1994-11-02 ARRA PacketAGENDA
Regular Meeting of the Governing Body of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda City Hall
Council Chamber (2nd Floor)
2263 Santa Clara Ave.
Alameda, CA
Wednesday, November 2, 1994
5:30 p.m.
IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE AUTHORITY:
1) Please file a speaker's slip with the Secretary, and upon
recognition by the Chair, approach the rostrum and state your
name. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes per item.
2) Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and only a
summary of pertinent points presented verbally.
3) Applause, signs or demonstrations are prohibited during Authority
meetings.
1.
11.
ROLL CALL
A. Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of October 5, 1994.
AGENDA ITEMS
A. Report from the Executive Director Recommending the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority Authorize the Executive Director to Send a Letter to the Secretary of Defense
Requesting Application for All or Portions of the Alameda Naval Air Station to be
Included Under the New Recently Amended McKinney Title V Process.
B. Report from the Executive Director Requesting the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority Endorse and Authorize the Executive Director to Submit the Funding Request
for the Combined Alameda Science City/ACET (Alameda Center for Environmental
Technology) Proposal for a "Scoping Study and Strategy Development Plan". (Science
City/ACET Endorsed by the Alameda City Council)
C. Designation by Remaining Authority Member of His Alternate.
D. Report from the Executive Director Regarding the Alameda City Council's Support of a
Request by the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG) for a BRAG Representative
to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority as a Non-voting, Ex-officio Member
with One Non-voting Alternate. (Endorsed by the Alameda City Council)
IV.
V.
E. Report from the Executive Director Recommending that the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority (A' ) Authorize the Signing of a Memorandum of
Understanding with the Naval Air Station Alameda Describing the Transfer and Use of
Property Parcel Number 144 Known as the "Soccer Field".
F. Report from the Executive Director Recommending the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority Direct the Executive Director to Submit Applications for an Army Corps of
Engineers Permit for the Oakland Harbor Estuary Sewer Force Main Pipe Size Change
in the Existing Federal Funding of the Oakland Harbor Deepening Project and to Take
All Necessary Actions to Successfully Complete this Project.
A.
REPORTS
Oral Report from Alameda Unified School District on the Impact of the Passage of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act on the School Districts' Ability to Adapt to
Changes Caused by Base Closure.
B. Oral Report from Alameda Unified School District on the Status of the Request for
Transition Funding by the Office of Economic Adjustment.
C. Oral Report from Executive Director Updating the Reuse Authority on Reuse Authority
Staff Activities.
D. Oral Report from Executive Director Updating the Reuse Authority on McKinney
Act/Homeless Issues.
E. Oral Report from Executive Director Updating the Reuse Authority on the Status of the
AEG Interim Reuse Proposal to Refurbish Bay Area Rapid Transit District's (BART) Rail
Carts at Naval Air Station Alameda.
F. Oral Report from Chair of the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG) Updating
the Reuse Authority on BRAG Activities.
G. Oral Report from Mr. Len Bertain Explaining the Scope of Work for a Feasibility Study
of the New Turnaround Proposal.
H. Oral Report from Executive Director Regarding Next Agenda for Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority.
COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
(Any person may address the Governing Body in regard to any matter over which the Governing
Body has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance, that is not on the agenda.)
COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNING BODY
ADJOU ' MENT
MINUTES
OF THE
REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, October 5, 1994
5:30 p.m.
The meeting convened at 5:30.p.m. with Chair Mayor E. William Withrow, Jr. presiding.
I. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmember Ralph Appezzato, City of Alameda;
Alternate for Ellen Corbett, Staff Member Leslie Gould, City of
San Leandro; Mr. Mark Friedman, Aide to Supervisor Don
Perata, District 3; Councilmember Karin Lucas, City of Alameda;
Vice-Mayor Richard Roth, City of Alameda; Vice-Chair Sandre
Swanson, District Director, 9th Congressional District; Chair
Mayor E. William Withrow, Jr., City of Alameda; Ex-officio
Member, Gail Greely, Alameda Unified School District. Absent:
Mayor Ellen Corbett, City of San Leandro; Councilman "Lil"
Arnerich, City of Alameda; Councilmember Dezie Woods-Jones,
City of Oakland. (Vice-Chair Swanson arrived at 5:45 p.m.)
A. Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of September 7, 1994
Speakers:
Mr. Don Roberts of Alameda stated that the minutes of September 7, 1994,
regarding the port priority designation, did not reflect the vote accurately, and
should state that Mayor Withrow and Vice-Mayor Roth were the two nayes
regarding the original motion and the six ayes were Authority Members Lucas,
Appezzato, Arnerich, Corbett, Friedman and Swanson.
Councilmember Karin Lucas moved to approve the minutes of the meeting of
September 7, 1994 as corrected. The motion was seconded by Mark Friedman
and carried by a unanimous voice vote.
II. AGENDA ITEMS:
A. Report from the Executive Director Recommending Endorsement of the AEG
Interim Reuse Proposal to Refurbish Bay Area Rapid Transit District's (BART)
Rail Cars at Naval Air Station (NAS) Alameda and Authorization for the Executive
Director to Negotiate with the U. S. Navy and AEG Concerning Lease Rates,
Terms and Conditions in the Event AEG is Awarded the Contract by BART.
Mr. Parker reported that AEG had submitted their best and final offer to BART
to be considered as one of the two proposers for refurbishment of the BART cars.
AEG is considering Buildings 11 and 400 within the base which encompass
160,000 sq. ft. Chair Withrow stated that the Alameda City Council at their
meeting of October 5, 1994, voted unanimously to support this particular
initiative.
Mr. Friedman stated that this was an excellent initiative and offers the best hope
for short-term re-employment for some of the displaced workers. He asked
whether there would be any provisions in the negotiations that displaced workers
get preference in the hiring for the jobs which are added by AEG. Mr. Parker
stated that the understanding of the intent of AEG is to look at the workforce
within the Naval Air Station as a resource to them.
Vice-Mayor Roth moved that the recommendation be approved. The motion was
seconded by Councilmember Appezzato, and passed by a unanimous voice vote.
Speakers:
Mr. Neal Patrick Sweeney, an Alameda resident, stated that he was in favor of
the topic under discussion.
B . Report from the Executive Director Recommending Support of an Amendment to
the Avigation Easement at the 7th Street Marine Terminal to Accommodate the
Addition of an Articulated Boom Crane for Port of Oakland Use and Authorization
to Communicate this Determination to the Port of Oakland and Naval Air Station
(NAS) Alameda
Mr. Parker stated that the Navy has requested concurrence from the Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority for approval of the avigation easement for
a crane which will be required for a new port facility anticipated to be in place
within the next 2 years. He requested that the Reuse Authority support the
amendment to the avigation easement at the 7th Street Marine Terminal to
accommodate the addition of an articulated boom crane for the Port of Oakland's
use with a further recommendation to direct the Executive Director to
communicate the determination of the Reuse Authority to the Port of Oakland and
to the Naval Air Station.
2
Speakers:
Mr. Jon Rogers, representing the legislative chairman for the aircraft pilots of the
Bay Area, stated that he disagreed with the recommendation and that the decision
was premature.
Mr. Richard Neve lin, a displaced base worker, stated that he felt there was a rush
to approve the easement before the information is made available to the public as
to what the impacts might be.
Mr. Rick Wiederhorn, Planning Manager, Port of Oakland, stated that a 25 year
easement is currently in effect with the Navy and has been in place since 1969
and that the Port of Oakland is requesting to amend it. He then gave a visual
presentation to the Authority members regarding the technical details of the
request.
Mr. Bill Smith, of Bases Commercialization Bureau, stated that the situation of
looking at the perspective of the entire airfield needs to be taken in a piece meal
fashion and that it should be left to the public as much as possible and taken
through the BRAG committees.
Mr. Mark Friedman moved to accept the staff recommendation. The motion was
seconded by Councilmember Appezzato and passed by unanimous voice vote.
Assistant General Counsel, Heather McLaughlin, requested that the Reuse Authority
consider the new item in the packet regarding Alameda Naval Air Station's sewer line
replacement. She stated that the Authority needed to get a 2/3 vote to determine the
need to discuss this item which arose after the agenda was posted.
Councilmember Appezzato moved to add the item (which had arisen since the posting of
the regular agenda) to the agenda. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Lucas,
and carried unanimously by voice vote.
C. Report from Executive Director Recommending that the ARRA Seek the Assistance
of Congressman Dellums to Incorporate Funding for the Oakland Harbor Estuary
Sewer Force Main Pipe Size Change in the Existing Federal Funding for the
Oakland Harbor Deepening Project.
Mr. Parker reported that the Army Corps of Engineers had contacted the ARRA
office regarding a 16" sewer line which runs across the estuary from Alameda to
the Port of Oakland. The 16"sewer line was going to be replaced as part of the
maintenance/dredging work for the Oakland Harbor Deepening Project which is
in the process of getting under way. In the process of the dredging, the Army
Corps of Engineers would be replacing the 16" sewer main. Recognizing that
if there was an opportunity to increase the line now in anticipation of reuse
potential of NAS, a significant amount of money would be saved doing the work
as part of the maintenance/dredging project, rather than in the future. The
preliminary analysis, determined through the efforts of the consultant team as well
as the City of Alameda's Engineering Department, that it would be prudent and
cost effective to increase the line from a 16" line to a 22" line. The larger line
would cost approximately $150,000. If this replacement is held for the future as
a separate work item, it would be more in the range of a couple million dollars.
The ARRA office is attempting to get the work done as part of the current
dredging/maintenance project.
Resources which are currently being considered for the project are: 1) the Army
Corps of Engineers; and, 2) the Economic Development Administration (EDA).
The staff is asking for the support of Congressman Dellum's office to seek
funding for the additional work to be done.
Councilmember Appezzato moved to support the recommendation. The motion
was seconded by Councilmember Lucas, and carried by a unanimous voice vote.
III. ORAL REPORTS
A. Oral Report from the Executive Director Updating the Reuse Authority on Reuse
Authority Staff Activities
Mr. Parker reported on the following issues: notification to the Reuse Authority
by staff to pursue in writing to the Secretary of the Navy, Honorable John
Dalton, as a follow-up to a previous letter written (August 19, 1994) to delay all
conveyance decisions, including federal or beneficial conveyances until the
Community Reuse Plan has been completed; the timing for beneficial conveyances
was to close July 31, 1994, but no official word that this closure date for
interested parties under beneficial conveyances is final; staff met with BCDC staff
to work out a joint communication to the Seaport Planning Advisory Commission
on November 8, 1994, acknowledging the designation of the potential of 200
acres for seaport use would remain open until the Community Reuse Plan is
completed and a final decision can be made; use of the soccer field may be the
first public use of NAS Alameda, and attempts are being made for the Officers
Club to be made available for public use.
B. Oral Report from Proponents of Science City/ACET Regarding the Status of Their
Planning Studies/Business Plans
Mr. Parker stated that the current presentation would be the first of a two-part
presentation, the first part in preparation for the second which will be presented
at the next meeting. The intent of the presentation was to give an understanding
4
of what has been accomplished to date on the Science City/ACET joint proposal,
the progress which has been made, the kind of funding being identified, and some
of the key participants involved in the process. Mr. Jim Davis and Mr. Bruce
Kern gave the presentation on the new developments of the Science City/ACET
joint proposal.
Mark Friedman requested that the next document prepared by Science City/ACET
detail: management, community participation and blue collar job projections for
displaced workers issues of interest to the East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment
Commission.
C. Oral Report from the ARRA Planning Consultant (John Petrovsky, EDAW)
Regarding the Reconnaissance Phase Report (Administrative Draft)
John Petrovsky, ARRA Planning Consultant, gave an update on the course of
studies to date, reporting that the Consultant Team is on schedule; first major
public review product will be in January in the Conditions and Trends Report; a
series of public presentations will also be held beginning in January; in March,
the Authority will be requested to review the alternatives and establish an interim
strategy; a survey is being prepared to be distributed through the Alameda Bureau
of Electricity Flash Newsletter, the EBCRC, and the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority's mailing list; a separate report on the survey will be
published in January on issues, opportunities, and ideas as expressed by the
public; regarding technical studies, lines of communication are well established
with the Navy; the overall effort is on budget and on time.
Vice-Chair Swanson asked whether the Navy is leaving buildings and state of the
art equipment which could be available in the planning process.
Mr. Petrovsky stated that one of the main components of the study is the concept
of suites of buildings and equipment. The Reuse Authority cannot take the
equipment and sell it on the open market, but equipment which is part of the
reuse potential and economic reuse is maintainable and should be retained by the
Reuse Authority. All of this equipment is being considered as part of the reuse
plan.
Chair Withrow stated that it would be appropriate for the Reuse Authority to send
a communication to the two commands stating our understanding regarding
equipment to clear the air.
Speakers:
Mr. Bill Smith, representing Bases Commercialization Bureau, stated that no one
has defined the term public benefit.
5
D. Oral Report from Executive Director Updating the Reuse Authority on McKinney
Act/Homeless Issues.
Don Parker reported that there is a bill on the Senate floor sponsored by Senator
Feinstein that is labeled "The Base Closure, Community Redevelopment and
Homeless Assistance Act of 1994.
He also reported that a cooperative letter had been sent to the Secretary of the
Navy Dalton seeking to have the Navy keep open the interests of the non-
profit/homeless providers until the Community Reuse Plan can be completed.
This mirrors what the legislation is attempting to accomplish. Meetings with the
County, EBCRC, and the key homeless providers have been occurring in an
attempt to determine what the proper roles are for each organization.
E. Oral Report from Chair of the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG)
Updating the Reuse Authority on BRAG Activities.
Mr. Lee Perez, Chair of the BRAG, reported: the community meeting has been
rescheduled to October 29, 1994 from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at Encinal High
School where there will be bus tours provided; considerable dialogue has been
occurring between the consultant, EDAW, and the BRAG members resulting in
a workshop between the consultants and the BRAG to be held on Wednesday,
October 12.
F. Oral Report from Assistant General Counsel Regarding Voting Procedures for the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority.
Assistant General Counsel, Heather McLaughlin reported that the purpose of this
item was to clarify who is permitted to vote and who is not permitted to vote.
Some of the confusion arises from using the terms "alternate" and "proxy"
interchangeably. In the Joint Powers Agreement, the terms are differentiated as
such: named parties in the Agreement, such as Councilmembers in the appointed
positions; each of those members is allowed to appoint an alternate; the alternate
has the full rights and authority of the Member in the Member's absence; those
who are the "alternates" to the "alternates" are called proxies and do not have
those powers (they are not allowed to vote). In order to clarify this issue, the
non-voting people will be requested to sit at the table with Staff and the Ex-
Officio Members. One exception has been made to the rule for Authority
Member Swanson that his proxy, Senior Staff Member, Roberta Brooks, can
vote.
Vice-Chair Swanson requested that future agenda items which have been already
acted upon by the City of Alameda City Council be designated on the agenda or
within the staff report so that Authority Members not on the City Council will
know what action was previously taken.
6
Vice-Mayor Roth also requested that items which require a special vote of the
Alameda City Council (3 of 5), should be so designated. Assistant General
Counsel McLaughlin reported that a legal opinion will be prepared for the
Authority Members as to which items require this special vote.
G. Oral Report from Executive Director Regarding Next Agenda for Alameda Reuse
and Redevelopment Authority
Mr. Parker reported that the following items will be on the next agenda of the
Reuse Authority: Science City/ACET Planning Proposal and Funding Request;
Designation of Remaining Proxy; BRAG Request for an Ex-Officio Non-Voting
Member of the ARRA (approved by the Alameda City Council); request for an
endorsement of the New Turnaround Proposal" by Mr. Len Bertain involving
base workers sponsoring reuse of particular facilities under their management;
and a report on AEG as to the outcome of the award of the contract.
Chair Withrow requested that when an outcome is heard regarding AEG that the
Reuse Authority Members be advised as soon as possible.
Mark Friedman suggested postponement of the November 2 meeting due to
elections. After discussion, it was decided to hold the meeting at its regularly
scheduled time: 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 2, 1994 with important
items being deferred to the next agenda if attendance turns out to be light.
Ex-officio Member Gail Greely requested two items for the next agenda: Report
from Alameda Unified School District on the impact of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act which passed Congress on October 5 which will have
a major impact on the ability of the school district to adapt to the changes caused
by base closure; and the effect on the Alameda Unified School District of the
Office of Economic Adjustment's refusal to fund a request for plarming in the
foini of an update and impact analysis.
Vice-Chair Swanson requested a briefing for his office on this refusal of funds.
V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
Speakers:
Neal Patrick Sweeney, resident of Alameda, stated that base conversion public relations
is lacking except for the information being furnished by the City of Alameda's
newspapers, the Alameda Times Star and the Alameda Journal and that they should be
acknowledged by the creation of a plaque honoring the contributions of these newspaper
writers.
7
Richard Neve lin, a displaced worker, stated that he felt the Authority should reconsider
the decision regarding the Port of Oakland and the crane.
V. COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNING BODY
Vice-Chair Swanson stated that he hoped that the interim reuse plan is specific, but
generic enough where it is not dependent on Science City, and that it identifies.a Science
City use as part of the scheme of things. He reported on the Worker Promotional
Brochure, discussed at the previous meeting, and stated that $50,000 in funding was
obtained for this project and should turn out to be a very exciting project. The
Department of the Navy has come up with $40,000 and the East Bay Conversion and
Reinvestment Commission will be contributing $10,000.
Vice-Chair Swanson also reported that the President signed the Defense Authorization
Act and as a result, there will be a number of salient opportunities available: Pilot
Program that will allow employers to receive $10,000 if they hire a base worker and the
money can be used to either re-train the worker or relocate the worker; a $50 Million
loan guarantee program for businesses in our area which do at least 25 % of its business
with the Department of Defense, the Department of Defense will use this money to
guarantee loans which will help leverage up to $2 Billion in loan opportunities for
contractors in the area that promise to retain workers yet are pursuing a different line of
business; provisions for $5 Million for technology center, business plan development;
$7.5 Million in ship recycling pilot program; $2 Million for business opportunities for
base workers inspired by the "New Turnaround Program" scheduled for the next ARRA
agenda; and $5 Million for firefighters to transition to either a City fire department or
other public institutional fire departments.
VI. ADJOURNMEIVT
Chair Withrow adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
1-4
Elizabeth Brydon
Secretary
8
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter-Office Memorandum
October 26, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
SUBJ: Report from the Executive Director Requesting the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Endorse and Authorize the Executive Director to
Submit the Funding Request for the Combined Alameda Science City/ACET
(Alameda Center for Environmental Technology) Proposal for a "Scoping Study
and Strategy Development Plan"
Background:
The Alameda Science City and the Alameda Center for Environmental Technology
(ACET) have coordinated their interests, and ACET is considered within the environmental
' component of Science City. Each proposal independently has been reviewed and/or endorsed
by the Alameda City Council, the East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission, and the
Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG). At the last meeting of the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority (ARRA), the ARRA staff, in conjunction with representatives from
Science City/ACET, provided a briefing and update on the status of the combined proposal -
which at the time was being finalized. (The draft of the Science City/ACET planning study was
distributed at the last ARRA meeting and is still being finalized.) The new Executive Summary
of the planning study is attached to this staff report.
Over the last several months, the University of California has assumed an active
participation in assisting with the formulation of the proposal for the Science City/ACET
planning study. The University of California is arranging for two staff members to lead the
effort regarding the planning study. The planning study will be carried out as a joint effort
undertaken by the University of California and the ARRA.
Discussion/Analysis:
The attached Executive Summary outlines the scope of the planning study, and describes
the overall concept of the Institute for Technology Development and an associated industrial
park. The purpose of Science City/ACET is to create ways of combining the unparalleled
research and development strength of the East Bay utilizing a new mechanism for accelerating
technology development, technology transfer, creating new businesses and job formation.
Honorable Members of the Page Two
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority October 26, 1994
If ultimately adopted as part of the Community Reuse Plan for NAS, Science City/ACET
would become the long term economic engine that would assure large scale conversion of
Alameda Naval Air Station (NAS) for economic redevelopment and job creation purposes.
The planning for Science City/ACET will be undertaken and coincide with the
preparation of the Community Reuse Plan for the NAS, and will be incorporated as one of the
alternatives in the Community Reuse Plan.
The proposed combined budget for the Science City/ACET planning study is $4.6
million, and would be spent generally within the period of preparation of the Community Reuse
Plan (December 1995).
With endorsement by the ARRA of the Science City/ACET planning study, ARRA staff
will apply to several available sources of funding including: the Department of Defense
(earmarked funds in the House Committee Report on the Defense Authorization Act of 1995),
the Department of Commerce (Economic Development Administration), Department of Energy,
State of California, etc.
Budget Consideration/Fiscal Impact:
The ARRA will apply for funding for the Science City/ACET planning study; therefore,
ARRA staff resources will be committed to securing funding for this project. However, funding
for the actual planning study will be secured from other sources, and will not be the financial
responsibility of the ARRA.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority endorse and
authorize the Executive Director to proceed with submitting the funding requests for the
combined Alameda Science City/ACET planning proposal.
Don Parker, xecutive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Attachment: Executive Summary
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter-Office Memorandum
October 24, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
SUBJ: Report from the Executive Director Requesting the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Authorize the Executive Director to Send a Letter to
the Secretary of Defense Requesting Application for All or Portions of the
Alameda Naval Air Station to be Included Under the New Recently Amended
McKinney Title V Process
Background:
On October 7, 1994, the House and Senate passed the "Base Closure Community
Redevelopment and Homeless Assistance Act of 1994" revising Title V of the McKinney
Homeless Assistance Act process for disposing of buildings and property at military installations.
The new legislation became effective when it was signed by President Clinton on October 25,
1994. The new process applies to any military installation approved for closure after the date
of enactment of the legislation; however, for military installations already approved for closure,
the local reuse authority may within 60 days of enactment of the new legislation submit a request
to the Department of Defense (DoD) for consideration under the new procedures instead of the
current McKinney Title V process.
Discussion/Analysis:
According to the new legislation, base closure and realignment property can be exempted
from the current provisions of Title V of the McKinney Homeless Assistance Act. Under the
new process, homeless providers will no longer make direct requests to the federal government
for all or part of a closing military installation. Instead, homeless assistance providers will be
incorporated into the Community Reuse Planning process, and local reuse authorities will be
required to balance all community and economic development interests - including those of the
homeless - in the Community Reuse Plan. Homeless assistance providers shall express their
interest and statement of need for base property directly to the local reuse authority. The
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) will review the Community Reuse Plan
to determine if it adequately addresses the needs of the homeless, and that it balances those
needs with the need for community and economic development.
Honorable Members of the Page Two
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority October 24, 1994
The local reuse authority must provide the following to HUD with the Community Reuse
Plan: copies of all expressions of interest from homeless assistance providers and a discussion
of how these are being address; a summary of the local reuse authorities outreach to homeless
providers and publicity efforts, as well as, a summary of any public comments; a summary of
the local reuse authorities consultations with other organizations in developing the Community
Reuse Plan - including local Homeless Assistance Planning Boards; a statement of how the plan
balances the expressed needs of the homeless (either on or off base) and other community and
economic development needs; and, copies of proposed legally binding agreements that the local
reuse authority has entered into to fulfill its commitments to homeless assistance providers.
If HUD determines that the Community Reuse Plan fails to reasonably address the needs
of the homeless, the local reuse authority has 90 days from HUD's determination to revise the
plan to address HUD's concerns. If HUD again determines that the revised Community Reuse
Plan is unacceptable, than HUD will review the original expressions of interest from homeless
assistance providers and work directly with them to determine how their needs can be met.
HUD will then prepare a recommendation to DoD, and the Secretary of Defense shall dispose
of the buildings and property at the military installation as indicated by the Secretary of HUD.
At its September 7, 1994, meeting, the ARRA voted to participate in a joint letter sent
to the Secretary of the Navy requesting a delay in the implementation of the current McKinney
process to provide an opportunity to incorporate homeless interests into the community reuse
planning process. The joint letter requested a response from the Secretary of the Navy by
October 7, 1994; however, the Navy chose not to respond given the new legislation. The new
legislation was adopted subsequent to the mailing of the joint letter, but the new legislation has
the same advantage of the cooperative process outlined in the letter.
Budget Consideration/Fiscal Impact:
None.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority authorize the
Executive Director to send of a letter to the Secretary of Defense requesting that all or portions
of the Alameda Naval Air Station be considered for inclusion under the new procedures instead
of the current McKinney Title V process.
Res i ectfully submi
D
Parker, E cutive Director
DP:jm Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
ALAMEDA SCIENCE CITY
PLANNING STUDY PROPOSAL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OCTOBER 27, 1994
ALAMEDA SCIENCE CITY
Proposal for a Planning Study for an
Institute for Technology Development and Implementation of the
Alameda Center for Environmental Technologies
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. Introduction
This is a proposal to create stronger linkages between the region's resources for
technology commercialization and development to create more businesses and jobs
for the region. One part of this proposal is to initiate a Planning Study for an
Institute for Technology Development (ITD) and its relationship to an associated
Industrial Park (IP). A second part of the proposal is for immediate
implementation of the Alameda Center for Environmental Technologies (ACET).
The ITD, IP and ACET would together form the Alameda Science City (ASC), which
will be an essential part of the integrated Community Reuse Plan for sustainable
development of the Naval Air Station, Alameda (NAS Alameda). This study will
be undertaken by the University of California on behalf of the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority (ARRA).
The objective of the ITD will create new ways of combining the unparalleled
research and development (R&D) strength of the East Bay region with the
exceptional private sector vigor of the region to enhance current businesses,
establish new businesses, and create as many as 30,000-40,000 direct and indirect
jobs in the region and $3-4 billion of revenue at maturity.
Few places in the world have so much creative strength and economic need and
opportunity concentrated in a defined area. The challenge in this proposed study
is to determine how best to combine these impressive strengths and opportunities
not heretofore accomplished and simultaneously create new mechanisms for
accelerating technology development, technology transfer, and new business and job
creation.
The most basic consideration underlying the motivation for this proposal is the
conviction that, if timely job creation and industrial redevelopment of NAS
Alameda is the goal, a government-sponsored economic stimulus is essential to
success; that is if NAS Alameda relies only on the private markets to achieve
timely development, it is likely to be another failed base conversion project.
2. Rationale and Vision: An Overview
The ideas and directions for the proposed Institute for Technology Development
(ITD), associated Industrial Park (IP), and Alameda Center for Environmental
Technologies (ACET) have evolved as a part of the community effort to develop a
long-term plan for job creation in Alameda and the Bay Area. The ITD will be a
central component of the conversion and reuse plan for the NAS Alameda and
integrally connected with an associated Industrial Park.
This proposal is stimulated by three closely related factors:
the impending closure of the NAS Alameda
(ii) the broad community commitment to convert the NAS Alameda to
economically productive uses and create jobs in ways that take
advantage of the special attributes of the East Bay region and
surrounding areas
(iii) significant combinations possible with the large, broadly diverse, and
exceptional quality and innovativeness of the Bay Area's
internationally R&D community and the counterpart strengths of the
East Bay's science and technology-based industry
The proposed ASC will be planned and managed to take full advantage of the
DOE's Lawrence Berkeley and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories, the
University of California, Berkeley and San Francisco campuses, other research
universities and laboratories, and private sector laboratories throughout the Bay
Area. It will link closely to the extraordinary array of science- and technology-
based firms in the area, many of them in vital, early-stage development, and use
the entrepreneurial dynamism of the area. The ASC will be instrumental in
creating and sustaining science and technology-based businesses. It is anticipated
that it will do this by combining research, technology development, business
involvement, financial structures, and market potential in new ways through new
collaborative arrangements among the science and technology and R&D community.
It is anticipated that an effective new model will be established for the critically
important linkages among research, development, and economic stimulus an
vitality.
The study will identify the most desirable organizational form for the ITD. One of
the key alternatives to be examined will be that of a federally-sponsored or -
chartered institute. the implementation of ACET will not only partner resources
and stimulate the commercialization of environmental technologies, but it will pilot
many of the concepts to be incorporated in centers to be established during later
stages of ASC development.
2
Given the right plan and the right economic and other incentives, it is envisioned
that as many as 30,000-40,000 regionwide jobs and gross annual revenues of $3-4
billion could be created at full maturity of the ASC.
3. Context
The underlying economy producing the high standard of living in the San Francisco
Bay Area, an area extending approximately from Santa Clara in the south to Santa
Rosa in the north and from the Bay to Livermore, is a science-based economy.
Indeed, this metropolitan area can be described as a large "science city" consisting
of a high density of advanced technology companies, major universities, three
national laboratories, extensive supporting industries and education facilities. The
NAS Alameda is geographically centered in this area near the Oakland
International Airport.
Economic Community Challenge
The NAS Alameda and its primary tenant the Naval Aviation Depot (NADEP) have
been selected for closure under the provisions of the 1990 Base Closure and
Realignment Act. These facilities, located on the San Francisco Bay in the City of
Alameda, California, occupy 1,734 acres of prime urban real estate. They have a
local employment base upwards of 11,000 military and 3,800 civilian jobs. The
Naval Public Works Center, which is housed in rented facilities in the City of
Oakland, is also slated for closure. This will result in the loss of an additional
1,800 civilian jobs The Oak Knoll Naval Hospital, located seven miles from the
NAS Alameda in the City of Oakland is also slated for closure and this will cause
the loss of an additional 1,400 military and 800 civilian jobs. This combined
reduction of 18,200 primary jobs has the further effect of eliminating .another
18,000 local jobs in the supporting infrastructure and commerce. The economy
within. the County of Alameda will be significantly impacted by this large job loss.
In addition to the four facilities in Alameda and Oakland, six other military bases
and facilities in the San Francisco Bay Area, and four more within a 100 mile
radius have been slated, for closure. Overall, regional base closures will result in
the loss of about 66,000 primary jobs and up to 130,000 jobs in total. Prior to the
announcement of the base closures this region held employment for 9.7 percent of
the total DoD military and civilian personnel, but it has been targeted for 45
percent of the nationwide cuts. Also, military procurement reductions have had a
disproportionately damaging effect on the employment of skilled and professional
workers in California and the Bay Area.
Response: Technology Development and Economic Vitality
The President perceives the impressive infrastructure already in place to support
further growth of the East Bay region (cf. Remarks by the President Clinton, Naval
Air Station, Alameda on August 13, 1993):
3
"The East Bay has the potential to be a magnet for technology, for
aviation, for manufacturing. Alameda County is the home of some of
the world's finest research laboratories---Lawrence Livermore,
Lawrence Berkeley and the University of California at Berkeley. We
have a technology re investment project for defense conversion that is
already drawing high-tech firm into partnerships with these
institutions. If we succeed, this military axis could be transferred into
a thriving, high-tech commercial hub, a high-tech gateway to Asia and
beyond.... I do want this county, I do want these facilities, I do want
this area to be a national model."
The conversion of the NAS Alameda into a science-based park that contributes to
this metropolitan "science city" would be not only feasible but also meritorious. It
would need to consist of businesses that provide a spectrum of jobs encompassing
the full range of needs from blue collar to white collar. Because of the relatively
high living standard enjoyed in the Bay Area, the ASC should offer relatively high
paying jobs. Consequently the focus should be on science-based products that are
not readily reproducible in areas having considerably less access to world class
research and technology capabilities. Thus the challenge set forth here is to design
a science city that not only can produce the needed high paying jobs for all
segments of the society but also is compatible with other diverse interests of the
community proximate to NAS Alameda.
The ITD is proposed to carry out applied science projects in close cooperation with
industries in areas of high national interest, such as manufacturing competitiveness
and work force training. ACET is proposed to create this type of collaboration in
the area of environment and health. ACET and the ITD will be dedicated to
narrowing the research-commercialization gap; catalyzing new business structures
and financing arrangements; emphasizing science and technology as a nucleus for
joint ventures beyond the means of a single large company, as a liaison between
small entrepreneurial enterprises and venture capital, and as a center for vocational
training and education. The Industrial Park (IP) will be home to advanced
technology industries of various sizes and specialties. ACET and the ITD are
separate from the IP but they will work in concert with the IP and serve as a
magnet to attract industries to the area. Naturally, projects in addition to those
fostered by the ITD and ACET will be implemented in the IP and in the balance
of the NAS Alameda land and in neighboring communities.
Both the ITD and ACET will be planned and structured to complement existing
institutions in the region, thus preventing competition for federal funds. For
example, the relationships between these institutions at Alameda and existing
national laboratories and university campuses in the region will be fully developed,
especially with regard to the size and functions of the ITD to ensure
complementarity. Where existing institutions in the region can provide necessary
technical infrastructure, both the ITD and ACET will be structured to use this
4
infrastructure in support of their programs; unnecessary duplication of locally
available capabilities will be avoided. It is anticipated that for the first 3-5 years
after initiation of the ASC project, prior to completion of needed new facilities, the
ITD will operate as an intermediary between interested ASC participants and
existing Bay Area organizations with established facilities and staff interested in
participating in joint ventures.
Already there has been such an entity formed, the Alameda Center for
Environmental Technology (ACET), and it is envisioned that the ITD through its
activities will create additional, complementary, initiatives such as ACET. ACET
is currently in the process of incorporation as a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation, and
has been in the planning process for a year and a half. ACET is specifically
designed to take advantage of the R&D strengths of the region is supporting the
environmental technology industry, business, and services. Its purpose is to be a
business incubator with a capacity for laboratory and fields studies for emerging
environmental businesses:
The study will explore the potential for international participation in the ITD in
order to accommodate the fact that essentially all companies, not only the large
multinationals but also the small entrepreneurial ones, today have international
interests. The criteria for international participation must and will be clearly
defined and implemented so as to assure that they are in the best interest of
national competitiveness and job creation. In this and other regards, the proposal
will be thoroughly compared with related developments around the world (e.g.,
Hsinchu, Taiwan) and other federal programs supporting national competitiveness
in order to benefit from lessons learned.
The ASC proposal has been approved by the City of Alameda's Base Reuse Advisory
Group (BRAG) and the Alameda City Council. It has also been presented to the
East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission (EBCRC) and Alameda
County's Economic Development Advisory Board (EDAB) during the last quarter of
1993 and early in 1994. A "Conceptual Business Plan" was prepared and submitted
to the Alameda City Council in March 1994 and (consistent with a strong
recommendation from the BRAG), and they endorsed the plan unanimously as
worthy of further development.
The ACET proposal has also been through extensive public review. It has been
endorsed by EBCRC, BRAG, the Bay Area Economic Forum, the Cities of Alameda,
San Leandro and San Pablo, the Housing and Economic Development Subcommittee
of the Oakland City Council, and the East Bay Municipal Utilities District among
others.
Two considerations derived from this early endorsement warrant emphasis:
First, the preliminary vision of the ASC offered here is intended to
provide only a reference frame for the Planning Study; it represents
what might be accomplished with strong government support such as
rnight be expected if the administration were to follow through on its
expressed desire to make this area a National Model. Such a
development scenario is aggressive but not unprecedented (cf. Hsinchu,
Taiwan). Second, although an aggressive vision of a fully evolved ASC
is elaborated here, it does not constitute the final proposal, which will
be the product of the Planning Study.
4. Proposed General Concept
Caveat: What follows is the general concept to be analyzed and
planned for the ITD portion of the Alameda Science City proposal.
Planning details of the ACET portion of the ASC proposal are
contained in the ACET business plan. Concept development for the
ITD and IP portion of ASC involves studying, evaluating, planning,
reanalyzing, and fashioning options from which the most desirable can
be chosen. The most attractive and beneficial alternatives to the ITD
and IP may well be options not anticipated or even articulated as
possible in this proposal or expected as possible at the outset. What
is important is that the mission and goals be kept in mind and be
optimally enabled with the preferred options.
The concept of ASC envisions two principal parts, the Institute for Technology
Development and an associated Industrial Park, both being key elements of the
overall reuse and conversion plan for the NAS Alameda.
Starting points for planning the ITD are that it will have the following
characteristics. It will:
(i) be a. focus for generating and developing technology and for the
creation of and assistance to advanced technology industries;
(ii) relate closely, collaboratively, and synergistically to the academic,
research, and private sector communities of the Bay Area;
(iii) create and pilot new products and processes;
(iv) be a direct participant (in selected instances) in establishing new
businesses;
(v) provide facile mechanisms for exchange and/or aggregation of people,
processes, organizational models, and funding to facilitate product
development and business innovation;
6
(vi) assist and/or participate in developing new ways of conducting
business, such as in financing and ownership in the processes of
product development, manufacturing, and sales and entrepreneurial
approaches to multinational projects; and
(vii) support and incubate new businesses that derive from or relate to
technologies emphasized in the ITD.
All of these, and other, points will be studied as to their appropriateness,
feasibility, and best alternatives to ultimately adopt.
The objectives of the Industrial Park are that it will:
0
be a major place for establishing and growing science and technology-
based businesses, and especially those related to the technology
emphases of the Institute;
(ii) it will be synergistic with ITD; and
(iii) many of the businesses involved will relate to strengths of the San
Francisco Bay Area.
Finally, as noted at the outset, notwithstanding these intentions, starting points,
and directions, all will be subject to critical analysis and scrutiny during the
planning to determine if they are appropriate, what are the best alternatives for
them, and how they might be most efficaciously implemented.
5. Mission and Goals of the Institute for Technology Development and the
Industrial Park
ITD Mission
The mission of the Institute will be to bring together the Bay Area's exceptional
research, development, entrepreneurial, and business strength in an exciting new
focus to stimulate development of a new generation of agile advanced technology
industries, to attract and retain strong, developing, and innovative national and
international companies to the area, and thereby to be a central force for economic
vitality and job creation and retention for the region. Put differently, the mission
of the ITD is to enhance the competitive position of the United States in advanced
technology and commerce by providing an effective interface between the advanced
technology base (available in the national laboratories, universities, private research
laboratories worldwide) and manufacturers.
ITD Goals
(i) To secure strong synergies among the internationally unique R & D
community of the Bay Area and of the comparably unique vigor of the
business and industry communities.
(ii) To cooperate with industries in areas of strategic national importance
such as materials, improved manufacturing techniques, environment,
health, and worker (re)training.
(iii) To forge a close partnership with the IP, which is proposed to be a
venue where new and existing businesses can be established and grow
and to which existing businesses can move to take better advantage
of the ITD.
(iv) To be central and integral to achieving effective economic development
at the NAS Alameda site.
(v) To develop an innovative, effective model mechanism for efficient
transfer of science and new technology to the commercial sector.
IP Mission
The industry focus represented by the companies targeted for the IP will have a
major influence upon the definition of the ITD. As an early part of the Scoping
Study, different segments of industry (biotechnology, instrumentation, information
processing, sensors and instrumentation, etc.) will be examined to determine the
attractiveness of the ASC endeavor for them. As a consequence, a limited number
of main areas of activity for the IP will be identified, and the market,
organizational and financial dynamics of that industrial focus will assist in the
definition and development of the ITD.
6. Vision
During this
for the ITD
elements of
(i)
study, a range of options and preferred alternatives will be analysed
and the IP. These options will be consistent with the following key
the vision for the ITD and IP:
A unique institution, drawing comprehensively on the strengths of the
region.
(ii) High environmental quality throughout, including base clean-up before
and during its conversion and as a test-bed and laboratory for
emerging, innovative environmental technologies.
8
(iii) Accelerated technology development and transfer using various types
of collaborations among universities, federal laboratories, and private
sector organizations, with rapid decisions on equitable distribution of
intellectual property rights.
(iv) Progressive use of economic enterprise zones and foreign trade zones.
Development of new approaches for conducting environmental and
other regulatory reviews within standards already established.
(v) Creation of a community of R & D (the ITD) and knowledge/technology
businesses (the IP) which provides seamless interface among research
(universities, federal laboratories, and private sector), technology
development (research findings converted into useful [near] products),
and manufacturing. • Models to be tested for applicability include
Hsinchu (Taiwan), Tsukuba City (Japan), and Technopolis (Bordeaux,
France)
(vi) Government, businesindustry, and public partnership in the planning
and in the review/approval stages in order to maximally facilitate key
steps, including start-up and implementation.
7. Strategic Analyses: Defining Specific Concepts and Directions
A key early step in planning the ITD is to address areas identified for strategic
attention to define further the concepts and directions for the ITD and associated
aspects of the IP.
Work plans for each area will be identified by a scoping team before planning
begins. The scoping team will define the key topics for the area; recommend the
most productive goals and directions for the area; identify the studies and analyses
that should be done in order to understand the area; identify relationships between
the ITD and IP and with their external environments; and recommend effective
ways to develop options for implementation for the area.
The following strategic areas have been identified for specific, early-stage attention:
Science and Technology Strategy
Science fields and technology arenas that would receive priority attention at
the outset; a fit of ITD research and technology development with university,
national laboratory, and private sector interest; intellectual property issues;
involvement with international and foreign research laboratories.
Human Resources and Education
Human resources needed for the ITD and the IP; determine how best to
secure and retain the work force and to ensure job creation including blue
collar and W/M/DVBE; provide for continuous human resource development
including in-service education and (re)training; (re)training of displaced
workers from the NAS Alameda; relationships with local and regional
educational systems including K-12.
Business Strategy
Develop preferred strategic directions for the science and technology core of
the ITD relative to private sector business needs, and anticipated national
and international business trends; priority actions for creating and nurturing
start-up firms.
Financial Systems
Establish the financial plans for ASC and its ITD and IP components, to
integrate them, and to ensure monitoring accountability, and fiduciary
responsibility. Develop financial constructs appropriate for the formation of
joint ventures among national laboratories, industries, universities, and
related foreign organizations, giving specific attention to securing appropriate
returns to government and private investors when public and private funds
are combined to achieve mutually beneficial goals.
Regulations, Approvals, and Incentives
To understand the regulatory requirements and approvals needed; to simplify
and expedite the approvals, including condensing and combining time
schedules and documents; identify incentives deemed essential for business
success. Close •relationships will be maintained with ARRA in the
development of the required environmental review documents (the federal
Environmental Impact Statement and the state Environmental Impact
Review).
Legislation and Contractual Relationships
Enabling legislation to establish the ITD, the IP, incentives, and changes in
regulations; consideration of the ITD to become a federally-charted or
federally-sponsored body and legislation and contracts to create it;
management options of the ITD.
Urban Planning, Architecture, and Engineering
Linkages of the ITD and IP to surrounding local and regional communities,
including transportation, public services, and amenities; master planning
concepts and design alternatives; architectural requirements to secure
maximum energy and resource conservation; architectural and precinct design
guidelines; and engineering alternatives.
Throughout the scoping studies there will be integration and review of the progress
made in order to optimize the strategic areas and functions relevant to the ITD and
IP.
8. Major Functions
The ITD will potentially engage in several different types of activity. The structure
and implementation of these activities will be developed further during the
planning study. It is intended that these functions will be complementary to related
functions undertaken by the universities, national laboratories, and industry in the
Bay Area.
Joint projects with industries, universities, and laboratories
The ITD may perform both entrepreneurial and performance functions in
identifying or evaluating opportunities, bringing together project teams,
arranging for project financing, performing some portion of the technical
effort, providing facilities and equipment, providing support services (legal,
contracting, etc.), and project management. The funding for the ITD
activities in these projects might normally be provided by the federal
goverru-nent, although in some cases the Institute may be funded by industry.
The federal government support of the ITD in these projects would provide
an inducement for industry. Joint projects could be of several types:
new product development
testing and refining of advanced manufacturing processes
new ways of starting, organizing, staffing, managing, and
financing projects
new techniques for educating and training the work force.
Incubation of new companies
The ITD might offer a "one-stop" resource for individuals or groups with
promising new ideas for products. For carefully selected proposals, it could
provide conception-to-birth support in the form of facilities, assistance in
raising start-up capital, business planning, and management to enhance the
survival rate of start-up companies.
11
Industrial support and assistance
The ITD might purchase selected special equipment to maintain the "latest
and the best" equipment and skills, which would be available to industry on
a negotiable basis. Such equipment would not be available to industry as a
routine production aid to avoid putting the ITD in competition with the
commercial design and specialty fabrication firms. Personnel training
assistance in advanced techniques and the use of exotic equipment might also
be provided.
Government support projects
The ITD might take on scientific, technical, or analytical tasks as needed for
any of the departments or agencies of the state and federal Government. The
ITD is conceptualized as an interagency technical institute of the federal
government, thus a true "National Institute". This highlights the question
of the logical "ownership" of the Institute in the long term. A new paradigm
for the ownership of the ITD is needed and options will be raised during the
Planning Study.
Institute projects
Some fraction of the Institute revenues might be used to support an
internally directed R&D program, to sharpen the skills of the staff, and to
explore new ideas generated by the staff.
Education and training projects
Specific programs in education will be planned in close cooperation with local
schools, colleges, national laboratories, and universities to help identify the
educational, training and retraining needed in the community to successfully
re-employ displaced and unemployed Bay Area workers, as well as those
expected to enter the work force in the near future.
9. Study Plan
Objectives
The Scoping Study will provide the long term vision and strategy
development for the ASC. The study objectives are to:
Evaluate and establish the concept of the ASC and its component ITD
and IP
Establish program components and organizational framework for the
ITD
12
Identify focus and marketing strategies for the ASC, including interim
leasing potential
Identify resource requirements to implement the ASC and ITD
Identify fiscally sound economic development strategies
Identify reg-ulatory, environmental, and legislative issues
Study Teams
Five Study Teams would be established, drawing on local (university,
national laboratory, and industry) expertise. These teams would be assisted
by consultants commissioned to undertake detailed studies in each area.
Science and technology (programs and organization issues):
This team will define the concept of ITD and, more generally, the IP
Business focus and marketing strategy
This team will define the market focus and business viability of the
ASC concept, using industry, associations, community groups, and
university research groups
Legislative issues:
This team would propose enabling legislation.
Financial resources and structures:
This team will be responsible for providing an integrated financial
plan for ITD (and ASC), and the means for developing joint ventures
with public and private fund sources
Regulatory issues:
This team would establish the regulatory requirements, working with
Base Reuse contractors. The Community Reuse Plan would be the
basis for Environmental Impact Documents.
The Scoping Study office staff would be responsible for coordinating work in
the following areas:
Physical design
Public information and outreach
Integration and review
Organization charts for the proposed reporting relationships between the Study
Teams, the study coordination office, and ARRA, are attached.
Communication and Public Participation
13
Alameda Science City is a community-based effort, as is the entire base reuse and
conversion initiative in the East Bay. It is essential, therefore, and it will be a goal
and central operating policy of the ITD planning study to keep the community
broadly informed, to be available for public discussions and responding to questions
when requested, and to be responsive to all reasonable requests for information and
presentations and to public interests and concerns. The planning study will utilize
the Community Reuse Planning Public Participation process to facilitate
comm-unications.
The scoping team will provide for public participation in key elements of the study.
Draft reports will be made available, comments solicited, and concerns and
suggestions incorporated.
Key Organizations
The entire East Bay community, and beyond, is important for this study. As noted,
the planning study will make its findings and plans broadly available as
expediously as possible. The study will work closely with a number of key
organizations, including:
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
City of Alameda
County of Alameda
Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG)
East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission
Economic Development Advisory Board for Alameda County
City of Oakland and other East Bay cities
Bay Area Economic Forum/Bay Area Defense Conversion Action Team
Bay Area Regional Technology Alliance (BARTA)
Joint Venture: Silicon Valley Network
University of California (Regents, Office of the President, and Berkeley
and San Francisco campuses)
Department of Energy (Lawrence Berkeley and Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratories)
California State University and California Community College systems
State of California (including economic development and defense
conversion. and base reuse units)
Private sector corporations, industry representatives and associations
Public interest organizations.
(f). Schedule of work
The work is planned according to the areas outlined in "Study Teams" above: (a)
science and technology, (b) Business Focus and Marketing Strategy, (c) Financial
Resources and Structures, (d) Reg-ulatory and Legislative Issues, (e) Physical
14
Design, (f) Public Information and Outreach. Study should be focused and work
consolidated by May. Study draft should be ready during September; October-.
December the project office would work with ARRA office to complete the proposal.
12/94 1/95
3/95 4/95
11/95
Science & Technology
Business Focus/Marketing
Financial Resources/Structures
Regulatory Issues
Legislative Issues
Physical Design
Public Information/Outreach
9. Budget.
(i) Financial accountability
The Scoping Study and Strategy Development will be conducted on
behalf of ARRA. All costs will be borne by ARRA and consultants
will be employed by ARRA. The accounting and budgeting will be
done by the project office and will invoice ARRA for payment on a
monthly basis.
(ii) Costs for .the ITD Planning:
Study team costs are estimated to be as follows (includes consultant fees
and meeting costs):
Science and Technology $500,000
Business focuWmarketing strategy $500,000
Financial resources and structures $400,000
Regulatory $300,000
Legislative $300,000
Physical design $300,000
Human Resources and Education $250,000
$2,550,000
Scoping Study Office (staff, overhead $800,000
S&E, travel)
Subtotal $3,350,000
(iii) Costs for the ACET Planning and Implementation:
Subtotal $1,250,000
Total Request
$4,600,000
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter-Office Memorandum
October 24, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker
Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
SUBJ: Designation by Remaining Authority Member of His Alternate
Background:
Pursuant to section VI.B. (Governing Body of Authority) of the "Joint Exercise of Power
Agreement" each member of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority shall appoint one
alternate as a representative.
Discussion/Analysis:
At the organizational meeting of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority on May 19,
1994, each Member was asked to be prepared at the next meeting to designate their alternate.
At this time, all but one Authority Member designated their alternate. The alternate shall have
all the rights and authority of a Member; however, these rights and authority may only be
exercised in the absence of the designated Member.
Fiscal Impact:
None..
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the remaining Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Member
designate his alternate.
Res ectfully sub
Don Parker
Executive Director
DP/eb
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter-Office Memorandum
October 24, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
SUBJ: Report from the Executive Director Regarding the Alameda City Council's
Support of a Request by the Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG) for
a BRAG Representative to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority as
a Non-voting, Ex-officio Member With One Non-voting Alternate
Backuound:
• At the August 3, 1994, meeting of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
(ARRA), at the request of the Alameda Unified School District (AUSD), the ARRA voted to
appoint the Superintendent of the AUSD to the ARRA as a non-voting, ex-officio member.
Subsequent to that action by the ARRA, at the September 14, 1994, meeting, the
Alameda Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG) voted to recommend that the City Council
support appointment of a BRAG representative to the ARRA as a non-voting, ex-officio member
with one non-voting alternate, to enhance the communication between the decision making group
for the Alameda Naval Air Station (the ARRA) and the community.
The Alameda City Council voted to support this proposal at its October 4, 1994,
meeting.
Discussion/Analysis:
The Alameda City Council created the Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG) and its
eleven subcommittees to provide community input for the base conversion process. The
subcommittees (approximately 250 members) and the BRAG have met over the last year to
ascertain issues of community concern. They also function as a grass roots conduit of
information from those working directly on base conversion.
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter-Office Memorandum
DATE: October 26, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
SUBJ: Report from the Executive Director Recommending that the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Authorize the Signing of a Memorandum of
Understanding with the Naval Air Station Alameda Describing the Transfer and
Use of Property Parcel Number 144 Known as the "Soccer Field."
Background:
The Naval Air Station Alameda is willing to make available property parcel number 144
to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) for use as a recreational field prior
to a formal lease being signed. This property located adjacent to Main Street is .approximately
4.3 acres including 135 parking spaces. The intended use of the property is a soccer field(s)
maintained by the City of Alameda's Recreation Department. The Memorandum of
Understanding will give the ARRA its first opportunity to actually receive rights to property at
NAS.
D iscussion/Analysis :
In order to expedite reuse, the Naval Air Station has agreed to make the "Soccer Field"
available to the ARRA through a license or a lease which will be signed with Engineering Field
Activity, West (EFAWEST - foimerly WESTDIV). The process of property transfer is
convoluted and relatively slow. A lease requires the Environmental Base Line Survey (EBS)
and a Finding of Suitability for Lease (FOSL) for the subject parcel be completed. The EBS
for this parcel is essentially complete; however, the FOSL has not yet been initiated. FOSL's
must be signed off by various regulatory agencies such as Department of Toxic Substances and
California Environmental Protection Agency. The time required to acquire a completed FOSL
is unknown at this time since this is first one to be initiated at NAS, but it is expected to be a
rather lengthy process. Additionally, license/lease terms with EFAWEST have not been
negotiated to date. The actual license/lease for this parcel will be presented to the ARRA for
approval prior to signature of the license/lease. The fiscal impact resulting from the acquisition
of this property will be presented to the Alameda City Council for approval prior to entering into
a binding agreement with the Navy.
A Memorandum of Understanding with NAS will allow the modifications required to
convert this parcel to a recreational field while the administrative process for transfer of this
parcel is continuing. The Memorandum of Understanding would also allow the City of Alameda
to make the modifications required to bring this piece of land into confolinance with other City
recreational fields until a license/lease with Engineering Field Activity, West Division can be
MEMO DUM OF 1 ERSTANDING
between the
Naval Air Station, eda, California
and the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
This MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING between the Naval Air Station, Alameda,
California, hereinafter referred to as NAS Alameda, and the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority, here' referred to as " ' acting under the President's Five-Point Plan of July 2,
1993,
•
SSE
WHEREAS, NAS Alameda's objective is to coordinate, implement and control all
drawdown/closure planning and action to achieve the community's and Navy's goals.
WHEREAS, NAS Alameda's and ARRA's objective is to take all action as required to facilitate
innovative and timely reuse with "seamless transition" as the ultimate goal.
NOW 1 • REFORE,
NAS 1 DA AGREES TO:
A. Environmental Action
1. Des' . - Parcel 144 (ERM Naval Air Station, Alameda Parcel Map, Areas 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6,
ERM CAD IDENR NO. 92210006) a priority on the Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS),
P 11 sampling schedule.
2. Expedite completion of EBS Phase 11 sampling to the extent permitted by federal and state
environmental regulations and promptly notify ARRA of the results.
3. Proceed with steps required to obtain a Finding of Suitability for Lease (FOSL) as prescribed in
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and De. ent of Defense (DOD) policy.
B. Legal Instrument. Determine the most appropriate instrument, i.e., license or lease, to effect
use of Parcel 144 by the ARRA or its : lent, on the earliest possible • - (at completion of EBS
P II and appropriate response action and/or notice) and proceed in an e - • itious manner to
execute the. •opriate document.
D. Each provision of this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is subject to the laws of
the United States and the State of California, the or' t. ices of the City of Alameda, and the
dele:ted authority in each instance.
The • : ;es hereto have caused this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING to be duly
executed on the respective • . - s set forth opposite their si . tures. It is their intent that this
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING take effect on the date both si: :tures have been
executed.
[Date] [Date]
COMMANDING OFFICER CHAIR
Naval Air Station, Alameda, Alameda Reuse & Redevelopment
California Authority
Approved as to form:
General Counsel
3
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inner-Office Memorandum
October 25, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker
Executive Director
SUBJ: Report from the Executive Director Recommending the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Direct the Executive Director to Submit Applications
for an Army Corps of Engineers Permit for the Oakland Harbor Estuary Sewer
Force Main Pipe Size Change in the Existing Federal Funding of the Oakland
Harbor Deepening Project and to Take All Necessary Actions to Successfully
Complete this Project
Background:
The Army Corps of Engineers is relocating the Naval Air Station (NAS) Alameda sewer main
across the Oakland Inner Harbor as part of the Port of Oakland Inner Harbor deepening project. By
increasing the size of the sewer line segment across the harbor now while the sewer line is being
relocated, the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) and the federal government
can save over two million dollars in construction costs.
At its regular meeting of October 5, 1994, the ARRA requested assistance from
Congressman Dellums to incorporate funding for the Oakland Harbor Estuary Sewer Force main pipe
size change from 16 inches in diameter to 22 inches into the federal funding for the Oalcland Harbor,
Deepening Project . (See attached ARRA Staff Report, October 5, 1994).
ARRA staff has had discussions on this project with Congressman Dellums' office staff,
Senator Feinstein's Office staff, Economic Development Administration (EDA) staff, and the Army
Corps of Engineers. It has been determined that funding for the project will be sought through a
special EDA award. Methods will also be pursued for expediting the EDA grant process.
In follow-up meetings with the Army Corps of Engineers, they requested that the proposal
for increasing the size of the NAS sewer main be processed as a separate Corps permit. If the grant
is funded and the Corps permit is approved, the sewer size increase could be a change order request
to the original Army Corps construction contract. In this way the sewer sizing changes would not
require modifications to the existing Corps project or changes in the existing harbor deepening project
schedule.
Honorable Members of the Page 2
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority October 25, 1994
Discussion/Analysis:
In order to meet the Army Corps of Engineers bidding and construction schedule for the Inner
Harbor Deepening Project is required a separate permit application and approval for the sewer size
increase from the Corp of Engineers. The Army Corps permit also requires a separate but concurrent
application and permit approval from the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development
Commission (BCDC). BCDC has permit jurisdiction over projects within the coastal zone, in this
case the San Francisco Bay.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review (an initial study) and determination will
be prepared by the ARRA office as part of the Army Corps of Engineers permit application. National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review will be conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers.
Fiscal Impact:
Cost for applications to the Corps of Engineers is $100.00. The application fees would be
paid from the ARRA office budget.
Funding for the sewer replacement is estimated at $150,000 by the ARRA Civil Engineers and
approximately $300,000 by the Army Corps of Engineers. Funding is now being sought for a special
grant (100%) from EDA for the project. EDA generally requires a 25% cash match for all
construction projects. Without special legislative instructions this project could require a match of
approximately $38,000 - $75,000., It is anticipated that any matching resources for the project will
be a loan from the City of Alameda to the ARRA.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority direct the Executive
Director to make the necessary Army Corps of Engineers applications and take all actions necessary
to successfully accomplish the NAS sewer main sizing project.
Res •ectfirlly submitted,
Don 'arker
Executive Director
DP/dpt
Attachment: Staff Report - October 5, 1994
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Inter-office Memorandum
October 5, 1994
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Parker, Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
SUBJ: Report from the Executive Director Recommending that the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Seek the Assistance of Congressman Dellums to
Incorporate Funding for the Oakland Harbor Estuary Sewer Force Main Pipe Size
Change in the Existing Federal Funding for the Oakland Harbor Deepening
Project
Background:
The Naval Supply Center (NSC) is scheduled to be turned over to the Port of Oakland
and converted to a deep water port as part of the Port's overall expansion prans. This will
require dredging the Oakland Inner Harbor from an existing depth of approximately -35 feet to
approximately -46 feet in the vicinity of the existing Naval Air Station (NAS) 16 inch sewer
force main. Thus, the sewer line must be relocated as a result of the proposed dredge work.
Presently, the Atli iy Corps of Engineers is circulating the revised plans and specifications for
final comments. They expect to advertise November 2, 1994, and award the contract on
December 19, 1994. This dredging replacement project provides a unique opportunity for the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) to provide adequate sewer capacity for
the future build out of the NAS at a lower cost. It would be much cheaper and more cost
effective to expand the capacity of this sewer line segment (from 16 inches.to 22 inches) while
the line is being relocated during the Oakland. Harbor Deepening Project.
Discussion/Analysis:
The ARRA consultant, EDAW, performed a flow capacity study for the NAS site. They
determined that the peak sewage flow for a future development scenario to be 16.7 cfs (7,500
mgd). Based on this flow estimate, it was determined that in order for the existing system to
handle the predicted future capacity needs of NAS, the sewer line would need to be either
upsized from a 16 inch to a 22 inch main or two parallel lines would need to be added. One
22 inch line would be substantially less expensive than parallel lines (a 16 inch and a 18 inch).
The cost to relocate the 16 inch sewer force main is estimated to be $1.8 to $2 million.
The estimated cost to install the 22 inch line in lieu of the 16 inch line is estimated at $150,000
which includes: approximately $110,000 for materials, $10,000 for redesign, $10,000 for design
oversight, and $16,500 for a 15% contingency.
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS IMPEDIMENTS TO THE 22" SEWER FORCE MAIN
The Army Corps of Engineers seems to be requesting an extraordinary number of
requirements for what should be a minor amendment to an existing project and to existing
permits. The following are a list of impediments to the expansion of the sewer line proposed
by the Army Corps of Engineers:
1. The environmental documents must be amended.
The Corps claims this enlargement may be a growth inducement issue. The City of
Alameda's Planning Director will conduct an initial study documenting that enlarging the
sewer line segment is not growth inducing. The increased sewer line size is only for that
segment of the sewer line crossing the Oakland Harbor (the most expensive section), and
will not substantially increase the overall capacity of the system. Furthermore, the
ARRA environmental consultant, EDAW, and Ray Chaing, Navy WESTDIV, have also
agreed that the increased sewer line size in this section would not be a growth
inducement.
2. The City of Alameda would need to obtain an Army Corps of Engineers permit.
To obtain such a permit generally takes several months, and it is assumed the Army
Corps of Engineers has a permit for the 16 inch line. The existing permit for the
Oakland Harbor Deepening Project - held by the Port of Oakland or the Army Corps of
Engineers - could be amended to change the relocated line to 22 inches.
Page Two
October 5, 1994
3. The Army Corps of Engineers said that they could not
The ARRA consultant has provided the Army Corps
various sewer lines. There is a company in Sacramento
a 21 3/4 inch pipe.
find a 22 inch line.
of Engineers with suppliers of
which has available immediately
inch pipe.
it should be a minor amendment
4. A BCDC permit would need to be obtained for the 22
The BCDC permit is held by the Port of Oakland, and
to the permit obtained for the 16 inch sewer line.
5. Water quality certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
This issue is resolved with the existing BCDC permit.
6. Granting of City of Alameda easement needed for Oakland Harbor Deepening., Project.
The Army Corps of Engineers needs the City of Alameda to grant a tidelands easement
for the Oakland Harbor Deepening Project. The City of Alameda is the responsible
agency for tidelands trust property within City limits (Oakland harbor estuary). The
Alameda City Attorney has preliminarily determined that the granting of an easement is
not possible; however, the City Attorney indicated that a long term lease can be provided
in lieu of the easement. This should not be an impediment to the project unless the
City's concerns are not addressed adequately.
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Page Three
October 5, 1994
7. The Army Corps of Engineers $10,000 advance funding request to redesign construction.
The Allay Corps of Engineers has sent a letter to the Alameda City Engineer, indicating
that the City of Alameda must provide a $10,000 check by October 11, 1994, for the
Corps to revise the design, plans and specifications to increase the relocated line from
16 inches to 22 inches. The Alameda City Engineer believes this cost for changing the
design plans is high and has asked for a cost breakdown from the Corps. The Alameda
City Engineer has requested the Army Corps of Engineers bid the sewer relocation
project with a simple "add-on alternative". This is a simple mechanism (one page
alternative description in the RFP) requesting an alternative construction bid for the 22
inch sewer pipe in lieu of a 16 inch sewer pipe. The Corps has not been receptive to this
request.
Since the Army Corps of Engineers will go out to bid on the Oakland Harbor Deepening
Project the second of November, a source of funding to expand the sewer capacity needs to be
guaranteed within the next 30 days. For the amount of money involved, and the long tenii
benefit to the ARRA in its conversion of NAS, it would seem appropriate to incorporate the
increase (22 inch instead of the 16 inch) sewer line size into the existing federal funding for the
Oakland Harbor Deepening Project.
Budget Impact/Fiscal Analysis:
The City of Alameda has no budget allocated for this project, and may not want to
commit to the use of other City funds unless it receives some reassurance that those funds can
be reimbursed.
Most construction projects have a 15 % contingency for routine change orders on a project
the size of the Oakland Harbor Deepening Project which could exceed the amount needed to
expand the size of the relocated sewer line. It would be much cheaper to expand the sewer line
size now while the line is being relocated for the Oakland Harbor Project - rather than have the
ARRA come back to the federal government in three or five years from now to fund a sewer
replacement project.
The Economic Development Administration (EDA), U.S. Department of Commerce, will
consider construction/public works construction grants; however, EDA does not generally
consider construction grants for less than a million as it costs $50,000 to process an EDA grant
application. Therefore, the proposed sewer capacity expansion project at approximately
$150,000 does not meet that EDA criteria. Furthermore, EDA could not guarantee approval of
the project even if the funding application for the sewer was combined with another
construction/public works project.
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Page Four
October 5, 1994
The City Manager for the City of Alameda has indicated that the City could immediately
advance the $10,000 requested by the Army Corps of Engineers by October 11, 1994, for the
redesign of plans and specifications with the expectation that this money will be reimbursed with
federal funds.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) seek
the assistance of Congressman Ron Dellums to incorporate funding for the Oakland Harbor
Estuary sewer force main pipe size change (22 inch in lieu of 16 inch) in the existing federal
funding for the Oakland Harbor Deepening Project, and to require that this size pipe be required
on both the Oakland and Alameda side of the estuary. Furthermore, it is recommended that the
ARRA request Congressman Dellums assistance in directing the Army Corps of Engineers to
bid the sewer relocation project with a simple "add-on alternative". (This would require the
Corps draft a one page description in the RFP requesting an alternative construction bid for the
22 inch sewer pipe in lieu of a 16 inch sewer pipe.)
Res ectfully submitted,
Don Parker, xecutive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
DP: jm
AUG- 23 -'94 17:43 ID:MOFFATT * NICHOL
c2
N '
4
TEL NO :510 944 -4732 4767 PO4
aT�D opt
d ddb
ag
4
U H
0o
01
w
z
w
a
nCX' °_e
.71 T L_/ a G. ,Q 4°
1
•
J
a
2
a
j ,1n 1
J
NOdd
ONINd:
*`
0
N
vp
r",1 . a
Oral Reports
Background Information
for Item
III . A
TO:
FROM: Dennis K. Chaconas, intendent
SUBJECT: Impact of Passage of Elementary and Secondary Education
Act (ESEA) Title VIII
Alameda Unified School District
We Serve Children
October 26, 1994
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
. _
Superintendents Office located in:
Historic Alameda High School
2200 Central Avenue
Alameda, California 94501.
(510) 748-4060
FAX (510) 522-6926
Dennis K. Chaconas, Superintendent
Packground
Federal Impact Aid has been available to Alameda. Unified. School Dis-
trict (AUSD) to make up for the financial losses of tax revenue
sources due to military connected students. The rationale for provid-
ing federal impact aid funds is based on the fact that additional
students are brought into a school district wherever a military base
is located, and.therefore, the ability of local schools to raise
revenue is reduced at the same time due to land being taken off the
tax rolls_
In FY 93/94, AUSD served a total of 1,738 students, grades K-12, of
military parents and an additional 592 K-12 students whose parents
were civilians working for the military or federal agencies. We there-
fore received S1,960,175 for these students from the U.S. Department
of Education. The total students served for which we received funds
was 2,330 out of a total student population of 10,058. The percentage
of impact aid-funded students is 23%. (See Enrollment Data Chart at-
tached).
New L.Pcaslation
The new legislation has revised the formula to use for determining
funding level entitlements: In addition, the funding for federal
impact aid was reduced by S70 million on a national level. This reduc-
tion of funding will also have a negative impact because it means
there is less money to distribute.
Another change in the new legislation impacts the funding of students
whose parents are civilians working for the military or federal agen-
cies. The students of these civilians now only receive funding if a
school district has 2,000 and 15% of the total district enrollment.
Under the new requirement, Alameda Unified School District no longer
qualifies for funding for at least 592 students, The other factor
which impacts the funding levels is that weighting in the formula
favors districts with high military student population, i.e., 50% or
more. Alameda is 23%. Colly Ferrer, Chief Fiscal Officer of AUSD has
computed the entitlements based on the new formula. (Attached you will
find her analysis.)
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
October 26, 1994
The analysis indicates that AUSD will need to apply for a hold harm-
less status to ensure we do not decrease the 94/95 entitlement by
$1,005,127. In the new legislation, hold harmless is a provision
which was designed to provide a transition for districts which were
negatively impacted by the new formula change. The hold harmless
provision is only for two years. There is no special consideration in
the new legislation for districts facing base closure. In the previous
legislation, there were special provisions for base closure which pro-
vided for continuation of funding for three years to transition from a
district that provided service to military students to one that did
not. The fact that AUSD will be significantly impacted by the change
in formula is not the only issue. We obviously will need to apply for
hold harmless status, but this will not address the loss of students
due to base closure for FY 96/97.
Impact on studepta
Indeed the information we have received from captain Dodge of NAS
indicates that the housing will stay full through FY 96/97 due to the
Navy's current plan to consolidate military families from the North
Bay Area into Alameda. Yet; our funding will decrease by over $1
million in FY 96/97 when we still have military students and we will
have no transition years of funding in FY 97/98,
It should be noted that the formula change also has the impact of
reducing funding levels while AUSD will still maintain the same level
or percentage of military students in FY 94/95 and FY 95/96. As you
can see from the attached analysis, the decrease for 94/95 entitlement
with hold harmless is projected at $294,026.25 and for FY 95/96
$249,922.31.
The loss of revenue will impact the total AUSD budget and services to
students. It is evident that due to the changes in the ESEA Title
VIII Impact Aid, AUSD will be negatively impacted by the changes as
well as the loss of students due tO base closure. It is also evident
that AUSD needs to pursue relief from this "double hit" through the
federal and state legislative process.
BC REUSE
AD:bt
Attachments
ANALYSIS OF IMPACT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT (ESEA) TITLE VIII
To compute the projected decrease In PL 81 -874
Entitlement due to new formula (LOT):
1993 -94 Entitlement
Entitlement using the new formula
Decrease
To compute our 19 95 Entitlement using the Holdharmiess:
1993 -94 Entitlement
Holdharmless Rate
$ 1,960,175.00
955,048.00
$ 1,005,127.00
$1,960,175.00
85.00%
Decrease from 1993 -94 to 1994 -95 Entitlement
1993 -94
199495
To compute our 1995 -96 Entitlement using the Holdharmless:
1994-95 Entitlement
Holdharmless
$1,666,148.75
$1,960,175.00
1,666,148.75
$294,026.25
$1,666,148.75
x
85.00%
Decrease from 1994-95 to 1995 -96 Entitlement
1994-95
1995-96
$1,416,226.44
$1,666,148.75
1,416,226.44
$249,922.31
ALAMEDA UNIFIED 11 COL DISTRICI-Ervollment Data rev. #2 (1/24/94) jh
Sources: District Enrollment Report 10/6/93 and Federal Survey Cards 10/5/93 (rev. 1/24/94).
ODLS
ARY
Bay Farm Island
Earhart
• a 1'2
•
'gra*
Longfellow
Lum
Paden
10
Total
Students
415
427
345
584
524
546
495
465
336
575
574
Mili
rtrol
Elementary To
:ODLE
Chipman
w
0•0
•
•
665
7C6
734
19
7
9
17
35
19
'.111
9
132
21
396
1152
303
21
Federal
Em.ly. Enrl.
13
19
18
33
51
22
2
18
41
29
40
43
Perct t. Sp. Ed
Mit. /Fed. Students
7.71%
6.09%
723%
16A1%
751%
98.99%
5.81%
45.83%
10.78%
74.04%
3
0
2
5
8
2
30
1
14
16
21
Mit. in
Fed. Housing
2
0
0
5
5
2
0
129
16
392
26.86% 102
1035
52.33%
8.64% 5
7.63% 6
1
8
Middle School Total 2106
GH
128 22109%
Island*"
1339
1146
1
High School Total 2667
DISTRICT
AIS
26
210
13
249
High
Middle Ails 2105 337
Elementary Schools . :. 1152
District Tot 1 1/11.: 1738
Per Cent of Fed./Military F
"Includes pre-kind . .-n enrollment "Includes Independent Study.
OS
15
2667
78
103
10
9
7.77%
27,75% 15
12.64%
4
187
7
196 16.69% 1
196 16.69% 18
128 2Z09% 38
268 26.86% 102
592 23,17% 158
y Housed 6532%
198
•
1035
1522
CORRN SPONDFNC h
( Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda Naval Air Station
Postal Directory, Bldg. 90
Alameda, California 94501-5012
510. 263.2870
FAX 521.3764
October 6, 1994
Mr. Raymond Chiang
Environmental Division
WESTDIV
Western Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command
P.O. Box 727
San Bruno, California 94066
Re: Comments on the DEIR/EIS on the Lease of Fleet & Industrial Supply Center
Property to the Port of Oakland for Development of Intermodal Rail Facilities
and Maritime Cargo-Related Tenant Uses.
Dear Mr. Chiang,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report
(DEIR) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for leasing the Fleet Industrial Supply
Center, Oakland (FISCO) to the Port of Oakland. The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority has reviewed the Draft EIR/EIS and have prepared the following. comments. Our
concerns focus on three major issues: the response to the City of Alameda comments presented
in Appendix A, traffic/circulation, and the issue of waste water services.
Your response to the City of Alameda comments in Appendix A of the EIS/EIR, do not
adequately address the City concerns. It is incorrect to state that decisions about Naval Air
Station (NAS) Alameda land uses are "years away". The base reuse planning process has begun.
Our schedule anticipates completion of the Interim Reuse Strategy in April 1995 and completion
of the long-teim Community Reuse Plan in December 1995. The Interim Reuse Strategy will
outline interim uses and a program to market a number of interim uses for NAS Alameda.
In addition, the response in Paragraph "###" is also incorrect in its reference to the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service request for property conveyance. No decision has been made on any
request. A number of similar requests have also been filed including; (1) the U.S. Coast Guard,
(2) a joint Alameda Parks Department, Alameda Unified School District, and the East Bay
Regional Park District, (3) a number of homeless providers, and (4) the California State
University. All property conveyance request will be assessed through the community reuse
planning process.
In regard to traffic/circulation, the Draft EIRJEIS does not adequately address the need to
maintain a transportation corridor through the project site for future regional access between the
NAS Alameda property and the 1-880/980 corridor. Ultimate success of the reuse and
nc\TNC A Hnlorli continent tinon nrovicling adequate transportation access to
Mr. Raymond Chiang
October 10, 1994
Page 2
the NAS site. Improved access to NAS Alameda must consider potential improvements for auto.
transit uses such as light rail, and improved ferry services. In addition, it may be appropriate to
provide more innovative transit solutions such as a direct skyway connection to the West
Oakland BART station on 7th Street in Oakland. The City of Alameda should be granted a
transportation corridor access easement across the project site adequate for potential future
transportation connections from NAS Alameda to 1-880/980 and the West Oakland BART
Station. Such a transportation corridor easement should also be resolved in the lease agreement
between the Navy and the Port of Oakland.
The EIR/EIS should also acknowledge the project's impact upon NAS Alameda's sewer
services. A 16" sewer main connects Alameda NAS with the East Bay MUD sewer plant to the
north in Oakland. This line crosses the Oakland Inner Harbor Estuary and crosses the project site
in the area proposed for lease, and connects to a 16-inch force main underneath 8th Street, which
ultimately connects with a 27-inch EBMUD line along 7th Street (page IV-120-121). It should
be noted that this line is the principal waste water discharge for all of NAS Alameda.
The sewer line requires protection from any proposed development. Furthermore, the
sewer line may need to be enlarged in the future. The ARRA is responsible for the planning and
redevelopment of NAS Alameda. and is working with the City of Alameda for the ultimate
control of the NAS Alameda sewer lines. Therefore. it is appropriate that the City of Alameda be
granted an easement to the land adequate for maintenance of this facility and that provisions be
made for allowing a future upgrade of the sewer line size connections to the East Bay MUD 27-
inch force main. This issue should also be resolved in the lease agreement between the Navy and
the Port of Oakland.
If you have any questions regarding the above comments, please contact Paul Tuttle, Reuse
Planner, of my staff at (510) 263-2870.
Don Parker
Executive Director
DP/dpt
cc: Honorable Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
City Manager, City of Alameda
Alameda City Attorney
Planning Director, City of Alameda
Public Works Director, City of Alameda
City Engineer, City of Alameda
Transportation Marker, City of Alameda
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda Naval Air Station
Postal Directory, Bldg. 90
Alameda, California 94501-5012
510. 263.2870
FAX 521.3764
October 6, 1994
Mr. James McGrath
Environmental Manager
Port of Oakland
530 Water Street
Oakland, CA 94607
Re: Comments on the DEIR/EIS on the Lease of Fleet & Industrial Supply Center
Property to the Port of Oakland for Development of Intermodal Rail Facilities
and Maritime Cargo-Related Tenant Uses.
Dear Mr. McGrath,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report
(DEIR) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for leasing the Fleet Industrial Supply
Center, Oakland (FISCO) to the Port of Oakland. The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment
Authority has reviewed the Draft EIR/E1S and have prepared the following comments. Our
concerns focus on three major issues: the response to the City of Alameda comments presented
in Appendix A, traffic/circulation, and the issue of waste water services.
Your response to the City of Alameda comments in Appendix A of the EIS/EIR, do not
adequately address the City concerns. It is incorrect to state that decisions about Naval Air
Station (NAS) Alameda land uses are "years away". The base reuse planning process has begun.
Our schedule anticipates completion of the Interim Reuse Strategy in April 1995 and completion
of the long-term Community Reuse Plan in December 1995. The Interim Reuse Strategy will
outline interim uses and a program to market a number of interim uses for NAS Alameda.
In addition, the response in Paragraph "###" is also incorrect in its reference to the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service request for property conveyance. No decision has been made on any
request. A number of similar requests have also been filed including; (1) the U.S. Coast Guard,
(2) a joint Alameda Parks Department, Alameda Unified School District, and the East Bay
Regional Park District, (3) a number of homeless providers, and (4) the California State
University. All property conveyance request will be assessed through the community reuse
planning process.
In regard to traffic/circulation, the Draft EIR/EIS does not adequately address the need to
maintain a transportation corridor through the project site for future regional access between the
NAS Alameda property and the 1-880/980 corridor. Ultimate success of the reuse and
redevelopment of NAS Alameda is contingent upon providing adequate transportation access to
the NAS site. Improved access to NAS Alameda must consider potential improvements for auto,
transit uses such as light rail, and improved ferry services. In addition, it may be appropriate to
provide more innovative transit solutions such as a direct skyway connection to the West
Mr. James McGrath
October 10, 1994
Page 2
Oakland BART station on 7th Street in Oakland. The City of Alameda should be granted a
transportation corridor access easement across the project site adequate for potential future
transportation connections from NAS Alameda to 1-880/980 and the West Oakland BART
Station. Such a transportation corridor easement should also be resolved in the lease agreement
between the Navy and the Port of Oakland.
The EIR/EIS should also acknowledge the project's impact upon NAS Alameda's sewer
services. A 16" sewer main connects Alameda NAS with the East Bay MUD sewer plant to the
north in Oakland. This line crosses the Oakland Inner Harbor Estuary and crosses the project site
in the area proposed for lease, and connects to a 16-inch force main underneath 8th Street, which
ultimately connects with a 27-inch EBMUD line along 7th Street (page IV-120-121). It should
be noted that this line is the principal waste water discharge for all of NAS Alameda.
The sewer line requires protection from any proposed development. Furthermore, the
sewer line may need to be enlarged in the future. The ARRA is responsible for the planning and
redevelopment of NAS Alameda, and is working with the City of Alameda for the ultimate
control of the NAS Alameda sewer lines. Therefore, it is appropriate that the City of Alameda be
granted an easement to the land adequate for maintenance of this facility and that provisions be
made for allowing a future upgrade of the sewer line size connections to the East Bay MUD 27-
inch force main. This issue should also be resolved in the lease agreement between the Navy and
the Port of Oakland.
If you have any questions regarding the above comments, please contact Paul Tuttle, Reuse
Planner, of my staff at (510) 263-2870.
Sincerely,
Don Parker
Executive Director
DP/dpt
cc: Honorable Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
City Manager, City of Alameda
Alameda City Attorney
Planning Director, City of Alameda
Public Works Director, City of Alameda
City Engineer, City of Alameda
Transportation Maier, City of Alameda
Ray Chiang, WESTDIV Environmental Planning Branch
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Naval Air Station
Po,vtal Directory, Bldg. 90
Alameda. CA 94501-5012
510-263-2870
FAX 510-521-3764
October 7, 1994
Senator David Pryor
267 Russell Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Pryor:
On behalf of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, I wish
your tremendous effort in getting the McKinney Reform Bill passed. I believe
result in a vastly improved process for dealing with the homeless issue in our
a result of the new bill, both the community and homeless interests will become
there will now be a process that works.
to thank you for
your efforts will
community. As
winners because
We certainly appreciate your dedication and commitment to improving, the process.
Sincerely,
Don Parker
Executive Director
DP/eb
cc: Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Members
Bill Norton, City Manager
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
tVaval Air Station
Postal Directory. B1c1q. 9!)
Alameda, CA 94501-5012
510-263-2870
FAX 510-521-3764
October 7, 1994
Senator Dianne Feinstein
331 Senate Hart Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Feinstein:
On behalf of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority. I wish
your tremendous effort in getting the McKinney Reform Bill passed. I believe
result in a vastly improved process for dealing with the homeless issue in our
a result of the new bill, both the community and homeless interests will become
there will now be a process that works.
to thank you for
your efforts will
corru-nunity. As
W nne r s because
We certainly appreciate your dedication and commitment to improving the process.
Sincerely.
„4/
Don Parker
Executive Director
DP/eb
cc: Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Members
Bill Norton. City Manager
(
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Naval Air Station
Postal Directory, Bldg. 90
Alameda, CA 94501-5012
510-263-2870
FAX 510-521-3764
October 10, 1994
Mr. Ben Williams
Deputy Director
Administrative Services
Governor's Office of Planning and Research
Office of Governor Pete Wilson
1400 Tenth Street, Room 156
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Ben:
On behalf of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, I wish to thank you and
your staff for your tremendous effort in getting the McKinney Reform Bill passed (The Base
Closure Community Redevelopment Act of 1994). I believe your efforts will result in a vastly
improved process for dealing with the homeless issue in our community. As a result of the new
bill, both the community and homeless interests will become winners because there will now be
a process that can work for all parties.
We certainly appreciate your dedication and commitment to improving the process.
Don Parker
Executive Director
DP/eb
cc: Governor Pete Wilson
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Members
Bill Norton, City manager