1998-05-06 ARRA PacketAGENDA
Regular Meeting of the Governing Body of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
* * * * * * **
Alameda City Hall
Council Chamber, Room 390
2263 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
Wednesday, May 6, 1998
Meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m.
City Hall will open at 5:15 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 minutes per item.
(2) Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and only a summary of pertinent points
presented verbally.
(3) Applause or demonstrations are prohibited during ARRA meetings.
1. CLOSED SESSION OF THE ARRA TO CONSIDER:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -- EXISTING LITIGATION 5:30 p.m.
Creative Artist Network. Inc. dba Cool World Productions v.
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and City of Alameda
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR 5:35 p.m.
Property: Alameda Naval Air Station
Negotiating parties: ARRA and Touro University
Under negotiation: Instruction to negotiator regarding sublease terms
and conditions
Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54956.8
2. ROLL CALL
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
3 -A. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of April 1, 1998.
4. ACTION ITEMS
4 -A. Recommend authorization for the Executive Director to finalize and execute a 14 -year
sublease with the California School of Professional Psychology.
4 -B. Recommend the award of contract for consultant design services in the amount of
$128,837 to Muller & Caulfield Architects for renovation of Building 23.
ARRA Agenda - May 6, 1998 Page 2
4 -C. Authorize additional allocation of funds in the amount of $75,000 for Building 39
upgrades.
5. ORAL REPORTS
5 -A. Oral report from the BRAG updating the ARRA on current activities.
5 -B. Written report on behalf of the Executive Director updating the ARRA on:
1. Status of the Economic Development Conveyance (EDC)
2. Status of the Tidelands Trust appraisal
3. Alameda Unified School District land swap
5 -C. Oral report from the Executive Director (non - discussion items).
6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
(Any person may address the governing body in regard to any matter over which the
governing body has jurisdiction, or of which it may take cognizance, that is not on the
agenda.)
7. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
8. ADJOURNMENT
This meeting will be simultaneously broadcast on cable channel 22.
The next regular ARRA meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, June 3, 1998.
Notes:
• Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact Patti Van Mark, ARRA
Secretary, at 864 -3400 at least 72 hours before the meeting to request an interpreter.
• Accessible seating for persons with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs) is available.
• Minutes of the meeting are available in enlarged print.
• Audio tapes of the meeting are available for review at the ARRA offices upon request.
APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, April 1, 1998
The meeting convened at 5:40 p.m. with Chair Appezzato presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Ralph Appezzato, Mayor, City of Alameda
Albert DeWitt, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Barbara Kerr, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Tony Daysog; Councilmember, City of Alameda
James Sweeney, alternate to Councilmember Karin Lucas, City of Alameda
Mark Friedman, alternate to Wilma Chan, Alameda County Board of Supervisors,
District 3
Jay Leonhardy, alternate to Henry Chang, Jr., alternate to Elihu Harris, Mayor, City
of Oakland
Kathleen Ornelas, alternate to Ellen Corbett, Mayor, City of San Leandro
Absent: Vice Chair Sandre Swanson, District Director, 9th Congressional District
Ex- officio: Lee Perez, Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG)
CONSENT CALENDAR
2 -A. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of March 4. 1998.
Speakers: None.
Alternate Leonhardy moved approval of the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded
by Member DeWitt and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 8. Noes: 0. Absent: 1.
ACTION ITEMS
3 -A. Report recommending authorization for the Executive Director to finalize and execute a
14 -year lease with Orton Development. Inc. for Building 5.
Ed Levine, ARRA Facilities Manager, provided information about the layout of Building 5 and
advised that it is essentially impossible to lease as is because of its size (375,000 sq.ft.) and
configuration. The best solution seems to be to bring in Orton Development, which will convert
the building into multi -tenant use. Orton will front all of the expertise and money needed to
finance building upgrades. They will also provide construction management and handle the
leasing for the space. The ARRA will then share in the net proceeds from the leases.
recycled paper 1 H:\MENSLEY \ARRA\MINUTES \1998 \4- 1- 98.MIN
Chair Appezzato inquired if all the upgrades revert to the. City without cost, and Mr. Levine
confirmed that this is true.
Member DeWitt noted that the Master Plan or Reuse Plan shows this area to be demolished,
although that cost would be very expensive ($2 million). He asked if Executive Director Miller
agreed with the strategy of Orton Development instead of demolishing the building.
Executive Director Kay Miller confirmed that this is consistent with the use of many of the
hangars that need to be upgraded. It will be a number of years before development gets to that
part of the base, and this seems like a good use of the property and good source of revenue.
Member Kerr brought up the difference between the building's size (375,000 sq.ft.) and the
leasable space (250,000 sq.ft.) and asked why there is such a large difference between the two
figures. Mr. Levine introduced Eddie Orton, who stated that some of these buildings were built
without regard to prevailing law for this jurisdiction. The primary effect of this is that there is
not adequate exit space, and much of this lost space will be given up to providing mandated exit
areas.
Member DeWitt asked if there were any contamination issues which would result in lesser use of
the building. Mr. Orton stated that environmental issues are being addressed, and they will affect
the design but he is not certain to what extent at present.
Chair Appezzato inquired if there have been any potential renters interested yet. Mr. Orton
indicated that he has received some good press coverage already, and he is working with local
people who are familiar with the marketplace.
Speakers:
Bill Smith, interested citizen of Alameda, stated he was happy to see an actual developer come
forward to take over this project and encouraged future live /work space accommodations.
Alternate Friedman motioned to recommend authorization to finalize and execute a 14-
year lease with Orton Development for Building 5. The motion was seconded by Member
Kerr and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 8. Noes: 0. Absent: 1.
3 -B. Alameda Point campus issues:
• Final report by Dr. Robert Fisher and consideration of results of campus outreach/
marketing efforts.
Executive Director Miller introduced Dr. Robert Fisher, the consultant hired to prepare a campus
outreach and marketing proposal for Alameda Point. Dr. Fisher stated that this project entailed
disseminating information . about the availability of the campus area to the higher education
community. The feedback he received was that there was no one institution interested in taking
over a substantial portion of the property.
recycled paper 2 H:\MENSLEY\ARRA\MINUTES \1998 \4- 1- 98.MIN
• Overview by Ed Levine, ARRA Facilities Manager, of potential campus users.
Ed Levine briefly described each of the potential campus users and outlined exactly which areas
they are interested in.
California School of Professional Psychology (CSPP) offers programs in research and clinical
psychology and is currently located in the Marina Village area. They are interested in relocating
to the former medical /dental clinic building, which contains 39,000 sq.ft.
Touro University is a New York City based school offering undergraduate, graduate and pro-
fessional degree programs. They are interested in moving their School of Osteopathic Medicine
from San Francisco to Alameda Point. The space they desire includes the former movie theater,
bowling alley, re- employment center, CPO galley, and BOQ, for a total of 273,000 sq.ft.
Pan- Pacific University (PPU) is a newly - formed and not yet credentialed institution. They are
interested in the BEQ and galley, comprising 284,000 sq.ft.
• Board consideration of ARRA staff recommendation to commence serious negotiations
with three potential campus users (California School of Professional Psychology, Touro
University and Pan- Pacific University)
Chair Appezzato voiced concerns about accreditation for all three schools, whether the enroll-
ment projections for all three schools are realistic, and whether tuition fees will financially
sustain them. Regarding PPU, they have indicated they will have $3 million in the bank, yet
$2.7 million is needed just for building upgrades, so where will operating income come from?
Can PPU look to Mokwon University of Korea for additional funding if needed? He said it
would be a "public relations nightmare" if any of the schools were to fail after locating here, and
he does not want the City to be liable for any expenses or commitments the schools cannot
fulfill.
Member Kerr expressed her concern about Pan- Pacific because of its past track record and its
funding coming from a foreign source. She stated she does not feel it is worth devoting more
staff time to PPU.
There was further discussion regarding the difficulty and lengthiness of the accreditation process,
how a revenue bond would affect the City (only being considered for CSPP), the cost of bringing
different facilities up to code, and, specific to PPU, whether Mokwon University could take on
an "affiliate" relationship with PPU, which may help with their financial and accreditation issues.
It was stressed that PPU is not being singled out for special treatment, but that there are serious
concerns since they have no faculty or governing body, few students, questionable financial
resources, and no accreditation. However, it was felt by most members that all three schools
should be given the opportunity to present their proposals.
Speakers:
Bill Smith, interested citizen of Alameda, stated that it seems like there is a "hot market" for
university cluster arrangements at Alameda Point.
recycled paper
3 H: \MENSLEY\ARRA\MINUTES \1998\4- 1- 98.MIN
Member Daysog moved, and Alternate Leonhardy seconded, the following motion: Accept
the staff recommendation that the ARRA Board accept the report of Dr. Fisher regarding
the campus and authorize staff to immediately commence serious discussions with
California School of Professional Psychology, Touro University and Pan - Pacific University
for facilities in the campus area at Alameda Point, with the understanding that whichever
agency is moved forward for final approval by the ARRA depends on the satisfactory
provision in a timely manner of documents that allow the ARRA staff and ARRA
Governing Board to exercise its due diligence responsibilities. The motion passed by the
following voice vote: Ayes: 7. Noes: 1 (Kerr). Absent: 1.
ORAL REPORTS
4 -A. Oral report from the BRAG updating the ARRA on current activities.
Lee Perez, BRAG Chair, concurred with the recommendation that was made regarding the
campus users. The BRAG is continuing to discuss its reorganization and will report on that at
the next meeting.
4 -B. Written report from the Exe utive Director updating the ARRA on:
1. Status of the Western Aerospace Museum business plan for Hangar 41
2. Quarterly report on lease revenue
Member DeWitt asked about the uses of the lease revenue funds. Executive Director Miller
stated that the largest expenditures are the EDA grant match, the port operations and the common
services fees paid to the Navy. It will be a number of years before the property is self - sustaining.
If the EDC plan is approved, it may result in a joint venture with the Navy for additional funding.
Speakers:
Barbara Baack, Alameda Naval Air Museum, stated that she hopes the museum will be given a
fair hearing and that they have been in contact with State Senator Barbara Lee regarding the
availability of grant funds. They also have a line of credit with Wells Fargo Bank.
4 -C. Oral report from the Executive Director (non - discussion items.
Executive Director Miller announced two items of interest. First, Gallagher & Lindsey held their
first open house last weekend for the 31 ranch units, which resulted in 10 tenants who will be
paying rent in the range of $1400 -1800. Secondly, filming is just beginning. in Building 24 for a
new Clint Eastwood movie, which he will be directing and starring in.
Also, Chair Appezzato reported that he had received a phone call from Deputy Assistant
Secretary of the Navy William Cassidy indicating that the federal government has turned down
the request from MARAD to acquire the FISC property for their ready reserve ships. Therefore,
if the MARAD wants to use any of the FISC property, they will have to negotiate lease
arrangements.
recycled paper 4 H: \MENSLEY\ARRA \MINUTES \1998 \4- 1- 98.MIN
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
Speakers:
John Kim, Jin Construction & Electric Company, stated he is a subcontractor working on the
Building 39 remodeling and upgrades. His company misinterpreted the drawings for the project
and as a result they underbid by $40,000. He asked for the Board's help in recouping some of
these losses. Chair Appezzato advised Mr. Kim that he must follow the normal process with
City staff to resolve the problem.
Douglas Copp, American Rescue Team International, told the Board about his Alameda -based
organization's all- volunteer rescue efforts around the world and indicated that they are in need of
storage space for vehicles and supplies. They would like to have access to some of the hangar
space at Alameda Point. Chair Appezzato told Mr. Copp to submit his request to ARRA staff
Gail Greely, Vice President of the Board of Education and ex officio member of the ARRA
Board representing the Alameda Unified School District, voiced concern about the impending
transfer of the FISC property and the resulting impact on the Public Benefit Conveyance
applications made by the School District. She stated that in 1994, the School District requested
three pieces of property for a continuation high school, central cafeteria and maintenance yard.
Three parcels were identified and agreed to, but they have since been changed due to the private
development of the FISC property, and proposed alternative sites have not been acceptable. The
School District would like their concerns to be addressed before the property is transferred to the
developer.
Bill Smith, interested citizen of Alameda, discussed the availability of T -1 lines in buildings at
Alameda Point and how they would be advantageous in attracting the high -tech industry and
educators to the site.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
Alternate Sweeney thanked Executive Director Miller and her staff for their assistance in the
campus outreach project.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Appezzato adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Te`
Patti.Van Mark
ARRA Secretary
recycled paper J` H:\MENSLEY\ARRA \MINUTES \1998 \4- 1- 98.MIN
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
April 30, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Ed Levine, Facilities Manager [for Kay Miller, Executive Director]
SUBJ: Report recommending authorization for the Executive Director to finalize and
execute a 14 -year sublease with the California School of Professional Psychology
Background:
The California School of Professional Psychology (CSPP) is a 30 -year -old fully accredited
institution offering clinical training and post - graduate degrees in psychology. CSPP's ten -year lease
of a 25,000 sq.ft. building in Marina Village will expire next year. Due to growth in their programs,
CSPP now needs a 40,000 sq.ft. facility. This requirement can be ideally accommodated by
renovating Building 16 (the former Medical/Dental Clinic) at Alameda Point. Equivalent space in
a single building may not be available at Marina Village. If CSPP does not lease space at Alameda
Point, they may consider moving outside the City of Alameda.
CSPP wishes to lease Building 16 for the maximum term allowed under the ARRA's Master Lease
with the Navy and has requested that their sublease extend through expiration of the Master Lease
on January 30, 2012. The term of their sublease will be approximately thirteen and one -half years.
Since this term exceeds seven years, the ARRA governing body must authorize the Executive
Director to execute the lease.
Discussion:
Building 16 will require extensive renovations, including seismic upgrades, to accommodate
CSPP's programmatic requirements. The estimated total project redevelopment cost is $4.0 million.
The financing plan contemplates the City issuing a two -year interest -only note. By the time the note
matures, it is anticipated that the Navy will have issued a Record of Decision and the property will
have been conveyed to the City or the City will have entered into a long -term Lease in Furtherance
of Conveyance. The City could then refinance the interest -only note over a 15= or 20 -year period.
Additional information and a formal request for ARRA action relating to bond financing for
Building 16 upgrades will be presented to the governing body at its June 1998 meeting. Current
plans call for completion of architectural drawings in August 1998; contractor selection by
November 1998; start of construction in December 1998; and completion and tenant move -in in
September 1999.
Fiscal Impact:
The sublease calls for rents of $48,800 /month for years one through ten and $62,600 /month for years
ten through lease expiration. The ARRA's projected net revenue during the two -year interest -only
note period is approximately $260,000 per year or $520,000 over the first two years of occupancy.
Thereafter, assuming that the debt is refinanced over a 15 -year amortization period, the estimated
net annual revenue after debt service will be approximately $75,000 per year through year 10 and
$235,000 per year from year 10 to 15. After full amortization of the project financing in year 15, the
annual cash flow to the City will be approximately $800,000 per year.
Honorable Members of the
Alameda.Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
April 30, 1998
Page 2
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the ARRA governing body authorize the Executive Director to finalize and
execute the proposed 14 -year sublease for Building 16 with the California School of Professional
Psychology. This sublease will not be executed until after review and approval of project financing
by the ARRA governing body.
Respectfully submitted,
Ed Levine
Facilities Manager
EL /KM/jcb
H:IMENSLEY\ARRAISTAFFREP\ 19981CSPP .LSE
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
April 24, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Ed Levine, Facilities Manager [for Kay Miller, Executive Director]
SUBJ: Recommend the award of contract for consultant design services in the amount of
$.128,837 to Muller & Caulfield Architects for renovation of Building 23
Background:
Building 23 is scheduled to be leased by the ARRA to Zebra Motors, an electric car manufacturing
company. The term of the lease is expected to be 10 years. Prior to the execution of this lease, life
safety, code upgrades, and tenant improvements will be constructed.
Discussion:
Six consultants submitted proposals for architectural and engineering services for Building 23
upgrades (list attached). Staff evaluated these proposals and then short- listed and interviewed three
consultants on April 7, 1998. Candidates were ranked according to the following criteria:
responsiveness to the RFP; technical quality of approach and methodology; training and experience
of key personnel; record in accomplishing similar projects; and ability to conform to project
schedule. The award of the contract is contingent upon the tenant submitting a letter of intent to the
ARRA.
Fiscal Impact:
The estimated cost for the consultant work is $128,837. A federal grant from the Economic
Development Administration (EDA) to ARRA covers 75% of construction costs. The remaining
25 %paid from local sources will come from a state grant (from the California Trade and Commerce
Agency) and from ARRA lease revenues.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the ARRA Governing Body, by motion, authorize the Executive Director to
award a contract for consultant design services in the amount of $128,837 to Muller & Caulfield
Architects for renovation of Building 23.
Respecpt y submitted,
Ed Levine
Facilities Manager
Attachment: Consultant list
Consultant List for Building 23
Alameda Point
No. P.W. 03 -98 -04
1. Noll & Tam
729 Heinz Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94710
2. MBH,Architects
1115 Atlantic Avenue
Suite 101
Alameda, CA 94501
3. The Onyx Group
2036 Livingston Street
Suite 2
Oakland, CA 94606
4. Thruston Design Group
1202 Lincoln Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
5. Muller & Caulfield
339 Fifteenth Street
Oakland, CA 94612
6. RPR Architect
1624 Franklin Street
Penthouse
Oakland, CA 94612
(Not listed in order of ranking)
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
April 24, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Ed Levine, Facilities Manager [for Kay Miller, Executive Director]
SUBJ: Authorize additional allocation of funds in the amount of $75,000 for
Building 39 upgrades (07- 49- 03698 -39A). No. P.W. 11 -97 -25
Background:
On January 7, 1998, the ARRA awarded a contract in the amount of $1,045,000, including 10%
contingencies, for Building 39 upgrades at Alameda Point, No. P.W. 11- 97 -25. These upgrades are
required to make the building code- compliant and suitable to lease to Delphi Productions.
Discussion:
The project is 75% complete and is expected to finish in May of 1998. To date, eight extra work
orders have been processed for new and unforseen work. Two of the extra work orders were for
work requested and paid for by the tenant. The remaining six extra work orders are for items (i.e.,
plumbing repairs, electrical repairs and wall repairs) discovered during construction. These six extra
work orders amount to $94,252 and were paid from the construction contingency amount of $95,000.
The balance in the contingency amount is $748.
During the last heavy rains, staff discovered that the roof drains, portions of the membrane roof, and
the clerestory windows leaked. Before the tenant occupies the building, these repairs must be done
to reduce the City's and ARRA's liability to claims.
In addition, as a part of the process to transfer ownership of the water lines to EBMUD, the City is
required, for health and safety reasons, to install a meter and backflow preventer at the connections
to the water main. To reduce maintenance and liability cost, the City also wants to eliminate
multiple water line feeds to the building and provide a single feed with internal plumbing.
The estimated cost for the above work, including 10% contingency, is $75,000.
Fiscal Impact:
A federal grant from the Economic Development Administration (EDA) to ARRA covers 75% of
construction costs. The remaining 25% paid from local sources will come from a state grant (from
the California Trade and Commerce Agency) and from ARRA lease revenues.
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
April 24, 1997
Page 2
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the ARRA Governing Body, by motion, authorize additional allocation of
funds in the amount of $75,000 including 10% contingencies into the project construction
contingency for Building 39 Upgrades (07- 49- 03698 -39A), No. P.W. 11- 97 -25.
Respect submitted,
Ed Levine
Facilities Manager
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
April 28, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Ed Levine, Facilities Manager [for Kay Miller, Executive
Director]
SUBJ: Written status report on ARRA activities
1. Status of the Economic Development Conveyance (EDC). The discussions with the Navy have
begun. The issues that will need to be addressed and a timeline for the negotiation are being clarified
and defined in productive meetings with Navy representatives. We have every reason to believe that
the original schedule, which calls for the EDC negotiations to be successfully completed before the
end of this year, will be maintained.
2. Status of the Tidelands Trust Appraisal. The discussions with staff from the State Lands
Commission are proceeding on track. Our expectation is that the appraisal process, staff evaluations,
and policy direction will be provided by early fall this year, with the final agreement being
completed by the end of the calendar year.
3. Alameda Unified School District Land Swap. ARRA staff met with the School District and East
Bay Regional Park District on March 30 to discuss locations for a corporation yard, central cafeteria
and warehouse. The School District had originally expressed interest in parcel 168 (the auto hobby
shop) for a corporation yard; however, the Park District plan had precluded this use. Due to the
proposed scale -back of that plan, the School District asked whether parcel 168 would now be
available. It was pointed out that there could be an interim lease but that this is part of the property
to be traded into the Public Trust.
Three alternate sites were proposed to the School District in the area north of the auto hobby shop.
However, no decision has yet been made by the District regarding these sites.
Respec y submitted,
Ed Levine
Facilities Manager
Correspondence
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Interim Leasing Status Report
Signed Leases
Ise4- 98.xts
Page 1
Tenant
_
Term of
Occupancy
Building #
Occupied Bldg. (Sq.
Ft.)
1
ACET (Environmental Tech. Incubator)
long term
7
15,550
2.
Alameda Point Storage (1200 Mini - storage Units)
long term
near Bldg. 530
-
3
Alameda Unified School District (Child Care Ctr.)
long term
258
12,430
4
Altair Marine (former Haviside) (Ship Repair)
long term
43
10,500
5
Bay Ship & Yacht (Ship Repair)
long term
292
2,700
6
Bureau of Electricity (Storage Yard)
long term
at FISC
-,
7
CALSTART (Electric Vehicle Consortium)
long term
20
66,000_
8
City Garage Carstar (Vehicle Painting)
long term
24
12,927
9
City of Alameda (Ferry Terminal Parking)
long term
-
38,976
10
City of Alameda (Gym and Pool)
long term
76 & 134
58,450
11
City of Alameda (Officers' Club)
long term
60
29,550
12
City of Alameda (Records Storage)
long term
397
17,000
13
City of Alameda (Soccer Field)
long term
Adjacent to Bldg. 360
-
14
Delphi Productions (Exhibit Displays)
long term
39
110,000
15
Forem Metal Mfg. (Sheet Metal Contractor)
long term
114
20,000
16
Giannotti (Ship Parts & Repair)
long term
113
13,150
17
Housing Units (31 units in West Housing)
long term
-
47,177
18
Interscope Communications (Film Co.)
5 months
portion of 11
50,000
19
Love Center Ministries
6 months
portion of 12
8,000
20
Manex Entertainment (Film Co.)
6 months
24
40,850
21
MARAD (Ready Reserve Fleet)
long term
Piers 1, 2,3
-,
22
MARAD
long term
168
117,419
23
Mass Illusions (Film Co.)
5 months
portion of 11
10,000
24
Navigator Systems (Furniture Mfgr.)
long term
14
40,000
25
Nelson's Marine (Boat Repair)
long term
167 & finger piers
55,450
26
Piedmont Baseball Foundation
1 year
200,688 sq. ft. field
-
27
Piedmont Soccer Club
1 year
280,000 sq. ft. field
-
28
Polyethylene Products (Plastics Recycling)
long term
398
10,000
29
Puglia Engineering (Ship Repair)
long term
67
14,000
30
Quality Assured Products (Valve Mfgr.)
long term
21
66,000
31
Richard Miller Photography (Photography)
long term
621
5,770
32
Tower Aviation (Avionics)
long term
530
82,250
33
Trident 3M Services (Port Mgmt. /Maint.)
long term
15
16,603
34
Woodmasters (aka Delaco) (Cabinetry)
long term
44
5,100
Number of Properties Currently Occupied:
34
Buildings (sq. ft.) Currently Occupied:
975,852
Current Employment in Leased Buildings:
552
Projected Future Employment in Leased Buildings: 1 1,375
Ise4- 98.xts
Page 1
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Interim Leasing Status Report
Pending Leases and Licenses
Ise4-98xls
Page 2
Tenant
Building Number
Area (Sq. Ft.)
Interim Use Permits Approved
Alameda Naval Air Museum
77
21,136
2
Altamont Technologies (Trans. Equipment Mfg.)
25
18,000
3
Antiques by the Bay (Swap Meet)
portion of taxiway H
4
Area 51 Productions (Auto Survey)
portion of taxiway H
5
Cellular One (Antenna Site)
60 x 20'
6
City Garage Carstar (Vehicle Painting)
25
14,000
X
7
Door Christian Fellowship Church
564
8,600
X
8
Dynamic Marine Boatworks (Boat Production)
166
55,000
X
9
Forty Plus (Career Counseling)
90
4,500
10
General Svcs. Admin. (Govt. Agency)
169, 117
193,210
11
Go-Lo Entertainment (Car Show)
-
portion of taxi ay H
12
Harbor Bay Maritime (Storage)
Pier 1 North
200'
13
Home Auto Repair
459
11,500
14
Integrated Technology Group (Computer Rebuild)
66
30,900
15
Manex Entertainment (Film Co.)
13
34,540
16
Manex Entertainment (Film Co.)
19
23,700
17
Manex Entertainment (Film Co.)
615
2,400
18
Marine Sanitation
611
1,000
19
NorCal Soccer (Dome)
near Piers
-
20
Orbit Development Inc. (Property Mgmt.)
5
270,000
21
San Francisco Drydock
612
4,000
22
Sigi, Inc. (Crepe Mfg.)
42
3,000
23
Simmba Systems (Records Storage)
9
92,817
24
Solo Energy Corp. (Prototype Testing)
12 & 22
176,108
25
United States Customs Service
29
19,480
26
USS Hornet Foundation
Pier 3
27
Zebra Motors, Inc. (Electric Vehicles)
23
65,500
COMPLETED LICENSES:
Tenant
Bldg. NoJSpace
1
Acad. ofModel Aeronautics (Model Planes)
portion of Runway 25
2
Alameda Recycling Co. (Storage)
Bay 2/Bldg. 24
3
Area 51 Productions (Custom Car Show)
portion of taxiway
4
Area 51 Productons (Auto Mfg. Marketing Survey)
5A
5
Area 51 Productions (Rehearsal studio)
12
6
Boy Scouts of America
Spike & Pitch Park
7
Chamber of Commerce/BOE (Inter. Trade Expo)
22
8
CINCPAC (Fleet Week '97)
Pier 3 South
9
City of Alameda/Bureau of Electricity (EV Expo)
23
10
Clubhouse Pictures (Film Co.)
25
11
Disney Studios (Film Co.)
24
12
Great Benefit Productions (Film Co.)
Portions of 24 & 25
13
Industrial Light and Magic (Film Co.)
400A
14
Industrial Light and Magic (Film Co.)
portion of taxiway
15
Interscope Communications (Film Co.)
11,12,400A
16
lnterscope Communications (Film Co.)
2
17
Interscope Communications (Film Co.)
pool
18
Microsoft (Software Co.)
400A
19
Nadel Productions (Film Co.)
portion of taxiway
20
Off Duty Productions (Film Co.)
portion of roadway
21
Rysher Entertainment (Film Co.)
24
Ise4-98xls
Page 2
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY
(INsTALLATIONS
ANP ENVIRommENT)
1000 NAVY PENTAPPN
wAsartNCT0N. D.C. *0350.1000
MAR 30 1998
cl;
' OF MANIEDA
tAl'ORS OFFICE
March 30, 1998
MEMORANDUM FOR COMMANDER, NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND
Subj: DISAPPROVAL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S
REQUEST FOR INTERAGENCY TRANSFER OF BASE CLOSURE
PROPERTY AT THE FLEET AND INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CENTER
OAKLAND'S ALAMEDA ANNEX TO THE MARITIME
ADMINISTRATION
Ref: (a) COMNAVFACENGCOM memo of March 26, 1998
In light of the opposition of the Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) and the recommendations
contained in reference (a), and pursuant to the authority
vested in the Administrator of General Services by the
provisions of the Federal Property and Administrative Services
Act of 1949, as amended, and a delegation of that authority to
the SeCretary of Defense (SECDEF) in accordance with the
provisions of Public Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Act of 1990 (104 Stat 1808), and a subsequent
delegation of that authority by SECDEF to the Secretary of the
Navy, I have. determined that an interagency transfer of base
closure property at the Fleet and Industrial Supply Center
Oakland's Alameda Annex to the Department of Transportation's
Maritime Administration is not in the best interests of the
Government.
I am further disapproving this request for an interagency
transfer of base closure property because of the
incompleteness of MARAD's property transfer request, ARRA's
opposition, and the conflict it would create with ARRA's land
use plan, Navy's Environmental Impact Statement, ARRA's Reuse
Plan, and the amendments to the San Francisco General Plan,
all of which are in the final stages of.completiOn. Revision
of these documents would require additional time, increase
costs and delay the disposal process.
I request that you or your designee advise the
Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration of this
decision and of ARRA's willingness to enter into a berthing
services agreement with MARAD that would permit RRF ships. to
use piers at Naval Air Station Alameda.
ROBERT B. PIRIE, 17-
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda Point/NAS Alameda
950 W. Mall Square - Building 1
Alameda, CA 94501 -5012
Governing Body
Ralph Appezzato
Chair
Mayor, City of Alameda
Sandre R. Swanson
Vice -Chair
District Director for
9th Congressional District
Wilma Chan
Supervisor, District 3
Alameda County Board
of Supervisors
Henry Chang, Jr.
Oakland Councilmember
serving for
Elihu Harris
Mayor, City of Oakland
Ellen M. Corbett
Mayor
City of San Leandro
Tony Daysog
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Albert H. DeWitt
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Barbara Kerr
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Karin Lucas
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Kay Miller
Executive Director
®Recycled paper
March 31, 1998
Ron Reuther
Western Aerospace Museum
P.O. Box 14264, Airport Station
Oakland, CA 94614
Dear Ron:
(510) 864-3400
Fax: (510) 521 -3764
This is a follow -up on the discussion at the BRAG Museum Task Force meeting
where staff recommended that you be given another two months to answer some of
the questions raised about your business plan for Hangar 41. Specifically, the
concerns that were raised are:
1. The cost of the building upgrades appears to be underestimated.
Please work with Steve Davis in the City Building Department and
Mike Edwards or Steve McKinley in the Fire Department to
determine the actual upgrades required for the occupancy that you
propose.
2. Your revenue forecasts appear to be largely dependent on
acquisition of grants. Your revised business plan should spell out
the exact status of those grants and identify any other sources of
income.
3. The cost of museum displays and exhibits appears to be
underestimated. In addition to projecting the real cost of the
displays, you should also factor in the cost of getting the aircraft to
the hangar, should the airfield option not be available.
We will look forward to receiving your revised business plan by May 26. We will
schedule another BRAG Museum Task Force meeting for early in June to review
the revised business plan.
Ron Reuther
March 31, 1998
Page 2
Good luck with nailing down some of these figures.
Sincerely,
Kay Miller
Executive Director
cc: ARRA Board
BRAG Chairpersons
BRAG Museum Task Force
Jim Flint
Ed Levine
Steve Davis
Mike Edwards
Steve McKinley
John Doll
Jim Carr
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY
(INSTALLATIONS AND ENVIRONMENT)
1000 NAVY PENTAGON
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20350-1000
The Honorable Ralph Appezzato
Mayor of the City of Alameda
2263 Santa Clara Avenue - Room 301
Alameda, CA 94501 -4456
Dear Mayor Appezzato:
April 2, 1998
I am pleased to inform you that the Department of the Navy
recently completed its review and redistribution of the air
emissions permits held by Navy for activities at Naval Air
Station Alameda. As a result, more than 280 air permits have now
been transferred from Navy to the City of Alameda to support
redevelopment of the Naval Air Station.
The closure and redevelopment of Naval Air Station Alameda
present substantial challenges for the City of Alameda. During
the past two years, the Naval Facilities Engineering Command's
Engineering Field Activity West in San Bruno (EFA West) has
worked closely with your staff to support the City's
redevelopment goals. These efforts included an extensive joint
review and prioritization of the several hundred air permits that
allowed Navy to operate equipment at NAS Alameda. Following that
review, Navy transferred to the City those permits that are
required to support current reuse and permits that will support
future redevelopment.
The timely transfer of these air permits avoided the delays
and costs that could have resulted if the permits had lapsed and
thus advanced the City's progress toward redeveloping the Naval
Air Station. We are pleased that Navy was able to support the
City of Alameda's reuse and redevelopment efforts by transferring
these permits to the City.
Sincerely,
WILLIAM CASSIDY, JR.
Deputy Assista t secretary of the Navy
(Conversion £nd Redevelopment)
L
Copy to:
Senator Dianne Feinstein
Senator Barbara Boxer
Ninth Congressional District Office
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA)
•
APR 1 4 1998
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda Point/NAS Alameda
950 W. Mall Square - Building 1
Alameda, CA 94501 -5012
Governing Body
Ralph Appezzato
Chair
Mayor, City of Alameda
Sandrt R. Swanson
Vice -Chair
District Director for
9th Congressional District
Wilma Chan
Supervisor, District 3
Alameda County Board
of Supervisors
Henry Chang, Jr.
Oakland Councilmember
serving for
Elihu Harris
Mayor, City of Oakland
Ellen M. Corbett
Mayor
City of San Leandro
Tony Daysog
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Albert H. DeWitt
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Barbara Kerr
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Karin Lucas
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Kay Miller
Executive Director
®Recycled paper
April 6, 1998
Dr. Peter Sun; President
Pan- Pacific University
435 Buena Vista Avenue, #309
Alameda, CA 94501
Dear Dr. Sun:
(510) 864-3400
Fax: (510) 521 -3764
As you know, the ARRA Governing Body approved the following motion at its
meeting last Wednesday night:
Accept the staff recommendation that the ARRA Board accept the
report of Dr. Fisher regarding the campus and authorize staff to
immediately commence serious discussions with California School
of Psychology, Touro University and Pan- Pacific University for
facilities in the campus area at Alameda Point, with the
understanding that whichever agencies are moved forward for final
approval by the ARRA depend on the satisfactory provision in a
timely manner of documents that allow the ARRA staff and ARRA
Governing Body to exercise its due diligence responsibilities.
In preparation for our future negotiations, we would request that you:
Prepare a detailed business plan for operating PPU at Alameda Point
for the next 10 years. The business plan should address projected
expenditures and sources of revenue for capital improvements to the
buildings and also operational and maintenance costs, as well as
establishment of a reserve fund to cover 12 months of rent. The plan
should also discuss proposed hiring of faculty and administrative
staff to fulfill the academic goals of the college and the proposed
composition of the board of directors of PPU.
2. Provide evidence of the transfer of the $3 million in funding from
Mokwon University to Trans Pacific Bank in Alameda.
Dr. Peter Sun
April 6, 1998
Page 2
3. Submit a detailed phasing plan for the takedown of space in Buildings 3 and 4. We
would want you to work with an architect in planning the renovation work. It is
essential that cost estimates for the phased building upgrades be prepared. These
estimates will be required to establish the appropriate rental structure for the
property.
I look forward to working with you in arriving at a lease arrangement that gives PPU the opportunity
to succeed as a new academic institution and at the same time protects the ARRA against undue
financial risk. I am available to meet with you anytime during the preparation of these documents
and to discuss options for terms of the proposed lease.
UTS,
Ed Levine
Facilities Manager
cc: ARRA Board
Jim Flint, City Manager
Kay Miller, ARRA Executive Director
IN REPLY REFER TO
1- 1 -98 -TA -1144
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office
3310 El Camino Avenue, Suite 130
Sacramento, California 95821 -6340
Ms. Kay Miller
Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda Point/NAS Alameda
950 W. Mall Square - Building 1
Alameda, CA 94501 -5012
8661
April 16, 1998
Subject: Economic Development Administration Grant for Building Upgrades at Naval
Air Station Alameda, County of Alameda, California
Dear Ms. Miller:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed material transmitted by your office
with a. letter dated March 25, 1998, which describes an application for a $1.65 million grant from
the Economic Development Administration to upgrade buildings at Naval Air Station Alameda
(NAS Alameda), County of Alameda, California. As you know, we are formally consulting with
the U.S. Navy on the proposed disposal by the Navy and reuse by the City of Alameda of NAS
Alameda. As part of our section 7 formal consultation, we are developing measures to be
implemented throughout NAS Alameda to protect the endangered California least tern and
California brown pelican, which occur at NAS Alameda, and thus meet the regulatory
requirements of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Upon successful
completion of this formal consultation, the Service expects the construction activities that can
occur and structures that can be constructed to protect these federally protected species will be
defined and incorporated into any authorizations granted by the Navy and \or City to upgrade
buildings affected by this grant. Therefore, we have determined that the proposed grant is not
likely to adversely affect any federally listed or proposed species.
Unless new information reveals effects of the proposed grant that may affect listed species in a
manner or to an extent not considered, or a new species or critical habitat is designated that may
be affected by the proposed action, no further action pursuant to the Act is necessary for the
proposed grant.
Ms. Kay Miller 2
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Jim Browning or Mr. Michael Thabault at
(916) 979 -2752.
Sincerely,
�e S. White
Field Supervisor
U.S. Department of the
Interior Coordinator
CC: Reg. Dir., (AES), Portland, OR
SFBNWR, Project Leader, Newark, CA (M. Kolar)
U.S. Navy (D. Pomeroy), San Bruno, CA
Dir., CDFG, Sacramento, CA
Reg. Mgr., CDFG, Reg. III, Yountville, CA (C. Wilcox)
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
ENGINEERING FIELD ACTIVITY, WEST
NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND
900 COMMODORE DRIVE
SAN BRUNO, CALIFORNIA 94066-5006
Mr. James M. Flint
City Manager
Office of the City Manager
2263 Santa Clara Avenue, Room 320
Alameda, CA 94501
Dear Mr. Flint:
IN REPLY REFER TO:
5090. I B
7032DP /EP8 -1469
24 April 1998
We are sending the revised internal Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report
(EIS /EIR) for Disposal and Reuse of the Naval Air Station, Alameda for final review by Ms. Cynthia
Eliason of your staff, and Elizabeth Johnson of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA).
This document is being sent under separate cover and you should receive it on 24 April. We will complete
internal Navy reviews of the EIS /EIR by 8 May 1998, and have scheduled final review sessions for May 8,
9, and 11, with the EIS /EIR consultant to address all Navy, City, and ARRA comments on the document.
We plan to use the Navy "tiger" team review format for these meetings, which consists of having Navy,
City and ARRA reviewers review the entire document line by line and resolve all comments at the meeting.
While this is a labor- intensive activity, we have found it the most effective way to complete a large
EIS /EIR document.
This approach will require your help. We will need City staff who can attend the entire one to three day
process, and are familiar with the EIS /EIR, so that we can finalize the document at the meeting.
As you requested in your 6 April 1998 letter, we allowed an additional two weeks for your subconsultant
review of the prior version of the EIS /EIR. Please provide any items for consideration from that review as
soon as they become available. This will help us make the most effective use of the review meeting. We
will continue to work directly with Ms. Cynthia Eliason to complete the EIS /EIR review. Thank you for
your continued assistance.
Sincerely,
64�
Doug R. Pomeroy
y
Leader, Base Conversion and Biology Section
By direction
copy to:
Kay. Miller, Executive Director, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority