Loading...
2001-09-05 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, September 5, 2001 Meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. City Hall will open at 5:15 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2 -A. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of August 1, 2001. 2 -B. Approval of the minutes of the special meeting of August 9, 2001. 2 -C. Recommendation to Adopt Resolution Approving the Transfer of the Electrical Utility Distribution System located at Alameda Point to the City of Alameda. 3. ACTION ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4 -A. Oral report from APAC. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) (Any person may address the governing body in regard to any matter over which the governing body has jurisdiction that is not on the agenda.) 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY 7. ADJOURNMENT This meeting will be cablecast live on channel 15. The next special ARRA meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, July 3, 2001. Notes: • Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the ARRA Secretary, Lucretia Akil 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, August 1, 2001 1. CLOSED SESSION OF THE ARRA BOARD Chair Appezzato reported that the Board was briefed by the real property negotiator, and the Board provided direction to the negotiator. No action was taken at this time; action will be taken at a special ARRA Board meeting on August 9, 2001. 2. ROLL CALL The meeting convened at 6:23 p.m. with Chair Appezzato presiding. Present: Ralph Appezzato, Mayor, City of Alameda Albert DeWitt, Councilmember, City of Alameda Barbara Kerr, Councilmember, City of Alameda Tony Daysog, Councilmember, City of Alameda Beverly Johnson, Councilmember, City of Alameda 3. CONSENT CALENDAR 3 -A. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of June 6, 2001. 3 -B. Approval of the minutes of the special meeting of June 19, 2001. 3 -C. Approval of the minutes of the special meeting of July 19, 2001. Member Daysog motioned for approval of the consent calendar, and Member DeWitt seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 4. ACTION ITEMS 4 -A. Report from the Director of Development Services Director regarding the Master Developer presentations. Chair Appezzato announced that this would be an opportunity for the three candidates to address questions and concerns raised by Board members at the meeting of July 19, 2001. Each candidate will have 30 minutes, and the order has been selected at random. Alameda Point Community Partners (APCP) was represented by Thom Gamble, president, 1 who provided Board members with written responses to the questions previously raised. He stressed the importance of a partnership between APCP and the community through extensive community input in the planning process and active community involvement going forward. Lori Feldberg, lead planner, discussed their vision of creating a well- rounded community where people live, work, shop and play, with small neighborhoods connected by pedestrian and bicycle paths. Housing plans include single - family homes plus affordable senior apartments, loft -style live /work units, and residential above retail. There will be a multi -modal transit hub in the marina area, plus a large park along the water, in addition to numerous active parks and greenbelts throughout the development. Rob Richardson, vice president of APCP, focused on early conveyance and environmental remediation, APCP's relationship with labor, and transportation plans. He stressed early investment of substantial capital for remediation, as they have done at McClellan AFB, where they will have invested $40 million by year -end and have created over 6,000 jobs and leased over 3 million square feet. They will also indemnify the City during the remediation process through their insurance coverage. He stated that all the companies making up APCP already have strong partnerships with labor unions, and they anticipate reaching agreements prior to beginning any work at Alameda Point. Regarding transportation needs, they ruled out light rail as an option because of inconvenient BART access and difficult right -of -way issues. Their multi -modal transportation hub includes ferries, expanded bus service, an estuary- crossing gondola, bicycles and auto parking. APCP's $45 million equity will pay for the hub. They have already met with the Port of Oakland and City of Oakland and have established good relationships for going forward with ferry, bus and gondola service. Eric Kaplan, partner at Morgan Stanley, summarized APCP's qualifications and financial resources. Harbor Bay /Lennar was introduced by Kevin Hanson, senior vice president. He stressed the company's long -term track record of working with the City of Alameda at Harbor Bay. They also have experience working with governmental agencies in military base conversions and early transfers. They have completed the first commercial early transfer of a base in the U.S. (Mare Island). A representative of CH2M/Hill discussed the challenges of early transfer (environ- mental, financial, governmental), and explained that his company separates the community from the risks of environmental responsibility through full corporate indemnification. He stressed their prior experience with the entire process necessary to achieve early transfer. A transporta- tion engineer discussed their transit plan for the development, including expanded bus service, ferries, light rail, and BART service to Lake Merritt and Fruitvale stations. Mr. Hanson presented slides of new designs for several current areas. Catellus Development Corporation was represented by CEO Nelson Rising, who focused their presentation on responses to questions raised at the previous meeting. He said their vision incorporates Alameda Point into the City of Alameda through their transportation plan, as well as complimentary architecture and landscaping plans. They anticipate continued community rapport, which they have already cultivated through their FISC development planning process. He stressed Catellus' ability to provide financial, environmental, commercial, and residential expertise in a singular package. Peter Laurner focused on residential requirements encompassing affordable and market rate housing, as well as senior housing units. They will integrate the 2 Collaborative units into their overall housing plan, including addressing landscaping and maintenance needs. They also will help fund the Collaborative's community center and daycare center. They have extensive prior experience with environmental remediation and early transfer, including Mission Bay in San Francisco and the FISC development, as well as negotiating experience with the necessary governmental agencies. Early transfer is complete at FISC and the clean -up is on schedule. They anticipate 12 months for early transfer and 36 months for most of the remediation at Alameda Point. There was a meeting today with the School District regarding anticipated schooling needs at both FISC and Alameda Point, and a mitigation agreement is being formulated. Funding will be provided by assessments included in housing prices. Dan Marcus addressed historic preservation, which will include tourist and education attractions. They have met with and support the Hornet and Air Museum and have pledged financial support to both. Their plan calls for more residential and less commercial development than the other three plans, but they will market to high -tech and biotech firms which are high property tax generators. They also plan less retail development, so as not to adversely impact current businesses on Park and Webster Streets. However, they plan more cultural, educational and civic uses than the other plans. Catellus' vision for residential development will produce a boost to the property tax revenues (approximately $14 million at full build -out). A transportation consultant outlined how they would connect Alameda to the regional transportation system via bus or light rail connections to BART, enhanced ferry service, and local feeder systems. Funding could be provided by separate intermodal transportation agreements. Chair Appezzato announced that a matrix will be developed by City staff which summarizes the three candidates' proposals and will be available for public review on August 3rd. The master developer selection will be made at a special ARRA meeting on August 9' The public hearing was opened. Bob Haslam represented the West Oakland Commerce Association, which plans to convert the West Oakland BART station into a "transportation village ". He suggested working with the City of Oakland, Port of Oakland and the Coast Guard on transportation solutions. Robert Leste endorsed APCP because of their passion, vision and personal commitment needed to complete the project. Don Peterson urged the selection of APCP because they have the best development plan. Marilyn York, representing the Alameda Naval Air Museum, invited the public to visit the Museum to see the history of Alameda Point. Steve Lowe, vice president of West Oakland Commerce Association, encouraged whichever developer that is chosen to implement the aerial tramway proposal. Charles Ward, member of the Economic Development Commission, endorsed APCP because of their innovative transportation plans. 3 Kurt Bohan expressed concern that the public has not been adequately informed about the developers' proposals and that Catellus plans to destroy many of the historic buildings and boat ramps. Hugh McKay also expressed concern about preservation of the historic areas and recommended Harbor Bay /Lennar. Barry Luboviski, secretary /treasurer of the Building & Constructions Trades Council, endorsed Catellus and Harbor Bay /Lennar because they have already met with the union. They have reached a labor agreement with Catellus and are negotiating with Harbor Bay. Marina Secchitano of the Inland Boatmen's Union urged the reward of the master developer contract to Harbor Bay /Lennar because of their current successful operation of the Harbor Bay ferry service and their plans for a regional ferry service. Nick Cabral endorsed APCP because of what they have already accomplished at the former McClellan AFB. Andy Lee, representing the Hotel & Restaurant Workers' Union, expressed hope that whichever developer is selected, if a hotel or restaurant is part of the plan, they will offer the employees the option of being unionized. He also stated that only Harbor Bay and Catellus have met with the union. Thomas Mercer of the Hornet Foundation indicated that the Foundation has met with all of the developer candidates, and they have found that Catellus has been most responsive to their interest in preserving the historical legacy of the Navy and the Hornet. Robert Wolf, former California Transportation Undersecretary, endorsed Catellus because of their multi -modal approach to transportation needs and their funding plans. Sam Swan recommended APCP because of their outstanding development team and their track record on projects throughout the state. Melissa Harris, local small business owner, expressed concern about the commercial space in the developers' plans and recommended Catellus because they propose the least commercial space, creating less competition with existing businesses on the West End. Bobby Winston, editor of Bay Crossings, stressed the importance of ferry service in new development at Alameda Point, and endorsed Harbor Bay/Lennar because of their previous ferry experience. Michael Vernetti indicated how important it will be to have adequate housing options and endorsed Catellus because their proposal calls for the most housing units. 4 Jon Spangler represents Bike Alameda, which has met with Catellus and APCP and feels both of these candidates have workable transportation plans in their proposals. They endorse Catellus because their plan better integrates Alameda Point into the community. John Huetter is president of the West Alameda Business Association, which met with all three candidates. The Association recommends Catellus because their proposal reflects the Association's vision for the development of the West Alameda area. Mike Dunlap opined that all of the proposals that have been presented will be changed when development actually begins. Bill Stremmel endorsed Catellus because of their efficient transportation plan and increased housing units. Sam Koka endorsed APCP. Kevin Lee supported APCP because of their innovative plans. Richard Neveln, member of the West Oakland Advisory Board, criticized Catellus for not preserving historic buildings at FISC and endorsed APCP because of their aerial tram proposal. Vickie Smith hoped that the parks in the new development areas will be available to all West End residents. Leslie Medine endorsed Catellus because she has had good working relationships with them as they have assisted the HOME Project. The public hearing was closed for Authority discussion. Chair Appezzato thanked all of the developers and speakers. He acknowledged that all of the proposals are general concepts and that there will be many changes as development moves forward. Member Kerr thanked the developers for the time they spent with the Board members, especially the tours of their existing projects. She stated that the City will own the land briefly before it is transferred to the developer, and the public benefits that are promised will affect the land price that is paid to the City. She hopes that the public benefit agreements are negotiated separately and not incorporated into the design and development agreement. Member DeWitt received responses from all the developers to the questions he had raised at the previous meeting. He visited Hamilton Field, Mission Bay, and McClellan AFB. He has a concern about the large parking structure proposed by APCP at their transportation hub and is uncertain about the IMAX entertainment area proposed on the Hornet. 5 Member Daysog thanked the developers for their written responses to the Board's previous questions, and also thanked City staff and consultants for all their work during the screening and selection process. He stressed the importance of resolving the potential traffic issues and appreciated the alternative solutions proposed by the developers. Member Johnson also thanked the developers and the selection team members, and acknowledged the efforts of the Alameda Point Advisory Committee in the last eight years. She stressed the importance of integrating Alameda Point into the rest of the community, as well as remediation, clean-up and early transfer of the property. Chair Appezzato thanked City staff for their input throughout the selection process and reiterated that it will be a difficult decision to make because all of the developers' proposals are excellent. 5. ORAL REPORTS 5 -A. Oral report from Alameda Point Advisory Committee. Lee Perez, Chair of the APAC, said that the APAC is very interested in the ARRA Board's selection of the master developer. The APAC would like to be involved in the street naming at both the FISC and Alameda Point as they are developed. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) Kurt Bohan stated that, although the Encinal Boat Ramp is very nice and generally functional in its present configuration, the roadway leading to it is quite narrow and somewhat dangerous for maneuvering large boats. He suggested using an adjacent parking lot for a dry marina and boat storage area. 7. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Kerr reminded everyone that Sunday, August 5', is the Firefighters Annual Breakfast to raise money for the Burn Foundation. Chair Appezzato also mentioned the Art & Wine Festival this weekend, including the Run for the Parks on Saturday morning. 8. ADJOURNMENT Chair Appezzato adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. f submitted, L retia Akil Secretary a 6 APPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, August 9, 2001 1. CLOSED SESSION OF THE ARRA BOARD Chair Appezzato reported that the Board was briefed by the real property negotiator. No action was taken. 2. ROLL CALL The meeting convened at 6:10 p.m. with Chair Appezzato presiding. Present: Ralph Appezzato, Mayor, City of Alameda Albert DeWitt, Councilmember, City of Alameda Barbara Kerr, Councilmember, City of Alameda Tony Daysog, Councilmember, City of Alameda Beverly Johnson, Councilmember, City of Alameda 3. ACTION ITEMS 3 -A. Report from the Executive Director regarding selection of the Master Developer for Alameda Point and authorization to prepare and enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement. Chair Appezzato announced that one developer, Harbor Bay/Lennar, has withdrawn from the selection process, so only two remain — Alameda Point Community Partners and Catellus. Executive Director Doug Yount thanked the ARRA Board for their diligent review of the volumes of information they have been given, the Selection Team for the many hours they spent, City staff (particularly the Development Services staff), the consultants, the developer teams, and the community for their input throughout the process. He then summarized the ten -month selection process, which will culminate in selection of the master developer at this meeting. This summary was included in the agenda packet, along with a matrix outlining the candidates' strengths and weaknesses in over 50 specific development criteria. He also presented Chair Appezzato with the NAID (National Association of Installation Developers) 2001 Award for Excellence for Marketing Special Purpose Brochures in the RFP and RFQ Process. Once the selection is made, next steps will be entering into an exclusive negotiating agreement with the chosen developer, developing the master plan, and beginning the remediation process, which should take about 24 months. -1 Chair Appezzato reiterated his gratitude, on behalf of the Board, to the community for their overwhelming participation in the selection process, especially the eight -year -old Alameda Point Advisory Committee (nee Base Reuse Advisory Group or BRAG), and the original ARRA Board Members, which included representatives from the Ninth Congressional District, Alameda County Supervisors Office and the Cities of Oakland and San Leandro. Chair Appezzato then recognized the Master Developer Selection Team with Certificates of Appreciation: David Berger, Suzanne Ota, Colette Meunier, Matt Naclerio, Mike Pucci, Gayle Codiga, Paul Fossum, Allan Shore, John Abrate, Gary Bard, Ardella Dailey, Ray Wentworth, Horst Breuer, Dion Griffin, Doug deHaan, Alice Garvin, and Bob DeLuca. The public hearing was opened. Horst Breuer of the Planning Board commended the selection process and endorsed Alameda Point Community Partners (APCP) as the superior candidate. Mariano Jauco recommended the selection of Catellus because of their vision for Alameda Point. Garth Spatz endorsed Catellus because they are the most receptive to maintaining the history of the area. Frank McConville backed Catellus because of their commitment to preserving the history of the former NAS Alameda. Richard Bangert of the Green Party commended the selection process, and recommended the use of renewable energy and building materials in the future development. Bronson Parry, USN Retired and Disabled American Veterans Chapter 8, endorsed Catellus because of their interest in preserving the military history of the area. Lucille Parsons expressed concern about noise, safety and disruption if a light rail route is built along the former Belt Line tracks. Kirk Hoeffler, a business tenant at Alameda Point, endorsed APCP because their plan is the most supportive of current tenants. Peggy Doherty expressed hope that whichever developer is chosen, they will use local labor shops. Catellus is the only candidate who has indicated an understanding of this request and has indicated a willingness to do so. Ted Reiff of the Reuse People of Alameda County, a salvage company, recommended APCP because of their technical, financial and design expertise. 2 Darrel Carey endorsed Catellus because of their commitment to open space, working with minorities, and partnering with the City of Oakland. Kendra Capen, Linda Nguyen, Paul Bothwell, and Carolyn Verduin of the HOME Project endorsed Catellus because of their commitment to youth, community involvement, and ethnic diversity. Steve Lowe of the West Oakland Commerce Association expressed the City of Oakland and Port of Oakland's backing of the plan for the aerial tramway. Don Peterson supported APCP because of their strong ranking in the City's matrix of criteria. Tom Matthews, chair of Renewed Hope, looks forward to working with whichever developer is selected and hopes that Alameda Point will become a racially and ethnically diverse community with adequate affordable housing. Eve Bach of ARC Ecology stressed continued community participation as the process goes forward, including public hearings on the various agreements. Pete Halberstadt recommended APCP because of their superior ranking in the matrix of criteria. William Rogers, a retired engineer, voiced concern over the aerial tramway proposal because of its high expense and safety concerns. David Thruston expressed hope that the developer that is selected will make a commitment to work with local businesses. Jon Spangler of Bike Alameda endorsed Catellus and encouraged the chosen developer to expand on the plans that have been submitted. Bertram Harris, local business owner, expressed his enthusiastic support of Catellus due to their design plan. Michael Karp recommended Catellus because of their remediation, housing, cultural and recreational, and traffic plans. Bruce McBride endorsed APCP because they bring so many diverse interests together and because of their aerial tram plan. Allan Shore of the Public Transit Committee and Developer Selection Team commended Catellus' push for community involvement throughout the process and acknowledged the efficacy of the entire selection process. Christopher Hanson endorsed APCP because of the success they have had at McClellan AFB. 3 Steve Lanctot recommended Catellus because of their planned mix of housing, commercial and open space, as well as community outreach. Thomas Mercer of the Hornet Foundation supported Catellus because of their commitment to the Hornet and Navy history. Gerald Lutz, CEO of the Hornet Foundation, endorsed Catellus because of their preservation plans for Alameda and Navy history and heritage. Brad Shook, president of Bladium, recommended APCP because of their vision for Alameda Point. Nick Cabral felt that APCP will take into consideration all of the requests and recommendations that have been expressed by the community. Kurt Bohan urged the selection of APCP, not only for their proposed plans, but also to prevent Catellus from having a monopoly in developing the entire western third of the island. Mark Feldman, a Sacramento roofing contractor, stated his company has had a very good working relationship with APCP at McClellan AFB and is very impressed with what APCP has accomplished there in a short period of time. Bill Stremmel, an Alameda Point resident, expressed concern about the existing traffic situation and the need for improved transit solutions. He supported the Catellus transportation plan. Neil and Irma Garcia - Sinclair of CyberTran, an Alameda Point tenant, recommended locating CyberTran stations along the former Belt Line railway with connections to BART, which was included in Catellus' proposal. Michelle Fredrick supported Catellus because it addressed the vision created by the community and will integrate Alameda Point into the community as a whole. Ken Moore, whose business will move into McClellan AFB in September 2001, provided strong references for APCP based on his recent negotiations with them. Sharon Tripp supported Catellus because of their proposed traffic plan. Timmie Chesler urged consideration of APCP because of their plans for solar energy and their housing cluster plans near Encinal High School. John Huetter, president of West Alameda Business Association, reaffirmed WABA's endorsement of Catellus because of their focus on West Alameda businesses and non- competition with current business in the area, as well as their transportation plan. 4 Janet Clinton urged the selection of Catellus because it is a single entity. Bonnie Crowe endorsed Catellus because of their financial structure, which protects the City, as well as their superior land use plan. Robert Rogers, former executive vice president of the Hornet Foundation and WABA member, recommended Catellus because of their understanding of the needs of the west end of the City and their transportation plan. Judith Laws supported Catellus because their plan most closely incorporates the Base Reuse Plan and aids west end businesses and residents. William Smith of the Sierra Club urged support of current transportation options rather than the gondola and encouraged a preponderance of residential rather than commercial development. Allan Michaan of Antiques by the Bay endorsed APCP because of their innovative plans for the large buildings at McClellan and Alameda Point. Sara Baldi recommended Catellus because of their community involvement. Barry Luboviski of the Building & Construction Trades Council stated that both developer candidates have executed agreements with the unions. The public hearing was closed for Authority discussion. Chair Appezzato thanked all of the speakers for their input. He reiterated that this is a very difficult decision because both developers are well - qualified for the project. Member Daysog thanked the community, consultants, volunteers, staff and developers. He stressed the importance of considering budgetary constraints, transportation concerns, and housing needs in the selection process. He felt that Catellus addresses all of these concerns better than APCP. There is greater cost - saving for the City in Catellus' financing plan, with half of the debt incurred by the City under APCP's plan. Catellus has already established good rapport with the community and Collaborative through their development at FISC. Member Kerr stated that one of the most decisive factors was touring the developers' current projects. APCP's marketing team at McClellan has been very aggressive in attracting tenants and generating income for the local community, while the FISC property has not changed much in the last five years. She assumes that all of the best transportation ideas will be incorporated from the various plans; they are not "developer- specific ". She does not feel that Catellus understands what type of housing fits in Alameda. 5 Member Johnson agreed that the site tours were very helpful in reaching her decision. She also felt that the selection process achieved its goal of soliciting community input, which will continue throughout the development process. She stressed the importance of integrating Alameda Point into the rest of the community and honoring the history of the area. She feels the most important factor in reaching the decision is the business plan, including the financial package, rather than the development plan itself. Member DeWitt thanked both developers for their input and interest in the project. He carefully considered the criteria outlined in the matrix. He acknowledged that Catellus has demonstrated a strong commitment to the community, but APCP has better organizational and financial capabilities. Chair Appezzato stated his selection was based on a very few fine points which he felt distinguished one team from the other. Chair Appezzato asked for a roll call vote on the selection of the master developer for Alameda Point. The vote was as follows: Member Kerr: Member Daysog: Member Johnson:. Member DeWitt: Chair Appezzato: Alameda Point Community Partners Catellus Alameda Point Community Partners Alameda Point Community Partners Alameda Point Community Partners Chair Appezzato declared Alameda Point Community Partners to be the master developer for Alameda Point. Exclusive negotiations will commence shortly. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 5. ADJOURNMENT Chair Appezzato adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. s ctfully sub t ed, cretia Aki ARRA Secretary 6 Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Interoffice Memorandum August 30, 2001 To: The Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: Doug Yount, Director Development Services Department 2 -C Subject: Recommendation to Adopt a Resolution Approving the Transfer of the Electrical Utility Distribution System located at Alameda Point to the City of Alameda Background: By application, dated October 1997, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) requested conveyance of portions of NAS Alameda through an Economic Development Conveyance (EDC) pursuant to DBCRA §2905(b)(4), as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000. The application encompasses land and improvements comprising a portion of NAS, and also requests the transfer of all personal property situated thereon. The Government conveyed certain portions of NAS to ARRA under the MOA on July 17, 2000. Discussion: On July 31, 2001, the Government transferred, by Bill of Sale, the electrical utility distribution system located at Alameda Point to the ARRA at no cost. Alameda Power and Telecom (AP &T) has maintained the system since October, 1996. By turning over the distribution systems at Alameda Point, AP &T will be able to plan and budget for the operation and maintenance of this system similar to the city -wide distribution system. This will result in a cost reduction to the ARRA of approximately $40,000 per month. In order for AP &T to own and operate the system, ARRA must transfer the system to the City of Alameda. The attached resolution provides for the necessary transfer. Fiscal Impact: A savings to ARRA of $40,000 per month in operating costs and $4 - 5,000 annual pumping costs. AP &T will have a potential disposal cost for 38 oil - containing transformer units, and clean -up of a transformer storage site. These costs will not exceed $100,000. The Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Recommendation: August 30, 2001 Page 2 It is recommended that the ARRA Board approve the transfer of the Electrical Utility Distribution System to the City of Alameda. DY/DP/MH:dc Attachment Respectfully submitted, Doug Yount, Director Development Services Department By: Debbie Potter Base Reuse & Redevelopment Manager W D iu ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RESOLUTION NO.3 TRANSFER OF THE ELECTRIC UTILITY DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM LOCATED AT ALAMEDA POINT TO THE CITY OF ALAMEDA WHEREAS. on June 6. 2000, the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment- Authority (`'ARRA ") and the United States of America, acting through the Secretary of the Navy, entered into a Memorandum of Agreement ( "Agreement ") for the no cost" Economic Development Conveyance (`EDC ") to the ARRA of a portion of the former Naval Air Station Alameda, pursuant to Section 2905(b)(4) of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. as amended, and the implementing regulations of the Department of Defense (32 CFR Part 175); and WHEREAS. subsequent to the execution and delivery of the Agreement, the ARRA and the Navy determined that in accordance with the Reuse Plan it is desirable and necessary to include within the scope of the Agreement additional items of Personal Property, including the Electric Utility Distribution System; and WHEREAS. on July 31, 2001, the Navy did quitclaim and convey to the ARRA pursuant to a Bill of Sale, all its right, title and interest to the Electric Utility Distribution System located on Alameda Point; and WHEREAS. the ARRA currently contracts with the City of Alameda, through the Alameda Power & Telecom, for the operation, maintenance, and repair or modification to the Electric Utility Distribution System and such operation and maintenance service is a significant monthly expense to the ARRA; and WHEREAS. the ARRA would realize a monthly cost savings of approximately $40.000 by transferring the obligation to operate, maintain and repair or modify the Electric Utility Distribution System to the City of Alameda; WHEREAS, the Alameda Power and Telecom is a municipally owned utility company, authorized to operate an Electric Utility Distribution System within the City of Alameda, and desires to acquire the Electric Utility Distribution System at Alameda Point for continued use in the delivery of electricity to its rate payers; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE ARRA THAT: The Electric Utility Distribution System described in the July 31, 2001 Bill of Sale from the Navy to the ARRA (a copy of which is on file with the ARRA Secretary) is hereby transferred to the City of Alameda as personal property. The Executive Director is directed to execute a Bill of Sale, if required, to quitclaim and transfer to the City of Alameda substantially the same Electric Utility Distribution System personal property as set forth in the July 31, 2001 Bill of Sale from the Navy to the ARRA. I. undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority in its regular meeting. assembled on the 5th day of September , 2001. by the following vote Co wit: AYES: 5 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 ABSTENTIONS: 0 Luc etia Akil Secretary Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Date: September 5, 2001 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 This Bill of Sale, made this 3/ day of �� , 2001, by the United States of 12 America, acting by and through the Department of t Nav ( "Government "), for the benefit of 13 the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, a Joint Powers Authority established by 14 the City of Alameda and County of Alameda under the California Joint Exercise of Powers Act 15 as set forth in Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 5, Article 1 of Government Code of the State of 16 California (Government Code Section 6500 et seq.) ( "ARRA "). 17 18 RECITALS 19 20 A. Government is the owner of that certain real property, together with 21 improvements and associated personal property thereon, located in Alameda, California, and 22 commonly referred to as the Former Naval Air Station, Alameda ( "NAS Alameda "), which was 23 closed as a military installation, and is subject to disposal pursuant to the Defense Base Closure 24 and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended ( "DBCRA "). 25 26 B. By application, dated October 1997, ARRA requested conveyance of portions of 27 NAS Alameda through an Economic Development Conveyance ( "EDC ") pursuant to DBCRA § 28 2905(b)(4), as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000. The 29 application encompasses land and improvements comprising a portion of NAS, and also requests 30 the transfer of all personal property situated thereon. Pursuant to said section the Secretary of 31 the Navy has the authority to dispose of real and personal property without consideration for 32 purposes of job creation and economic redevelopment related to a closed military installation. 33 34 C. The Government has approved said EDC application and agreed to convey 35 portions of NAS to ARRA under the Memorandum of Agreement Between the United States of 36 America Acting By and Through the Secretary of the Navy, United States Department of the 37 Navy, and the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority for the Conveyance of Portions of 38 the Naval Air Station Alameda from the United States of America to the Alameda Reuse and 39 Redevelopment Authority, dated June 6, 2000 ( "MOA "). 40 41 D. The Government conveyed certain portions of NAS to ARRA under the MOA on 42 July 17, 2000. 43 44 BILL OF SALE FOR ELECTRIC UTILITY DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM LOCATED AT THE FORMER NAVAL AIR STATION, ALAMEDA BILL OF SALE FOR ELECTRIC UTILITY DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 1 AGREEMENTS 2 3 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and other consideration 4 set forth herein, it is mutually agreed as follows: 5 6 1. Government hereby grants, transfers, releases, and quitclaims all of its right, title and 7 interest in and to the Electric Utility Distribution System located on that portion of the NAS that 8 the Government is conveying to ARRA under the MOA as described and depicted in Exhibit 9 'A" hereof, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof It is noted that the Electrical 10 Distribution System covered by this Bill of Sale has been operated, maintained, repaired, and to 11 some extent modified and replaced by the ARRA for a period of years. Accordingly, this Bill of 12 Sale is intended to include the transfer of the Government's right, title and interest to all 13 currently existing portions of the system installed or modified by the ARRA whether listed in 14 Exhibit "A" or not. 15 16 2. Electric Transformers: This transfer of property specifically excludes the electric 17 transformers listed in Exhibit "B" hereto, which transformers were determined to have contained 18 polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) in concentrations equal to or exceeding 50 parts per million 19 (ppm) and have been removed from NAS and disposed of by the Government in accordance with 20 applicable laws and regulations. The Government's identification and removal of such 21 transformers was done in consultation with and concurred in by the ARRA. This conveyance 22 shall not include any transformer that satisfies all three of the following conditions: 23 24 a) The transformer was owned and operated at NAS by the Government before it 25 was operated by the ARRA, 26 b) The ARRA and the Government determine that the transformer contains PCB's in 27 concentrations equal to or exceeding 50 ppm after the date of execution of this Bill of Sale, and 28 c) The ARRA demonstrates to the Government's satisfaction that the concentration 29 of PCBs in the transformer was not modified during the ARRA's use of the transformer. 30 31 The Government, at the option of the ARRA, shall remove and dispose of any such transformer 32 at the Government's cost and expense in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. 33 34 3. The proceeds of the sale of the property described in this Bill of Sale shall be subject to 35 the same restrictions and provisions for recoupment as are set forth in Article 6 of the MOA. 36 37 4. The property described in this Bill of Sale is transferred without warranty of any kind. 38 The property is delivered to ARRA "as is" and "where is," and the Government makes no 39 warranty as to its usability generally or as to its fitness for any particular purpose. 40 41 5. Nothing in this Bill of Sale will be construed as or constitute a commitment or 42 requirement that any federal agency or department will obligate or pay funds in contravention of 43 the Anti- deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. Section 1341, or that the Congress, at a later time, will 44 appropriate funds sufficient to meet.deficiencies. 45 46 BILL OF SALE FOR ELECTRIC UTILITY DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 1 6. This Bill of Sale shall be effective on the date first above written. 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Government and ARRA have caused this instrument to be 4 executed by their duly authorized representatives on the date first above written. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Acting by and through t ,he Department of the Navy By WILLIAM R. CARSILLO Real Estate Contracting Officer Base Realignment and Closure Office ALAMEDA REUS RUTH. By AND REDEVELOPMENT J M I LINT E ecutive Director 3 Approved as to Form CIS ATTORNEY By: Assistant City Attorney CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of ALAM5 t SS. s On JULY 3i Date ZL X1 , before me, personally appeared CIRPtC, N Wft M $A R . GRACE1.SAGUN Commission # 1210404 Notary Public - Caiiftxnia San Mateo County My Comm. Expires Feb 9, 2003 Place Notary Seal Above Name and Title of Officer (e.g., "Jane Doe, Notary Public ") GARzst t.t.O Name(s) of Signer(s) D. personally known to me roved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his /her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature r3E Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Docum t Title or Type of Document: '(1( L' Document Date: Sut-Y 31, Z601 Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: JIM Rdtrrt Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: RIGHT THUMBPRINT OF SIGNER Top of thumb here ccct:��= cr�ecCA; •<� tex crescvc��Lcterc �<c ccc tti ®1997 National Notary Association • 9350 De Soto Ave., P.O. Box 2402 • Chatsworth, CA 91313 -2402 Prod. No. 5907 Reorder. Call Toll -Free 1- 800. 876 -6827 CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT 5 State of California County of AL.444ePP On cfuit ' 31, WO Date personally appeared , before me, cAMG✓ CRAGS &iu1• Name and Title of Officer (e.g., "Jane Doe, Notary Public ") M. T .-t 1 1 1 GRACE L SAGUN Commission # 1210404 Notary Public - California San Mateo County My Comm. Expires Fete 9, 2003 Place Notary Seal Above Name(s) of Signer(s) 2ersonally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name,,(s) isfefe- subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /sbe/ey- executed the same in his Aterithreir authorized capacity iesr and that by hisArerftIleYir signature *.on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person s)' acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. OPTIONAL Sign ure of otary Public Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached DQ ju�m'enii t , �C �. .5.1 Title or Type of Document: 1`J' 8�' Document Date: 31A� Y 1 Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: W1IAA R . c \-1"91 7 Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: ®1997 National Notary Association • 9350 De Soto Ave., P.O. Box 2402 • Chatsworth, CA 91313 -2402 Prod. No. 5907 RIGHT THUMBPRINT OF SIGNER Top of thumb here Reorder: Call Toil -Free 1- 800 -876 -6827 EXHIBIT "B" TO BILL OF SALE FOR ELECTRIC UTILITY DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AT THE FORMER NAVAL AIR STATION, ALAMEDA (Page 1 of 1) - Electrical Transformers Removed from Service for Environmental Compliance Building Serial Number Manufacturer 1.:\layA BOE # 584 (PAV- 2907 -01) Westingh. X -53 1165 39 G &W A -330 8119 338D & E (pole) 6964136 G.E. 39 G &W A -330 8119 39 G &W A -330 8119 39 G &W A -328 8118 39 G &W A -328 8118 2 (62800) Gardner X -373 8294 41 G &W A -334 8228 41 G &W A -334 8228 41 G &W A -336 8229 340 FC42 B G &W 8523 41 G &W A -334 8228 39 CO -8119 39 G &W A -328 8118 41 G &W A -336 8229 166 9F2E53 G.E. 2 (7660392) G.E. X -371 8296 166 7530173 G.E. X -201 8503 27 (6702054) G.E. X -386 8353 41 G &W A -336 8229 27 No I.D. Plate G.E. 30 (7295671) G.E. X -318 8275 2 7303160 G.E. 41 (67698) Uptegraff X -277 8222 27 (6576348) G.E. X -387 8352 2 (62801) Gardner X -372 8295 12 (6956782) G.E. 552 Storage (6585376)- G.E. X -389 8356 5 72126 Esco X -90 1137 Pole #436 G310399065 K G.E. 552 Storage (2) G &W 552 Storage B 342682 G.E. 552 Storage (9801243) G.E. Pier 3 Vault 4 PFG -3328 Std. Trans. X -32 552 Storage B 343868 G.E. 552 Storage B 343869 G.E. Pier 3 Vault 3 PFF -3006 Std. Trans. X -29 Pier 3 Vault 4 PFG -3346 Std. Trans. X -31 Pier3 Vault 3 PFG -3347 Std. Trans. X -30 Correspondence / Miscellaneous ALAMEDA REUSE AND RE ...:VELOPMENT AUTHORITY Interim Leasing Status Report - September 2001 RevisedlnterimLease.xls Signed Leases & Licenses Building # Building Sq. Ft. 1 ACET (Environmental Tech. Incubator) 7 15,550 2 AC Homet Foundation Pier 3 40,000 3 Alameda Aerospace (Advanced Turbine Tech.) 398 32,000 4 Alameda Aerospace (Tower Aviation) 530 82,250 5 Alameda Naval Air Museum 77 21,136 6 Alameda Point Storage (Mini Storage) Near Bldg. 530 Ground Lease 7 Alameda Point Collaborative (Warehouse) 92 89,000 8 Alameda Point Collaborative (Office, etc.) 101 68,650 9 Alameda Power & Telecom (Storage Yard) at FISC 10 Alameda Power & Telecom 162 East 51,000 11 Alameda Power & Telecom Bldg 2 ,Wing 3 6,000 12 Alameda Unified School District (Child Care Cntr) 258 12,430 13 Altematives in Action (HOME) 585 10,550 14 Antiques by the Bay (Collectibles Faire) Tarmac & 405 4,880 15 Apelon (formerly Lexical) 527 West 6,000 16 AVTS dba: Creative Technology 22 66,000 17 Bay Ship & Yacht (Ship Repair) 292 2,700 18 Bladium (Indoor Games) 40 104,000 19 Bobac (Warehouse) Bldg 2 FISC 110,000 20 Cafe Strada 119 47,000 21 Cametoid 32, East Side 6,000 22 Cellular One (Cell Site) Near Bldg. 360 Ground Lease 23 City of Alameda (Administration) 1 37,084 24 City of Alameda (Dog Run Park) along estuary 40,000 25 City of Alameda (Ferry Terminal Parking) along estuary 47,000 26 City of Alameda (Fire Dept Training) 522 2,400 27 City of Alameda (Gym & Pool) - 76 &134 58,450 28 City of Alameda (O'Club) 60 29,550 29 City of Alameda (Police Department) 494 2,850 30 City of Alameda (Public Works storage) 397 17,000 31 City of Alameda (Soccer Field) east of Bldg 360 19,500 32 City of Alameda (Tennis Courts) west of O'Club 92,817 33 Coach Specialties (formerly NB Industries) 24 - Bay 3 26,927 34 College of Alameda (License) Taxiway "H" Ground Lease 35 Container Storage (Cans) 338 42,000 36 CyberTran, International 163 10,000 37 Delphi Productions (Exhibit Displays) 39 110,000 38 Delphi Productions 117 West 32,000 39 Dignity Housing (Homeless Coll.) 103,105,809,810 4,400 40 Door Christian Fellowship Church 564 8,600 41 Dunavant of Califomia (Storage) Bldg 2 FISC 170,000 42 Edge Innovations 20 65,547 43 Emerg. Svcs. Network (Office) 613 4,600 44 Forem Metal Manufacturing 114 46,133 45 Forty Plus (Career Counseling) 90 4,500 46 Foss Environmental 616 & D-13 21,800 47 Fribel Internal. (Concrete Statuary) 98 8,507 48 Gen. Svcs. Admin. (Maritime Museum Storage) 169 86,300 49 Home Auto Repair 459 5,400 50 Housing Units (Big White/Ranch Style/Twnhse) 68 units 50,000 RevisedlnterimLease.xls Signed Leases & Licenses Building # Building Sq. Ft. 51 Hung Construction Company 459-East 4,000 52 JBI, Inc. 170 North 40,000 53 Jim Bustos Plumbing 612 4,000 54 Jimex Corporation 91 52,200 55 Kitz Corporation 21 66,000 56 Manex Entertainment 62 16,473 57 Manex Entertainment 13 34,540 58 Manex Entertainment 19 27,650 59 Maritime Administration Piers 1,2,3 60 Maritime Administration (Warehouse/Office) 168 117,419 61 Marine Sanitation 611 1,000 62 MMCE 152 6,000 63 Navigator Systems (Furniture Mfg.) 14 31,400 64 Nelson's Marine (Boat Repair & Storage) 167 & piers 55,450 65 Nelson's (subletting to other businesses) 66 28,542 66 Nelson's Marine (Boat Repair & Storage) 410 34,650 67 Nextel 624 200 68 Operation Dignity (Homeless Collaborative) 816 - 821 15,000 69 Pacific Fine Food, Inc. (Food Preparation) 42 3,000 70 Performance Multihull 608 8,213 71 Piedmont Soccer soccer field 72 Port Distribution & Warehousing 117 East 22,000 73 Port Distribution & Warehousing 118 West 60,800 74 Port Distribution & Warehousing 170 South 40,000 75 Power Engineering 166 47,000 76 Puglia Engr. (Ship Repair) 67 14,000 77 RCD (Homeless Collaborative) various units 8,000 78 Richard Miller Photography 621 5,770 79 Rieder Structural Works (RSW, Inc.) 113 13,100 80 San Leandro Shelter (Homeless Collab) 531,532,533 28,080 81 Silicon Venture Partners 29 19,500 82 Simmba Systems (Records Storage) 9 92,817 83 Studio 35 35 2,750 84 Trident Port Services 393 Ground Lease 85 Trident Management FISC Wharf Ground Lease 86 Trident Management 15 16,600 87 United Indian Nations (Homeless Collaborative) various units 6,000 88 University Avenue Housing various units 40,000 89 Wamer Bros 11/12/400/400A 345,000 90 Wamer Bros 2 / 3 / 5A 95,300 91 Waters,Caldwell & Assoc. (Environ.Consultant) 115 2,200 92 West Coast Bridge (License) FISC 16 & Lot 1,000 93 West Coat Novelties 23 65,000 94 West Coast Seaworks (Marine Construction) 43 10,500 95 Westem Pacific Truck School 102 1,500 96 Woodmasters (Woodworkers) 44 5,100 NO. OF EMPLOYEES 2,111 NO. OF PROPERTIES CURRENTLY OCCUPIED 96 OCCUPIED BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE 3,066,948 RevisedlnterimLease.xls