI) grant by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the
construction of the parking garage component of the project in October 2004 and a
Section 108 loan guarantee to assist with its financing in January 2006. The overall
project will consist of an eight- screen movie theater, including a 484 -seat, single- screen
theater in the historic Alameda Theater and seven screens in the new cineplex, 6,100
square feet of retail, and an approximately 350 -space parking garage.
Report 1
Special Joint CC /CIC Meeting
7 -26 -06
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
July 26, 2006
Page 2 of 8
On March 21, 2006, the CIC adopted plans and specifications and authorized a call for
bids for the restoration and rehabilitation of the historic Alameda Theater and the
design -build of the Civic Center Parking Garage from pre - qualified contractors. Bids
were opened for the garage on May 9, 2006. The CIC received three bids for the garage
from the three pre - qualified contractors. Of the three bids, Overaa Construction of
Richmond, California was the lowest apparent bidder at $9,104,000, $800,000 over the
CIC's garage budget of $8.3 million. The other two bids from S.J. Amoroso and West
Bay Builders were for $10,081,000 and $10,118,000, respectively.
The bids for the theater were opened on May 10, 2006. The CIC received only one bid
for the theater project from SJ Amoroso in the amount of $11,187,000, approximately
$3.8 million over the CIC's construction estimate of $7.4 million. Insufficient funds were
available to contract with SJ Amoroso at the bid price. Staff met with SJ Amoroso to
evaluate the possibility of negotiating a lower price; however, it became apparent at the
meeting that the parties would not reach a price within the CIC budget. Given the fact
that discussions with SJ Amoroso were not successful and that no other pre - qualified
contractors bid on this project, the CIC concluded that going out to bid again would be
unlikely to yield any better result. One of the key factors considered in this decision was
the steep escalation in construction costs, which mean that the delay required to rebid
would reduce the likelihood that new bids would be any lower than the original. After
considering all of the circumstances, the CIC rejected the SJ Amoroso bid and
authorized staff to negotiate with Overaa Construction —the lowest apparent bidder on
the garage project —for a firm contract price within the CIC's budget. This option
provided the CIC with maximum flexibility to collaborate and negotiate both scope and
price.
DISCUSSION
(1) Civic Center Parking Garage Construction Contract
The parking garage project is a design -build project. CIC staff recommends awarding
the contract to Overaa Construction at the base bid price of approximately $9.1 million,
with a stipulation in the agreement that the Notice to Proceed on the construction phase
be contingent upon value engineering the project to meet the CIC's budget. CIC staff
and Overaa Construction have already identified mutually agreeable value engineering
changes that will be included during the design phase that are expected to bring the
cost within the City's budget (see Attachment 1). The major proposed changes would
include the following:
• Deletion of marquee canopy and application of signage directly onto building
above entrance (see Attachment 2, Sheet A5);
• Deletion of blade sign (see Attachment 2, Sheet A5);
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
July 26, 2006
Page3of8
• Deletion of CMU wall on northern elevation and replacement with cast -in -place
spandrel panels to create an open northern elevation similar to the western
elevation (see Attachment 2, Sheet A21);
• Deletion of one elevator car, while maintaining second hoistway and plunger for
future installation of second elevator car;
• Elimination of "tongue" on roof level, resulting in the reduction of eight parking
spaces;
• Deletion of plaster "picture frames" at ground and second floors;
• Deletion of decorative screens at roofs of elevator and stair towers;
• Deletion of walls not part of the elevator shaft; and
• Eliminate EIFS "cornice" effect at tops of stair towers.
The greatest risk for change orders in a design -build garage occurs during site
excavation with the potential for encountering hazardous materials and /or unfavorable
soil conditions. Many owners carry a three to four percent contingency on design -build
parking garages because liability for change orders due to design deficiencies lies with
the architect and engineers employed directly by the General Contractor, rather than the
City. University of California at San Francisco and Bay Area Rapid Transit use four
percent contingencies as the standard on design -build parking garages, while Kaiser
Permanente utilizes a three percent contingency. The CIC budget for this project has a
ten percent contingency, or $786,000, on the design and construction components of
the project. This amount substantially exceeds industry standards. As a result, it is
recommended that the CIC reduce its contingency on the garage to approximately five
percent of the $8.3 million, or $415,000, and transfer the remaining $371,000
contingency to supplement the parking garage budget by $71,000 and the historic
theater budget by $300,000 (see Attachment 3). A number of the items value -
engineered from the parking garage could be added back into the scope (i.e., blade sign
and canopy) if funds remain available after the site is successfully excavated, the
foundations have been poured, and unknowns eliminated.
The $9,104,000 contract with Overaa Construction for the design -build construction of
the parking garage is on file with the City Clerk.
(2) Historic Alameda Theater Rehabilitation Construction Contract
CIC staff and Overaa Construction have negotiated an $8.8 million contract price for the
rehabilitation and restoration of the historic Alameda Theater by value engineering a
number of relatively minor portions of the original scope of work (see Attachment 4). A
summary of these items include:
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
July 26, 2006
Page 4 of 8
• Modifying the emergency exit and disability access ramp enclosure proposed for
the western side of the building to eliminate the enclosure (i.e., eliminating roof
and walls), while maintaining an outdoor access and exit ramp that meets the
exiting requirements of the building code;
• Eliminating the wheelchair lift to provide disabled access to the stage in the
historic theater auditorium. The theater is accessible to the public for only 12
days per year, and the operator and /or user of the facility will be required to rent
a portable wheelchair lift for these events;
• Restoring the coffered plaster ceilings by silk screening the original Art Deco
designs onto canvas that is then glued to the ceiling instead of painting the
design directly onto the plaster. According to Architectural Resources Group
(ARG), the City's preservation architect, this is an accepted industry standard
and is a viable alternative for the theater;
• Converting the storefront doors and trim from wood to aluminum
Eliminating the $100,000 allowance carried by the Contractor for unforeseen
miscellaneous plaster patching related to mechanical, electrical, and plumbing
work; and
• Roof inspection indicated the need for repairs instead of installation of a cap
sheet. This repair would result in five -plus years of additional roof life; ongoing
maintenance contract could extend the life of the roof beyond five years.
In conjunction with CIC staff, Overaa Construction has also identified more substantial
value- engineering items and scope reductions that would help the CIC to meet its
current $8.5 million budget for the theater rehabilitation. Examples of potential cost
savings items are listed below and represent draft estimates. If any or all of these items
are selected by the CIC, the final prices would need to be negotiated and the
construction contract would need to be revised. A summary of these major items
include:
• The air - conditioning unit and chilled water pipes could be eliminated with no
provision for future installation without significant disruption and new construction
($40,000 to 60,000 cost savings).
• The limitation of full disabled access could be considered. (Undetermined).
• The proposed custom carpet pattern manufactured to match the original historic
pattern in the lobby could be replaced with a glued -down carpet with little to no
pattern in colors consistent with the original carpet ($40,000 cost savings).
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
July 26, 2006
Page 5of8
• The proposed electrical service capacity could be reduced from 1600 amps to
1200 amps to allow for reuse of the existing electrical conduit. This reduction in
service would preclude a restaurant use from locating in the historic theater's
retail space without providing supplemental power ($50,000 to $75,000 cost
savings).
CIC staff does not, however, recommend any of these modifications and, therefore,
urges the CCI to award the $8,800,000 contract to Overaa Construction and transfer
$300,000 in contingency funds from the garage to the theater project. The risk posed by
the design -build construction of the parking garage can be properly mitigated without
these funds. The selection of this option preserves the current scope of work for the
theater without any major modifications. The $8,800,000 contract with Overaa
Construction for the rehabilitation and restoration of the historic Alameda Theater is on
file with the City Clerk.
(3) Issuance of HUD Section 108 Loan Guarantee Note and Contract
HUD awarded the City with an $800,000 BEDI grant in October 2004 and a $7,000,000
Section 108 loan guarantee in January 2006. These funds will be used by the CIC to
assist in financing the construction of the proposed Civic Center Parking Garage. The
loan will be repaid using project revenues including parking meter revenues, retail
income from the historic Alameda Theater, loan repayment and percentage rent to the
CIC from AEA, and building and ground lease payments to the CIC from AEA for the
theater and cineplex, respectively (see Attachment 5). It is recommended that the CIC
authorize issuance of the HUD Section 108 Variable Rate Note, HUD Section 108 Loan
Guarantee Assistance Contract, BEDI Grant Agreement and Cooperation Agreement
between the City and the CIC to administer the loan by approving the accompanying
resolution.
The Section 108 variable rate note and contract for $7,000,000 Section 108 loan
guarantee assistance, and the BEDI grant agreement for $800,000 between the City
and HUD, and the cooperation agreement between the City and the CIC are on file with
the City Clerk.
(4) Summary Vacation of a Portion of the Central Avenue Public Right -of -Way
As discussed in the staff report for the March 21, 2006 CIC meeting regarding the
approval of the amended designs for the cineplex and garage, the CIC eliminated the
cineplex's approximate 20 -inch projection along Central Avenue by moving the face of
the building out approximately 20 inches, resulting in a reduction in the width of the
sidewalk along a portion of Central Avenue (see Exhibit A of the accompanying
summary vacation resolution and Attachment 2, Sheet A9). The actual encroachment
varies from three inches along the "bay window" portion of the facade in order to
straighten out the property line to 18 inches at the exterior plane of the cineplex
between the columns on the corner portion of the Central Avenue facade to 25 inches at
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
July 26, 2006
Page6of8
the columns. The sidewalk is currently 14 feet and will be reduced to approximately 12
feet at this corner portion of the building. The approximate 20 -inch projection was
eliminated in response to comments provided to the CIC by the California State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) as part of the Section 106 review process. The Section
106 Review process was required as the result of accepting federal monies for the
project.
The most appropriate manner of accomplishing this approximate 20 -inch encroachment
into the public right -of -way is to summarily vacate that portion of the sidewalk. Summary
vacation is an abbreviated process for vacating a public street in instances where an
excess right -of -way is not required for street purposes. This summary vacation is
required for reparcelization and reconfiguration of the cineplex property to facilitate
redevelopment of this blighted property located within the City's redevelopment area.
Vacating a portion of the sidewalk will not affect vehicular or pedestrian circulation
because the remaining width of the sidewalk is more than adequate. It is recommended
that the CIC approve the accompanying resolution authorizing the summary vacation of
a portion of the Central Avenue public right -of -way.
POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
Alameda Downtown Vision Plan 2000 — Action B1.0 — Renovate /restore Alameda
Theater.
Alameda Downtown Vision Plan 2000 — Action F4 — Consider building a parking
structure as part of a Downtown parking management program.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT
Up until June 6, 2006, the total budget for all three components of this project (the
cineplex, parking garage and historic Theater renovation) was $27.8 million plus $1.17
million in uncommitted, but available funds. The CIC, at the June 6, 2006 meeting,
committed the $1.17 million in unallocated revenue that had been available, but not
committed, to the Theater project (see Attachment 3). In addition, on July 19, 2006, the
CIC settled its lawsuit over the value of the historic Alameda Theater with the previous
property owner for $3.2 million. This settlement action requires the allocation of $1.2
million in additional uncommitted CIC bond proceeds to the project for acquisition (see
Attachment 3). Funds from the $1 million in redevelopment bond proceeds no longer
required by the new library construction project were previously allocated to the project
by the CIC; staff recommends allocation of $200,000 proposed to be available from the
$3.1 million in bond proceeds released from the CIC's debt service reserve fund upon
purchase of a surety bond, consistent with the bond indenture (see other 7/26/2006 staff
report).
The proposed recommendation to award the parking garage construction contract for
$9.1 million (contingent on its subsequent reduction to within the CIC's budget) and the
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
July 26, 2006
Page 7 of 8
historic Alameda Theater restoration and rehabilitation contract for $8.8 million will
result in the transfer of $300,000 in parking garage contingency funds to augment the
theater construction budget from $8.5 million to $8.8 million, and approximately $70,000
to augment the parking garage budget. This reduces the parking garage contingency
from approximately 10 percent to five percent. As stated above, developers and many
public agencies of design -build projects typically reserve a three to four percent
contingency for design -build parking garages. The CIC would conservatively still carry a
five percent contingency. Attachment 3 outlines the revised project budget compared to
the budget approved at the June 6, 2006 and March 21, 2006 CIC meetings. If these
recommendations are accepted and no further reductions from the historic Theater
requested, the total budget will be $30.2 million. This number includes all soft costs,
design, engineering, acquisition, demolition, environmental remediation, tenant
relocation, construction, and contingencies. In addition, the developer will contribute at
least another $5.4 million to the total overall budget.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The City completed CEQA review of the Project and adopted the Mitigated Negative
Declaration ( "MND ") on May 3, 2005. This review is final and conclusive, and was
upheld by the Alameda County Superior Court on June 30, 2006. The proposed
reduction of eight spaces to 342 spaces from the 350 -space Parking Structure analyzed
in the MND does not create any significant effect not previously discussed and does not
trigger the need for subsequent environmental review. CEQA Guidelines §15162(a) To
the contrary, the analysis in the December 2004 Downtown Alameda Theater, Cineplex
and Parking Structure Parking and Traffic Study conducted by EnviroTrans Solutions
demonstrates with the addition of 350 new parking spaces provided by the Project,
there would be a surplus of 335 parking spaces on weekdays and 463 spaces on
weekends. Thus, based on Parking and Traffic Study, the MND concluded that the
Project would have a Tess- than - significant impact on parking capacity because of the
potential for increased utilization of existing parking facilities downtown through joint
use.
The reduction in parking spaces is also consistent with the terms of the use permit for
the Parking Structure approved by the Planning Board on June 27, 2005, and upheld by
the City Council on August 16, 2005 (UP05- 0008). In upholding the use permit, the City
Council described the Parking Structure as providing 352 spaces (subsequently, 350
spaces), and conditioned its approval of the use permit on the Project's "substantial
conformity" with the plans titled "Oak Street Public Parking Garage" dated June 7, 2005,
prepared by Michael Stanton Architecture. The reduction of ten spaces (342 current
spaces compared to 352 spaces described in parking garage use permit) is in
substantial conformity with the 352 -space plan and is consistent with the use permit.
Similarly, the reduction in spaces is also consistent with the use permit for the Cineplex,
adopted by the Planning Board on September 27, 2005, and upheld by the City Council
on November 1, 2005 (UP05- 0018). In upholding the use permit, the City Council found
that a 350 -space parking structure would be adequate to meet parking demand, and
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
July 26, 2006
Page8of8
that the Project would be served by adequate parking. The reduction of eight spaces
(342 current spaces compared to 350 spaces) will not affect the City Council's finding
that the Project will be served by adequate transportation and service facilities. See
Alameda Municipal Code § 30- 21.3(b)(2). This minor variation in the plans for the
Parking Structure would not be considered a change of use.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Recommendation to Award Design -Build Contract in the Amount of $9,104,000
to C. Overaa & Co. for the Civic Center Parking Garage, No. P.W. 90 -19;
2) Recommendation to Award Contract in the Amount of $8,800,000 to C. Overaa &
Co. for Rehabilitation and Restoration of the Historic Alameda Theater;
3) Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Execution of U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) Contract for Loan Guarantee Assistance under
Section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 5308; Execution of Brownfields Economic
Development Initiative (BEDI) Grant Agreement; Issuance of Section 108 Loan
Guarantee Program Variable Rate Note; and Cooperation Agreement between
the City of Alameda and the Community Improvement Commission; and
4) Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Summary Vacation of a Portion of the
Central Avenue Public Right -of -Way Pursuant to Chapter 4 of the Streets and
Highways Codes.
Respectfully submitted,
Leslie A. Little
Development Services Director
By: Dorene E. Soto
Manager, Business Development
Divi:. io
Jen i er Ott
Development Manager
Attachments:
1. List of Value- Engineering for Civic Center Parking Garage.
2. Approved Parking Garage Design: Sheets A5, A9, and A21.
3. 7/26/2006 Proposed Budget for Downtown Theater Project.
4. List of Value- Engineering for Rehab. and Restoration of the Alameda Theater.
5. HUD Section 108 Loan Schedule for Repayment.
Attachment 1
VE Log for Parking Garage
July 20, 2006
Item
1
Item Description
Replace Precast spandrels with CIP walls
cu
CD
p
c'
a
w
c
X
m
y
a
Redesign
Effort
(0 -5)
0
Comments
Accept Alternate
2
Eliminate spandrel panel at "D" line at roof, replace with masonry
and paint
X
1
3
Eliminate spandrel panel at "D" line at roof, replace with masonry,
skim coat and paint (in lieu of 1 B).
X
0
4
Reduce quantity of canopies along west elevation (price determined
upon how many are deleted).
X
X
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
5
Simplify Canopy designs along west elevation.
X
Included in VE Item #4
6
Delete Kynar paint finish requirement from canopies and replace
with shop applied primer and field applied finish paint.
X
7
Delete galvanizing requirement on exterior items and replace with
shop coat applied primer
X
8
Simplify tube steel "mullions" or change to sheet metal at West
Elevation
X
9
Eliminate "scallops" at column tops along "A" line from 1.5 to 2.5
and Qarry "wedge" over the top of column atwest Elevation
X
X
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
10
Delete plaster "picture frames" at ground and second floors
between columns along "A" line
X
X
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
11
Delete marquee canopy and apply signage directly onto building
above entrance.
X
X
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
12
Delete Blade Sign
X
X
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
13
Change "anchored stone veneer" at base of west elevation exterior
to 12" x 12" granite tile set in thinset.
X
14
Reveals in lieu of "steps" at spandrel panels at North Elevation
X
15
Delete CMU wall along "1" line from "E" to "H" and replace with CIP
spandrel panels (with reveals in lieu of "steps ").
X
16
Eliminate Canopy at North Elevation
X
17
Delete Kynar paint finish requirement from canopies and replace
with shop applied primer and field applied finish paint at North
Elevation
X
18
Reduce quantity of MSM's to two and centrally locate at first floor
lobby as well as other simplifications and revisions to the PARCS
spec.
X
X
Provide price for one machine as an
add alternate for acceptance at a future
date
19
Delete site lighting set in sidewalk
X
20
Delete sandblast finish at sidewalk
X
21
Reduce PT requirement from 200psi to standard 150psi at all
covered decks
X
1
22
Delete storage room under ramp
X
2
23
Delete 1 elevator car but keep 2nd hoistway and plunger (set CMU
block at future openings)
X
X
2
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
24
Delete separator screens at elevator
X
X
2
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
25
Delete 6" of rock under SOG. No capillary break is required as
thereare no floor coverings being installed in the garage.
X
1
26
Reduce fire sprinkler system throughout garage. To include only
class III standpipes in the stairs and hose cabinets.
X
1
27
Delete decorative screens at roofs of elevator and stair towers
X
X
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
28
Delete interior wrap of EIFS /plaster
X
X
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
29
Delete interior facing articulation of stair roof canopies
X
X
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
Attachment 1
VE Log for Parking Garage
July 20, 2006
Item
30
Item Description
P
Reduce size of roof and simplify to cover for protection from
weather only
v
cu
c
n
m
c
X
m
"
a
X
Redesign
Effort
(0 -5)
_
Comments
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
31
Delete walls that are not part of the elevator shaft (vertical elements
on sheet A5.0)
X
X
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
32
Eliminate EIFS "cornice" effect at tops of stair towers
X
X
_provide
_Provide
Provide price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
price as an add alternate for
acceptance at a future date
Provide price as an add alternate and
hold for six months. This might be
added back in.
33
Simplify (delete "steps" and use reveals) EIFS "cornice" effect at
tops of stair towers (in lieu of item 4f).
X
X
34
Change plaster "mullions" to steel or sheet metal
X
--
X
35
Delete plaster "picture frames" between stair tower columns
X
36
Delete relief panels at stair towers
X
X
37
Eliminate upper Level to Line G
--
X
38
Reduce GC per VE
--
X
--
/
'1
--satiro
';
.111111ffie
1 fill7111711NI prime form=
1
-- --•-.•-
_ • _ --• •_
•
2930'900'019 : Yd 9903'999'O19 :6d
31996 90 '0991090
133111S HiN331N11Od 910
S.LDL,.LIHDUIv
X'aiX1.0 j,- SflOHIO7^IO}I
NOIIVA913
3f1N3AV
V2i'10 VIN'S
39VUVO JNDIaVd
elwo ;lle0 'epewely JO 40
leen )IeO pee enueny Ieve°
30VHVJ ONINIVd aNV
X31d3NI0'a311V1V
REVISIONS
N
II
II
II
II
J
9
GE
t
win f_ Li _1
QN0_p_ 1U� •
O Q - 0- W
H 0Y0
11r 4
0 0a
UUNcn UUa
SANTA CLARA AVENUE ELEVATION
Attachment 3
Proposed Budget for Downtown Theater Project
Item
Budget
3/21/2006
Budget
6/7/2006
Proposed
Budget
7/26/2006
Difference
between
6/7- 7/26
I. SOURCE OF FUNDS(')
Sources of Funds
Add'I Redevelopment Bond Proceeds (Library)
Add'I Redevelopment Bond Proceeds
TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS
II. USE OF FUNDS
Parking Garage
Land Acquisition
Construction Costs
Other Costs
Construction Contingence)
Subtotal
Cineplex
Public Contribution /Loan
Hazardous Materials Clean -up(3)
Theater Connections
Subtotal
Alameda Theater Rehabilitation
Property Acquisition /Relocation
Rehabilitation Costs
Other Costs
Additional Soft Costs(4)
Construction Contingence)
Subtotal
TOTAL USE OF FUNDS
III. NET BALANCE/ REVENUE SURPLUS
$29,003,000
$0
$29,003,000
$811,000
$8,300,000
$1,410,000
$786,000
$11,307,000
$2,800,000
$200,000
$675,000
$3,675,000
$2,500,000
$7,373,600
$1,870,000
$0
$1,106,000
$12,849,600
$27,832,000
$1,171,000
$29,003,000
$o
$29,003,000
$811,000
$8,300,000
$1,410,000
$786,000
$11,307,000
$2,800,000
$200,000
$675,000
$3,675,000
$2,500,000
$8,500,000
$1,870,000
$45,000
$1,106,000
$14,021,000
$29,003,000
so
$29,003,000
$1,000,000
$200,000
$30,203,000
$811,000
$8,371,000
$1,410,000
$415,000
$11,007,000
$2,800,000
$250,000
$675,000
$3,725,000
$3,418,000
$8,800,000
$1,870,000
$277,000
$1,106,000
$15,471,000
$30,203,000
$0
$0
$1,000,000
$200,000
$1,200,000
$0
$71,000
$0
($371,000)
($300,000)
$0
$50,000
$50,000
$918,000
$300,000
$0
$232,000
$1,450,000
$1,200,000
(1) Assumes $1 million in library redevelopment bond funds and $200,000 in uncommitted bond funds no longer required
for cash reserves are committed to the Theater project under the 7/26/2006 budget.
(2) The contingency for the theater under the 7/26/2006 budget is approximately 13% instead of 15% with the increase
in construction budget; and the garage was reduced to 5% still exceeding industry standards.
(3) This contingency was incorrectly stated as a $200,000 in previous budgets. The DDA states it is a $250,000 contingency.
(4) As part of the value- engineering process for the the theater, these funds are likely to be required for
additional soft costs.
7/20/2006
Attachment 4
VE Log for Alameda Theater Rehabilitation
July 20, 2006
Item
1
Item Description
Redesign of Alley Way
Drawing Number
a�i
a0
g
c'
a
X
a.
.
c
W
m
8
a
Initial by
Contractor
and City
Redesign
Effort
(0 -5)
0
2
Revise alley electrical service from a direct boring to a trenched
service.
A3.1 A
X
2
3
Provide Survey of Roof and modify roofing design.
A3.3, A8.6
X
2
4
Reduced rigid insulation requirements to account for slope only
under roofing
X
1
5
Revise storefront doors from wood to aluminum to match
A8.1
X
2
6
Provide allowance for patching of work associated with MEP or other
work
X
0
7
Delete West Enclosure which includes all electrical, mechanical,
carpet, fire protection, plaster /framing, structural steel, painting and
roofing work associated with the deletion of the west enclosure
T1.1, T1.2, A2.0,
A2.1, A2.3, A2.5,
A2.9, A2.11, A3.0,
A3.4, A6.1, A6.3,
A7.0, A7.1, A7.2,
A7.3, A9.4, S2.0,
S2.1, S2.2, S2.3,
S2.4, S2.5, S3.2,
S4.3, S4.5, S4.6,
P2.1, P2.5, E0.2,
E2.1, E2.3, E3.1 B,
E3.3
X
5
8
Replace doors currently called out to be reused with new doors to
match existing
X
1
9
Substitute Door Hardware
A2.10
X
2
10
Revise handpainting coffered ceiling to a silkscreen applied canvas
X
1
11
Delete Carpet pad
X
0
12
Delete Wheel chair lift at stage
A1.1
X
3
13
Delete concrete work associated with wheel chair lift
A7.4
X
3
14
Delete stairs at wheel chair lift
A7.4
X
3
15
Use alternative Stainless steel handrails to match design as shown
X
1
16
Design Build stadium seating
X
1
17
Delete sidewall sprinkler heads along G/L 4
F2.1, F2.3
X
2
18
Revise electrical service inside theater from direct bore to overhead
installation via game room and womens rest room
E5.1, E5.2
X
2
19
Revise HVAC Mechanical Equipment
M0..2, M2.1
X
2
20
Delete Air Conditioning
X
0
Attachment 5
ALAMEDA THEATER PROJECT GARAGE
As Modified by Mark Briggs
HUD SEC 108 LOAN
co
w
CO
(0
w
}
0
w
w
•
0)
of
04
N
U m
w y
d i
O
2
O
0
N
0
0
SCHEDULE FOR LOAN REPAYMENT
O
0)
n 0))
oR C7
O O)
°o o ° 0 n n
O O CO co
co 0 N O 0
O 0 ° CO O)
co O co O
(0 (O O (O
0 0) - (0
0 0 ° co co
0 0 co_ 0
((n 0) r° (0
0 0 (00
O O n
N N 0
f9
co 0)
O
co O 0 0 CO
0 0 (00 CDr
n o n
O 0 CO 0
O O O
n-
69
0 0 (0n
O O O
n M
U)
0)
(0
O CO
Nir
N
o 0 0 N ° 0
O O
N N n c
69 r
0 o N 0 O
O O CO O
N T N O
69
0
N
v
(l'1
0
(0
0)
W
4,
tt
0)
(+)
N
0
N
N
N
0
r
N
N_
O
0
N
N
n
O
(O
0
0,3o)
O O (07 CO ( 7 0 VO
oo o-
z co N 13 (� (n
to 6. 69 69 69
co
0
U hi
U m co
a)
0 J N F
N
co
1- J U
z " -O O
co `o
O
w m 0J N
o U 2
a°' U
co d a)
m d) o E
N C
m
'O m . U
d 0 9 m E c
.5 3 a -
2 = z a ¢ Q Cr
m
w
z
w
w
cc
z
a
O N
O
(O o
N
0 (0D
O 0
N �
0 (p
O N
O 0)
N
o [h
O
0 r
N
O (0
O
O in
0 (+)
N
0 N
O
(°n m
N r
0 O
O M
(°n N
N
0 0
O (O
o
(0 N
N
0 0
O O
(°n N
N
0 O
0 o
°0 CO
CO (
N
co O °
O
O
N
is
E
w
a)
0
()
)0
(a
m
co
0
N
O
O
m
r
0))
0
N
O
000
(V
of
(07
O
W
0)
r
N
CO
OD
O
(+)
r
M
O
0
n
0')
0
0
N-
o>
O
co
O
0)
O
0
O
N
N
N r
(00 00)
O r
CO
CV 0)
CO O
W 0)
(°n (o
N V
co
oo
o
O 00
r
m n
n 0)
0 o
O 0)
r
CO
CO N
(0
CD (00
CO
(N�) 0
a0 0)
co 0
0
c �
nr
0 Ln
0
0 O
N (°n
VNF
(0
0
(ND o
(O 0
0 10
CO
w
Z
w
w
2
J
0
0)
E
'Vl
w
N
Ci
0
U
0)
0)
0
a)
14
(a
(DA
co
W
V
O
0
O
(00
0
0
0
0
n
n
0
o
m
0
O
ui
0
0
n
0)
N
0)
N
co
0
0
0
n
W
0)
0
(0
M
4
0
z
7
LL
0
w
-J
Q
Q
w
z
w
w
Q
SEC 108 LOAN - PRINCIPAL
A
CO
(0
co
0°0
N
(0
0)
CD
(0
n
0
co0)
(0
00))
(0
co
n
0
co
0)
O)
0
v
(0
co
o
.N...
n
(0')
N
O)
(+)
0
0
N
7
cv
PAYMENT SCHEDULE (11
N
r
N
oo
(0
(0
0
N
m
O
(O (0
V LO
CO CO
o
CO
o
N 0
N N
Use of BEDI Funds to Pay Interest
O
0
O
0)
o n
(" N
0
N
O N
(O
N r
N
0)
0-
(/)
N
v
N N
co (o
0)
N
cv
A (�
O
c (0
0) (D
00 r
OD 0 LO
00) o
0 N
M
n0.
r N
(°0 N
0 CO
N
) 0)
O N
o> .4- O
O co
h
CO LO
CO
0 W
N 0
00 0)
0 0
O
RESERVE FUNDS
O
0)
Carry over (Line 19/ Line 21)
v CO N
CO V
0) 0 Or)
N N
0) 0 0)
co `( CO
N 0 N
O (() v o
N 0) N
r v N
N N
VO a 00))
N 0 r
N co
0) 0 r)
r. N
O
N
N
Ci V
0 7 M
o°) r 0)
0) 0)
00 0 N-
00 n C00
(o0 '- 00)
0 0
(NO C0) N
° O -N-
,- ) 0
I-- (o
0 (0 W O
(0 N
0 N 0)
O O
N CO O
CO- 01 01 CO
Nt 0
CCD (0
0 0 0
O V V
O CO (O
CV CV
CO CO
Interest income on balance
FUNDS REMAINING
1) Source: Mark Briggs 2004
Attachments
ALAMEDA THEATER PROJECT GARAGE
As Modified by
HUD SEC 108 LOAN
N
N
Y
0
N
} W
0)
}
0
0
}
`O
}
CO
L
d
}
N
CO
Y
SCHEDULE FOR LOAN REPAYMENT
V CO ° CO N
CO CO CO
M ° N
69 r r
CO 0 CO i0
(0o O OOD n
O
ai N Or N
N r r r
E9
co V 00 ° n °
0 N 00
O N ° O
NN
69
r r r
CO 0 0 CO 0)
0 0 03 I.- 0
n 0 (n
r r
(.(00 (00 ° n N
CO O 0 CO
CO O of
N N 0 n (00
N 0 0 O
(0 v 0 0i
0 r O
v 0) ° n m
N 0 c0
0°D O
0) 0) 0 CO n N. N. LO 0 COO 0)
n 0 ° 0
LO N 0 CO CO
V 0) C
CO °0
O O 0i
n 0 0)
0 CO 0 CO 0
c°0 Oa0 W 0
Coo O Or 00)
CO ° CO ° 0 CO n
0 CO 0 O
(0 0) 0 0)
V)
co co co co ccoo
2 (ti c
69
MovieTECS PAYMENTS TO CIC
Historic Theater: Building Lease
New Building: Ground Lease
Percentage Rent
Repayment of CIC Loan
Retail Income - Historical Theater Space
0
0)
W
L1)
0
N
n
0
co
0
0
i0
00)
n
V
0
0)
0)
0
0)
CO
O
0
0
O
00)
N
0)
0a
co
O
0
v
0
cri
PARKING REVENUES
O N
O
0 O
N N
0 N
O0)
c°0 0
N N
0 V
O C7
0
00)
N r
O cp
O c0
(0 0N)
N r
0 0 (0
O 0) CO
CD
N
O
O
0
N
10
0
0 N
O N
0 �
N
O
O
0
N
0)
O
n
O o
O r
O (0
O (0
0 On
O 0.
((00 0
N r
0 CO
0 10
In up
N r
Parking Meter Revenue Funds
Parking Garage Income - - -- Estimate
V
O
(0
co
n
CA
0a O
O N
c0)
0
n
O
N n c0
O) n N 0 0
N 0 0 CO n
ID V O N n CO
(00
ID
CO 121 CO I-
CO CD
(0 ONO
n in r 0)
O c0 c0 NI-
0. N n CO
CO n
cD CO W
00) N
0
V
0
n
O)
N
N
co
(0
co n cc r o
00) o c°. CO 0 On
0) N n co
0)
N
N
CO
0
V
0
O
0
O
N
n
Lq
0
0
01 LO 0 OD
a
ch co 0 n
N 0) W N
Cr) co n m
LO CO
0
(0 (O
00) N
0)) co
0 N
L (0
r 0
N 0)
00) N
CO O)
(0 co
co O
CO N,
0°D n0
O
O N
TOTAL REVENUES
<LESS> Garage Operating Costs - -- Estimate
N
aD
°n
O
W
0
CO
0
0
n
0
0
0))
0)
0
REVENUES AVAILABLE TO FUND LOAN
0)
n
co
co
0)
n
(+)
co
0)
0))
a
co
O
n
(0
cv
O
0 N
0
0 r
o
N
69
SEC 108 LOAN - PRINCIPAL
PAYMENT SCHEDULE (1)
Use of BEDI Funds to Pay Interest
N
O
n
0
00)
°0
0
N-
o
(0
co
0
4
4
LO CV
W 0
V N.
N"
(0 0
(NO r
O 01
O r
N
N
I--
0
0
0•) Cr)
0) r
W
r-
°
u) 0
0 (0
o
co o 0
a°)O o
n
(0
CV 0) V-
77)
co
N. a
77- coo
N In
a
0) LO
LO
n
0)
CD
0)
0)
co
0) 0
N N
CO o
O (NO
0)
00)
0) O_
(0 n
c0 r
co
o
((0 v
0
of r
n
0) LO
0 CO-
CV N
0
CD a
0 r
N
LO
(0..
0)
0)
0
0 o
CO 00)
0 0
a
O
co
0)
0
°
v
0
0..
O
0)
N
p-
op
0)
0
n
1()
(0
co
0
0
0
0)
n
n
co
7
° ° °V 0)°'
(°o co 0 (00 n n
CO CO CO
na 0 V f 00
T
N. N N CO CO 0
N CO CO
0
N
Income After Debt Service (Line 14 - line 17 + line 18)
Interest income on HUD Loan
cn
0
z
LL
W
W
w
W
2
0
ctl
(tl
0
O
0)
E
O
O
c
y
d
U)
c
z
2
W
0
Z
LL
1) Source: Mark Briggs 2004
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. HUD Loan Repayment2 per M Briggs_1122; Feb. 3, 2005
Approved as to Form
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) CONTRACT
FOR LOAN GUARANTEE ASSISTANCE UNDER SECTION 108
OF THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974, AS
AMENDED, 42 U.S.C. SECTION 5308; EXECUTION OF BEDI GRANT
AGREEMENT; AND ISSUANCE OF HUD SECTION 108 LOAN GUARANTEE
PROGRAM VARIABLE RATE NOTE
WHEREAS, the City of Alameda has determined that a high priority
exists for economic development and job creation activities and that the
proposed Downtown Revitalization— Construction of New Parking Garage ( "the
Project ") meets these priorities; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown Revitalization— Construction of New Parking
Garage is included in the City's adopted One Year Action Plan of the
Consolidated Plan: and
WHEREAS, the Section 108 Loan Guarantee program, implemented by
the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), is
designed to provide funds to assist with these types of projects; and
WHEREAS, under the Section 108 Loan Guarantee program, the City
can borrow up to five years worth of its annual Community Development Block
Grant allocation, and can take up to twenty years to repay the principal and
interest; and
WHEREAS, In July 2004, pursuant to City of Alameda Resolution No.
13744, the City submitted an application for a Section 108 Loan Guarantee and
a Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) grant; and
WHEREAS, in January 2006, the City was awarded $7,000,000 in
Section 108 Loan Guarantee funds to assist with the implementation of the
improvements and related economic development activities on the Project site;
and
WHEREAS, in October 2004, HUD awarded the City a Brownfields
Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) grant in the amount of $800,000 to
also assist with the economics of the Project and which said BEDI funds cannot
be expended without an approved Section 108; and
Resolution #1 -C
7 -26 -06 Joint Meeting
WHEREAS, the City has or will enter into a Cooperation Agreement with
the Community Improvement Commission to administer the Section 108 Loan
Funds in the amount of $7,000,000 and the BEDI grant funds in the amount of
$800,000 for the benefit of the Project;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ALAMEDA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. City reaffirms the continuing commitments and
representations made in the July 2004 City Council Resolution No. 13744,
Sections 4 through 12.
SECTION 2. The City possesses the legal authority to enter into contract
for the Loan Guarantee Assistance under Section 108 of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 5308,
and to use the guaranteed loan funds in accordance with 24 CFR Part 570,
subpart M.
the:
SECTION 3. The City Manager or her designee is authorized to execute
a) Contract for Loan Guarantee Assistance Under Section 108 of
the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as
Amended, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 5308;
b) Variable /Fixed Rate Note No. B- 04 -MC -06 -0007 for
$7,000,000;
c) Brownfields Economic Development (BEDI) Grant Agreement
with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
for $800,000;
d). Cooperation Agreement Regarding Administration of the 2006
Section 108 HUD Loan and BEDI Grant funds Between the
City of Alameda and the Community Improvement Commission
of the City of Alameda.
SECTION 4. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon its
adoption.
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly
and regularly adopted and passed by the City Council of the City of Alameda in
a regular meeting of the City Council on the 26th day of July, 2006, by the
following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official
seal of said City this day of July, 2006.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
AUTHORIZING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A PORTION OF
THE CENTRAL AVENUE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY PURSUANT
TO CHAPTER 4 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE
WHEREAS, the Community Improvement Commission of the City of
Alameda ( "Commission ") is carrying out the Community Improvement Plan
( "Plan ") for the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project ( "BWIP ") by
w renovating the existing downtown historic Alameda Theater and providing for
o z development of a new multi -plex cinema and public parking garage
O(collectively, the "Project "); and
co
as
WHEREAS, the City of Alameda ( "City ") is the owner of record of the
public right -of -way and street commonly known as Central Avenue located
adjacent to the Project; and
0
L
WHEREAS, the Commission and the City desire to reconfigure a portion
Q ▪ � of Central Avenue and the adjacent property currently owned by the
Commission on which the Project will be located for the purpose of improving
pedestrian and vehicular circulation, facilitating redevelopment of the Project
and eliminating blight within the BWIP to serve the public needs, necessity and
convenience; and
WHEREAS, to effectuate the abovementioned goal, the City must
vacate a portion of the sidewalk located on the north side of Central Avenue,
between Park Street and Oak Street, varying from 3" to 25" (only at the
columns), as depicted and described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto ( "Vacation
Area "); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8334.5, summary vacation of a public
right -of -way may not be completed until existing public utility facilities have
been relocated; and
WHEREAS, the existing SBC utilities located under the Vacation Area
have been relocated.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
DOES HEREBY FIND AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Pursuant to Chapter 4, Section 8334(a) of the Streets and
Highways Code, the Vacation Area qualifies for summary vacation as an
excess right -of -way. The subject right -of -way is not required for street or
highway purposes because the remaining portion of the sidewalk is adequate to
accommodate pedestrian traffic.
Section 2. The vacation is for the benefit of the public at large. The
City's purpose for vacating the Vacation Area is to effectuate the
Resolution #1 -D
7 -26 -06 Joint Meeting
reconfiguration of the public right -of -way and the adjacent site in a manner that
will improve pedestrian circulation and facilitate redevelopment of the Project,
thereby achieving the redevelopment goals and objectives of the BWIP Plan.
Section 3. Subject to completion of the SBC utility facilities relocation,
vacation of the Vacation Area depicted and described in Exhibit "A" is hereby
approved pursuant to Sections 8334 and 8335 of the Streets and Highways
Code.
Section 4. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to record this Resolution
and the attached Exhibit "A" (subject to minor, technical changes that may be
approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney) with the County Recorder of
the County of Alameda upon receiving notification that relocation of the existing
SBC public utility facilities has been completed.
Section 5. From and after the date this Resolution is recorded, the
Vacation Area shall no longer constitute a right -of -way for public use as a street
or highway or any other public right -of -way purposes.
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
STREET ENCROACHMENT
ALL that certain real property situate in the City of Alameda, County of Alameda, State of California, described as
follows:
BEING a portion of the Central Avenue right -of -way, being an 80 foot wide right -of -way, more particularly
described as follows:
BEGINNING at the intersection of the southeasterly right -of -way line of Oak Street with the northeasterly right -of-
way line of Central Avenue;
Thence along said right -of -way line of Central Avenue, South 60 °11'38" East 2.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
Thence continuing along said right -of -way, South 60 °11'38" East 158.12 feet;
Thence leaving said right -of -way line, South 29 °48'22" West 0.25 feet;
Thence North 60 °11'38" West 98.62 feet;
Thence South 29 °48'22" West 1.83 feet;
Thence North 60 °11'38" West 7.00 feet;
Thence North 29 °48'22" East 0.12 feet;
Thence North 60 °11'38" West 34.33 feet;
Thence South 29 °48'22" West 0.12 feet;
Thence North 60 °11'38" West 8.50 feet;
Thence North 29 °48'22" East 1.83 feet;
Thence North 60 °11'38" West 9.67 feet:
Thence North 29 °48'22" East 0.25 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing an area of 126.60 square feet, more or less.
A plat showing the above - described parcel is attached herein and made a part hereof as Exhibit "B".
This description was prepared by me or under i irection in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyors
Act .O�M. LAN
Randall L. Heik -, P.L.S. 5756
License Expires: 6 -30 -2008
K:\Main \2005 \057019- 50 \legals \ST_ENCROACH. DOC
Page 1 of 1
7. 19' 04,
Dated:
P.O.B.
LOT .5
JJ
LOT 6
DOC. NO. 2005123663
PARCEL ONE
APN 071 - 0203 -016
NJ 53
LOT 7
LOT 8
22 NJ 41
PARCEL 1 — DOC. NO. 89- 169868
APN 071 - 0203 -015
APN 071- 0203 -014
2 PROPOSED ' WIDE PUBL C STREET ENCROACHMENT
STREET DEDICATION 126.60 SQ. FT. ±
T•P•O.B• N 6011'38" W 158.12'
40.00'
SEE DETAIL "A"
P.O.B. L1 ,„-- T.P.O.B.
N 6011'38" W
N 6011'38 W
7.00'
SEE DETAIL "B" �I
CENTRAL AVENUE
N 6011'38" W
DETAIL "A"
SCALE 1 " =5'
S 6011'38" E 158.12'
L7— N 6011'38" W 9.67'
S 6011'38" E 158.12'
J S 6011'38" E
N 60'11'38" W 8.58' L5
DETAIL "B"
SCALE 1"=5'
LEGEND
APN — ASSESSOR PARCEL
NUMBER
P.O.B. — POINT OF BEGINNING
T.P.O.B. — TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING
■t■•
N 6011'38" W 98.62'
34.33'
L2
LINE TABLE
LINE
BEARING
LENGTH
L1
N 6011'38" W
2.00'
L2
S 29'48'22" W
0.25'
L3
S 29'48'22" W
1.83'
L4
N 29'48'22" E
0.12'
L5
S 29'48'22" W
0.12'
L6
N 29'48'22" E
1.83'
L7
N 29'48'22" E
0.25'
B F
ENGINEERSISURVEYORSIPLANNERS
4780 Chabot Drive
Suite 104
Pleasanton, CA 94588
925/396 -7700
925/396 -7799 (FAX)
([. •C..45■11S/n1G\nWr. %P1 erccT cwVria WIITai." 7 /19 /Pflflf. 11,37117 AM PDT
Subject EXHIBIT "B"
STREET ENCROACHMENT
Job No. 20057019
By RL Date 07 /19 /O6Chkd. RLH
SHEET 1 OF 1
ST_ENCROACH.txt
Parcel name: ST_ENCROACH
North: 465247.2988
Line Course: S 60 -11 -38 E
North: 465168.7026
Line Course: S 29 -48 -22 W
North: 465168.4857
Line Course: N 60 -11 -38 W
North: 465217.5064
Line Course: S 29 -48 -22 W
North: 465215.9185
Line Course: N 60 -11 -38 W
North: 465219.3979
Line Course: N 29 -48 -22 E
North: 465219.5021
Line Course: N 60 -11 -38 W
North: 465236.5664
Line Course: S 29 -48 -22 W
North: 465236.4622
Line Course: N 60 -11 -38 W
North: 465240.6873
Line Course: N 29 -48 -22 E
North: 465242.2752
Line Course: N 60 -11 -38 W
North: 465247.0818
Line Course: N 29 -48 -22 E
North: 465247.2988
East : 1496202.5716
Length: 158.12
East : 1496339.7743
Length: 0.25
East : 1496339.6500
Length: 98.62
East : 1496254.0762
Length: 1.83
East : 1496253.1666
Length: 7.00
East : 1496247.0926
Length: 0.12
East : 1496247.1522
Length: 34.33
East : 1496217.3637
Length: 0.12
East : 1496217.3040
Length: 8.50
East : 1496209.9285
Length: 1.83
East : 1496210.8381
Length: 9.67
East : 1496202.4473
Length: 0.25
East : 1496202.5716
Perimeter: 320.67 Area: 126.60 sq. ft. 0.00 acres
Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas)
Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 75 -57 -50 W
Error North: - 0.00000 East : - 0.00000
Precision 1: 320,640,000.00
}H.L n1210101H
olsssv
CENT 4L AVENU
EXHIBIT A
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly
and regularly adopted and passed by the City Council of the City of Alameda in
a regular meeting of the City Council on the 26th day of July, 2006, by the
following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official
seal of said City this day of July, 2006.
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
CITY OF ALAMEDA
MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Chair and Members
of the Community Improvement Commission
From: Debra Kurita
City Manager
Date: July 26, 2006
Re: Authorization to Substitute Surety Bond for 2003 Merged Bond Issue Cash
Reserve Account Consistent with Bond Indenture
Background
In December 2003 the CIC authorized the issuance of up to $50 million in bonds leveraged
upon the existing tax increment generated from the Merged Business and Waterfront
Improvement Project (BWIP) and West End Community Improvement Project (WECIP).
When ultimately sized, the gross bond proceeds were $46,439,247, with net proceeds
resulting in $40,180,011. The bonds were sold to finance $13,175,000 for the Marina
Village infrastructure reimbursement, to retire a $2 million loan from the General Fund to
the WECIP project, and provide financing for the Downtown Parking Structure, Alameda
Theater Project, the Bridgeside Shopping Center redevelopment and Park and Webster
Streetscapes. Proceeds were ultimately used to fund a portion of the new Alameda Free
Library as well. The final bond issue was actually a combination of three issues; two
taxable and one tax exempt.
Discussion /Analysis
When bond issues are structured, they must meet certain federal tax requirements. One of
those requirements is the maintenance of a debt service reserve fund. The requirement for
this fund is that a reserve be maintained either in cash or by an acceptable substituting
instrument, such as a Surety Bond, that is equal to the largest single year payment of the
bond repayment schedule. This bond payment for the combined 2003 bond or the
reserved fund balance is $3,230,954. At the time the bond issue was structured it was
determined that the CIC would maintain this reserve in cash rather than in a Surety Bond.
Even though the CIC chose to maintain the reserve in cash, the bond indenture documents
allow for the substitution of this cash deposit by a Surety Bond. A Surety Bond costs
between 2 — 3 percent of the payment amount, and as a result would free up $3,134,025
from the reserve account to be utilized for economic development activities consistent with
the types of projects expressly listed in the 2003 merged issue; primarily economic
development capital construction.
Report 2
Special Joint CC /CIC Meeting
7 -26 -06
Honorable Chair and Members
of the Community Improvement Commission
Fiscal Impact
July 26, 2006
Page 2
None. The debt service reserve fund is $3,230.954. The cost for the Surety Bond is 2 -3
percent of the funds. The cost is deducted from the existing cash reserve thereby netting
approximately $3,134,025 for projects. There is no new impact to the General Fund or CIC
tax increment.
Recommendation
Authorize the substitution of a Surety Bond for the 2003 Merged Area Bond Issue Cash
Reserve Account consistent with the bond indenture. Staff recommends that $500,000 of
the resulting $3,134,025 be earmarked to the acquisition of the Historic Alameda Theater.
The remainder could be released based upon CIC priorities.
Respe ully submit -d,
Leslie A. Little
Development Services Director
LAL:dc
Ile -Ann Boyer
hief Financial Officer