Loading...
2009-04-01 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 1. ROLL CALL 2. CONSENT CALENDAR Wednesday, April 1, 2009 Meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted, approved or adopted by one motion unless a request for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the Board or a member of the public. 2 -A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 4, 2009. 2 -B. Approve the minutes of the Special Joint Meeting of the ARRA/HABOC of March 4, 2009. 2 -C. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Antiques by the Bay, Building 13, at Alameda Point. 2 -D. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Antiques by the Bay, Building 459, at Alameda Point. 2 -E. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Bay Ship & Yacht Company at Alameda Point. 2 -F. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Dreyfuss Capital Partners, Building 29, at Alameda Point. 2 -G. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Dreyfuss Capital Partners, Hangar 22, at Alameda Point. 2 -H. Approve a Waiver of License Fees for Pacific Skyline Council, BSA Sea Scouts, Ancient Mariner Regatta. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3 -A. LRA Presentation of Treasure Island Redevelopment - Jack Sylvan, San Francisco Mayor's office. 3 -B. Alameda Point Update. ARRA Agenda — April 1, 2009 Page 2 3 -C. Alameda Point Environmental Issues Update: Radiological Substance at West Shore of Seaplane Lagoon and Block of Oversize Debris at North Shore of Seaplane Lagoon. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4 -A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of March 5th Alameda Point RAB Meeting. 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. Notes: • Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the ARRA Secretary at 749 -5800 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, March 4, 2009 The meeting convened at 7:12 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Beverly Johnson Boardmember Lena Tam Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Doug deHaan 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2 -A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 7, 2009. 2 -B. Approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of February 3, 2009. 2 -C. Approve an Amendment to the Consultant Contract with Harris & Associates for On -Call Services for the Review of Land Development Entitlement Applications for the Redevelopment of Alameda Point. 2 -D. Approve a Second Amendment to Agreement with Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., Increasing the Budget $145,000 and Extending the Term 11 Months, to Provide Ongoing Negotiation Support for the Redevelopment of Alameda Point. 2 -E. Authorize the Executive Director to Execute a Consultant Agreement with National Response Corporation Environmental Services in the Amount of $325,000 for Management of Alameda Point Port for the earlier of Five Years or Until Property is Conveyed to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority 2 -F. Approve and Authorize the Executive Director to Execute a Second Amendment to the Alameda Point Lease in Furtherance of Conveyance with the United States Navy. Vice Chair deHaan pulled items 2 -D, 2 -E, and 2 -F for discussion. Approval of the balance of the Consent Calendar (items 2 -A, 2 -B, and 2 -C) was motioned by Member Matarrese, seconded by Member Tam and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 Item 2 -D — Vice Chair deHaan requested more background on the term extension for EPS, asking if it was due to a scope of work change, or duration. Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, explained that the request is for the duration, and that the scope of work remains the same. Vice Chair deHaan motioned approval of Item 2 -D, seconded by Member Matarrese, and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 Item 2 -E. — Leslie Little discussed that this contract with NRC is part of the lease requirement with MARAD to provide port services. Vice Chair deHaan requested clarification that MARAD was not an exclusive user of the piers, and if there were no other activities at the pier, we would still need port services. Ms. Little explained that the driver is the MARAD lease, and that we would need the port services regardless. Todd Roloff, of NRC, supported Ms. Little's discussion and explained that management of the old piers would still be needed, even if MARAD were not there, at the very least, at a `Public Works' type of level. Vice Chair deHaan motioned approval of Item 2 -E, seconded by Member Matarrese, and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 Item 2 -F - Vice Chair deHaan has concern about losing lease revenue while the Navy does clean -up and closure of some of the structures at Alameda Point. He also asked if there were other buildings that would be falling into the same category. Ms. Potter explained that the lease revenue we are currently getting from three of the buildings that are slated to be removed from the lease premises is approx. $250,000 per year, but it is noted that several of those tenants have already been relocated, so that we will not be losing that rent. Nelson's Marine is vacating the premises and we will be losing approx. $95,000 per year. We have worked with the Navy to minimize the financial impact on the environmental work that they need to do. Ms. Little pointed out that at the end of their environmental work, if the buildings can be released, the Navy has agreed that we can come back in the future and amend the LIFOC to put those buildings back into the lease premises. Member Matarrese is concerned that the $95,000 loss represents some services being cut. Ms. Potter stated that the loss would impact our cash reserves, but that we do not anticipate a reduction in services. Member Matarrese encourages the clean -up, but stresses the importance to protect the assets that are being cleaned up. Ms. Little discussed that the costs for the clean- up will be offset with other leasing activity. Chair Johnson requested a report on the state of infrastructure on Alameda Point at a future meeting. Vice Chair deHaan motioned approval of Item 2 -F, seconded by Member Tam, and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3 -A. Alameda Point Update — Presentation of Project Pro Forma. Before the presentation, Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, summarized the Alameda Point Project to date: Pursuant to the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement, SunCal submitted a draft master plan and business plan to the City on December 19, 2008. Concurrent with this effort, staff, the City's economic consultant EPS, and SunCal, completed the initial project pro forma. The pro forma is required to begin discussions with the Navy regarding the property conveyance term sheet. SunCal presented its master plan to the ARRA at its January 7 meeting. It is important to note that SunCal considers the pro forma confidential because it contains proprietary information that could disadvantage SunCal with its competitors. In addition to the pro forma summary, staff will present work done on fiscal neutrality to date. Ms. Potter also addressed a recent misconception publicly expressed that tax increment financing at Alameda Point will consume all property tax. She explained that this is not correct - while it is true that Alameda Point is currently not on the tax rolls and isn't generating property tax, when the property is transferred to private ownership, all property tax that is generated is allocated by statutory formula, often referred to as the AB1290 pass - throughs, to all of the taxing entities, including the City general fund and the school district, and the redevelopment agency. At project build -out, the CIC will receive approximately 38% of all property tax revenue to be used for economic development purposes. The CIC will receive an additional 20% of all property tax revenue for affordable housing. On an annual basis, the City's general fund will receive 11 % of all property tax generated and AUSD will receive 8% of all property tax revenue. Based on a cumulative assessed value of $5 billion at build -out, based on SunCal's draft master plan, the General Fund will receive $5.5 million a year and AUSD will receive $4 million a year in Alameda Point property tax payments. While the dollar amount received will vary based on assessed valuation, the percentage of property tax allocated to the various taxing entities will not change as it is set by state law. Jennifer Ott, Redevelopment Manager, presented the summary of the Project Pro Forma. Chair Johnson asked how confident we are on the timeline based on the current discussion with the Navy. Ms. Ott replied that we have to see where their numbers come in, and they have said before that they're not willing to negotiate. If they come in with a number that is workable and reasonable, then the timeline is reasonable. Both SunCal and ARRA are anxious to see at what number they will come in with, as it will affect the timeline. Ms. Ott stated that a response is expected at the end of March. Member Matarrese clarified that the term sheet and price was negotiated with the previous developer in 2006, and recognized by both the Navy and the City as a draft, non - binding term sheet. He asked that once the Navy comes back with a response (at next ARRA meeting in April), can we expect to counter at that time. Ms. Ott explained that whether or not we counter depends on how the Navy presents their response. Member Matarrese stressed that our Plan B is that we cannot be passive, we have to be ready with our ability to counter and say to the Navy, `this is our last and best offer, take it or leave it.' David Brandt, Acting Executive Director, clarified how the Navy approaches EDC's — under the 2005 amendment to the BRAC law, the price terms aren't negotiated — the requirement is to seek fair market value, and so the way the process works is, we give them what we believe the costs and revenues are from the project that's being planned. The Navy then goes out and hires a consultant to do a separate review based on our data/assumptions, and come back to us, as they did in 2003, with their determination of the fair market value (in 2003, it was $108.5M). It is not a negotiation, it's their number, and what you can negotiate are terms, payment over time, payment in kind, but they cannot negotiate the price. Based on this approach, Member Matarrese suggested taking a political step with our representatives in Congress, stressing that those rules put in place in 2003 and 2005 are no longer applicable in 2009. The economy is different, the lending institutions are in disarray, we do not have the same structure in which those rules were based. This is a serious option and there needs to be policy change. Mr. Brandt clarified that we never accepted the Navy's price and that they are willing to re -value the property for two reasons: 1) the plan is different, and 2) the market circumstances are wildly different. They won't negotiate with us, but will give us what they believe the fair market value is and will probably be "take it or leave it" offer. Over the years we have taken a number of political approaches, the most recent was last summer - we actually achieved legislation that ended up being gutted in the Senate, and largely not useful to us. Ms Potter further explained that Alameda is not the only LRA interested in a no -cost conveyance, or something other than the fair market valuation process — so nationally there was a push to get the no -cost EDC legislation resurrected as part of the stimulus bill, and they Mayor did send a letter to Senator Boxer and Senator Feinstein expressing our interest in them supporting the no -cost EDC legislation. That effort died in the senate before it ever even came to the floor. So there is a wide range of views among elected officials about priorities, an appropriate process for disposing of properties. An effort we all recognize but hard to predict the outcome. Member Tam suggested establishing a subcommittee of the ARRA Board to participate in the next negotiation with the Navy. Board members agreed that it would be valuable to have this subcommittee. Ms. Potter suggested that in the alternative, the ARRA consider the "subcommittee" meet with Navy officials in Washington DC who actually set the policy and give the policy direction to the folks in San Diego, and may be a worthwhile effort. Chair Johnson requested that, to be cost efficient, she strongly prefers to meet in San Diego with the Washington representatives. Ms. Potter will follow up with the Navy on this issue. Member Tam motioned to establish the ARRA subcommittee to participate in Navy negotiations, seconded by Member Gilmore and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 Vice Chair deHaan requested an off- agenda report on general fund expenditures and revenue streams to support the payback. 3 -B. Approve a Five -Year Lease and Repayment PlanlWrite -off with AC Hornet Foundation. Leslie Little gave an overview about the particular conditions relative to the lease. Essentially, the goal is to sign a five -year lease commitment, giving the Hornet an opportunity to repay outstanding back rent and to assist them in building a better position to attract donor funds, grants, etc. John Baker, original Board of Trustees for the Aircraft Hornet Foundation and current Chairman, introduced members of their Board, staff, and volunteers in attendance. On behalf of their Board, Mr. Baker expressed their appreciation that the City of Alameda is considering renewing their contract. He discussed the mission of the USS Hornet and the importance of the services they provide. Member Matarrese motioned approval of 3 -B, seconded by Vice Chair deHaan, and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3 -C. Provide Leasing Guidance for Proposed Autocross /Motocross Events in the Northwest Territories at Alameda Point Representatives from Alameda Auto Park, LLC. spoke to the Board regarding their proposal for the auto /motocross events at Alameda Point. The ARRA Board was mostly concerned about the potential negative elements that such an event would generate, specifically noise pollution, intrusion on the fish and wildlife /wildlife refuge, and the level of disruption to other existing tenants. There were several speakers that had an opinion on the issue, both for and against the events. Member Gilmore motioned for a "test day" in order to assess the potential noise and disruption of the proposed events, seconded by Member Tam, and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 3, Noes: 2 (deHaan and Matarrese), Abstentions: 0 4. ORAL REPORTS 4 -A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of February 5th Alameda Point RAB Meeting. At Feb 5th RAB meeting the highlight was the Final Feasibility Study on Site 2, which is located at the northwest point, and then south where the wetlands are. Member Matarrese discussed the slides that were presented, citing slide 16 which talks about the cost of doing different remediation scenarios, ranging from $10 -$20 million to almost $1 billion (complete removal, backfill engineering, institutional controls and offsite disposal) They are still soliciting input on the final plan. Slide 18 talks about the Record of Decision (ROD) happening sometime after April or May. Member Matarrese will attend tomorrow's RAB meeting and will get the figure of how much has been spent on remediation of entire base to date, and how much is programmed, and will report back at the next ARRA meeting. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Vice Chair deHaan discussed the MTC Transportation Oriented Development (TOD) and how they market various sites for TODs. He explained that the real criteria for the TOD sites was a heavy transportation corridor. Alameda was not one of the sites. In some of those, they made recommendations of lower density - under 40 -units per acre. The density at the Summer House development is 39 -units per acre. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 10:29 a.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, (9*,t, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary APPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING of the EDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA), AND OUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC) Wednesday March 4, 2009 The meeting convened at 10:30 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, Torrey and Chair Johnson 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2-A. Accept Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda Held Tuesday, January 6, 2009. 2-B. Accept Housing Authority Audit Report for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2008. The Housing Commission and Chief Executive Officer recommend the Board of Commissioners accept the audit report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2008. 2-C. Authorize Submission of Application for Replacement Vouchers for Esperanza Residents. Approval of the consent calendar was motioned by Commissioner Matarrese and seconded by Commissioner Torrey and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Abstentions: 0. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Hold a Public Hearing to Approve an Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Resolution Adopting an Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Reuse of Naval Air Station Alameda and Fleet Industrial Supply Center; Approving an Amendment to the 1996 Naval Air Station Alameda Community Reuse Plan for the Main Street Neighborhoods Subarea; and Approving a Legally Binding Agreement for a Homeless Accommodation at the North Housing Parcel (LBA); and Approve a Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Resolution Approving a LBA and Related Memorandum of Understanding. Elizabeth Cook, Housing Development Manager, gave a presentation which was an overview of the North Housing Parcel project. Liz Varela, Executive Director, Building Futures for Women and Children (BFWC), stated that they are excited about the project, as it's a great opportunity for their clients to make change in a safe, stable housing, with support. Doug Biggs, Executive Director, Alameda Point Collaborative, commented on a few points, stating that the process has resulted in a really strong plan, and that all partners came together to create a solid program which draws on the strengths of each provider, the Housing Authority (HA) and BWFC. He's excited that this plan will permanently end homelessness. He reminded the board that the Homeless Needs Assessment was done a year ago, March 2008, and today, the needs for the homeless is even greater. He addressed a couple of issues discussed in the presentation, including the site plan. He commented that the drawing is only a small portion of entire site, and that the general plan principles are met: housing is closer to the Tinker Ave. transit corridor, which makes for easy access to transportation and schools. Regarding the environmental clean up, Mr. Biggs stated that they are constrained by the ROD (Record of Decision), which limits the Navy's culpability. He discussed that in the worse case to comply with ROD, the HA came up with a plan built into the funding mix, as well as a plan which is part of the service plan to set aside money for insurance. He assured the Board that the project was made to be as risk — averse as much as possible Member Matarrese stated a few modifications to the recommendation, including making sure the eight acres stay contiguous, and that the Miracle League is specified within the eight acres; that language is worked into the LBA that addresses if the remediation insurance is cross prohibitive, we don't have to take title. Chair Johnson added the provision that outside counsel, or counsel, should make any changes necessary to ensure additional safeguards. Donna Mooney, ARRA General Counsel, summarized that this is an ARRA motion approving the resolution (the addendum to final EIR), amending the Community Reuse Plan, and approving the LBA as modified. The motion was made by Chair Johnson, seconded by Member Matarrese and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes — 6, Noes — 0, Abstentions — 0. As the HABOC, the recommendation was to approve the resolution approving the MOU between the Housing Authority, Alameda Point Collaborative, and Building Futures for Women and Children; and approving the LBA as modified. The motion was made by Commissioner Torrey, seconded by Commissioner Matarrese, and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes — 6, Noes — 0, Abstentions — 0. 4. 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.) None. 5. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 6. ADJOURNMENT — ARRA, HABOC Meeting was adjourned at 11:50 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Memorandum To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: David Brandt Acting Executive Director Date: April 1, 2009 Re: Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Antiques by the Bay, Building 13, at Alameda Point BACKGROUND The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) governing Board approves all Alameda Point subleases with a lease term greater than one year. The proposed sublease for Antiques by the Bay is for two years. DISCUSSION Antiques by the Bay has occupied a portion of Building 13 at Alameda Point for the past four years. This building is used as office space in support of the monthly Antique Faire. Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed sublease for Antiques by the Bay in a portion of Building 13. The rent for Antiques by the Bay is $29,424 annually, or $0.6130 per sq. ft. in the first year. There is a 3% increase in each subsequent year. The building will continue to be used for general office space. Building 13 is in poor condition. In accordance with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the ARRA and SunCal Companies, this lease has been discussed with representatives from SunCal Companies and has their concurrence. BUDGET CONSIDERATION / FINANCIAL IMPACT This lease will generate $29,424 in the first year. These funds will be retained by the ARRA. RECOMMENDATION Authorize negotiation and execution of a sublease for Antiques by the Bay at Alameda Point. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Respectfully submitted, Leslie Little Development Services Director By: Nanette Banks Mocanu Finance and Administration Manager Attachment: A. Proposed Sublease Business Terms B. Site Map ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS TENANT BUILDING SIZE (SF) TERM RENT Antiques by the Bay 13 4,000 2 yrs 32,452/mo. I ' I td J> 1 0 co icp co CM V CM W ATTACHMENT B Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Memorandum To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: David Brandt Acting Executive Director Date: April 1, 2009 Re: Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Antiques by the Bay, Building 459, at Alameda Point BACKGROUND The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) governing Board approves all Alameda Point subleases with a lease term greater than one year. The proposed sublease for Antiques by the Bay is for two years. DISCUSSION Antiques by the Bay has occupied Building 459 at Alameda Point for the past two years. This building is used to do light maintenance on the tugs and trailers used to set up the field for the monthly Antique Faire. This building also is used to perform maintenance of the various tables, booths and other wooden pieces at the Antiques Faire. Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed sublease for Antiques by the Bay in Building 459. The rent for Antiques by the Bay is $41,484 annually, or $0.3008 per sq. ft. in the first year. There is a 3% increase in each subsequent year. The building will continue to be used for light vehicle maintenance, shop space and parking. Building 459 is in poor condition. In accordance with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the ARRA and SunCal Companies, this lease has been discussed with representatives from SunCal Companies and has their concurrence. BUDGET CONSIDERATION / FINANCIAL IMPACT This lease will generate $41,484 in the first year. These funds will be retained by the ARRA. RECOMMENDATION Authorize negotiation and execution of a sublease for Antiques by the Bay at Alameda Point. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Respectf submitted, Leslie Little Development Services Director By: Nanette Banks Mocanu Finance and Administration Manager Attachment: A. Proposed Sublease Business Terms B. Site Map ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS TENANT BUILDING SIZE (SF) TERM RENT Antiques by the Bay 459 11,493 2 yrs $3,457/rno. a> 7 0 ( ►'► V) 13NVH co co cm 8 ,/ ATTACHMENT B Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Memorandum To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: David Brandt Acting Executive Director Date: April 1, 2009 Re: Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Bay Ship & Yacht Company at Alameda Point BACKGROUND The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) governing Board approves all Alameda Point subleases with a lease term greater than one year. The proposed sublease for Bay Ship & Yacht Company is for two years. DISCUSSION Bay Ship & Yacht Company has occupied Building 400A at Alameda Point for the past four years. This building is used for ship building and restoration of wooden ships and boats. Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed sublease for Bay Ship & Yacht Company in Building 400A. The rent for Bay Ship & Yacht Company is $234,000 annually, or $0.30 per sq. ft. in the first year. There is a 3% increase in each subsequent year. The building will continue to be used ship building and restoration. Building 400A is in fair condition. In accordance with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the ARRA and SunCal Companies, this lease has been discussed with representatives from SunCal Companies and has their concurrence. BUDGET CONSIDERATION / FINANCIAL IMPACT This lease will generate $234,000 in the first year. These funds will be retained by the ARRA. RECOMMENDATION Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a` Sublease for Bay Ship & Yacht Company at Alameda Point. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Respect II ubmitted, Leslie Little Development Services Director By: Nanette Banks Mocanu Finance and Administration Manager Attachment: A. Proposed Sublease Business Terms B. Site Map ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS TENANT BUILDING SIZE (SF) TERM RENT Bay Ship & Yacht Company 400A 65,000 2 yrs $19,500/mo. a 11) 2J z z r 1;,\- - TAXI' ro 1:1! R) MONARCH r ATTACHMENT B Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Memorandum To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: David Brandt Acting Executive Director Date: April 1, 2009 Re: Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Dreyfuss Capital Partners, Building 29, at Alameda Point BACKGROUND The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) governing Board approves all Alameda Point subleases with a lease term greater than one year. The proposed sublease for Dreyfuss Capital Partners is for three years. DISCUSSION Dreyfuss Capital Partners formerly occupied Building 113 at Alameda Point. In February 2008, the Navy informed the ARRA that they would be conducting screening and testing in four buildings at Alameda Point and that those buildings are required to be empty for these tests. Building 113 was one of those buildings. Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed sublease for Dreyfuss Capital Partners in a portion of Building 29. The rent for Dreyfuss Capital Partners is $29,184 annually, or $0.30 per sq. ft. in the first year. There is a 3% increase each subsequent year. The building will continue to be used for light manufacturing, fabrication, and general office. Additionally, Dreyfus Capital Partners has asked for a Right of First Offer (ROFO) for the remaining space in Building 29. This will give Dreyfuss Capital Partners the ability to meet or exceed any offer the ARRA would receive to lease the remaining 8,703 square feet of Building 29. If Dreyfuss Capital Partners does not respond to the offer presented to them, the ARRA would lease the remaining space to whoever provided a viable offer to lease the remaining space. Building 29 is in good condition. In accordance with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the ARRA and SunCal Companies, this lease has been discussed with representatives from SunCal Companies and has their concurrence. BUDGET CONSIDERATION / FINANCIAL IMPACT This lease will generate $29,184 in the first year. These funds will be retained by the ARRA. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority RECOMMENDATION April 1, 2009 Page 2 Authorize negotiation and execution of a sublease for Dreyfuss Capital Partners at Alameda Point. Resp tfully submitted Leslie Little Development Services Director By: Nanette Banks Mocanu Finance and Administration Manager Attachment: A. Proposed Sublease Business Terms B. Site Map ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS TENANT BUILDING SIZE (SF) TERM RENT Dreyfuss Capital Partners 29 8,107 3 yrs $2,432/mo. 0 33 > m -u z -n rn > c 33 r- co co 0 cn \imam' aNivriavasAloODVI 1 ON dIAIVN 2 'ON dNVN ,F11 AWNIXVI ATTACHMENT B Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Memorandum To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: David Brandt Acting Executive Director Date: April 1, 2009 Re: Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Dreyfuss Capital Partners, Hangar 22, at Alameda Point BACKGROUND The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) governing Board approves all Alameda Point subleases with a lease term greater than one year. The proposed sublease for Dreyfuss Capital Partners is for five years, with a five year option to extend. DISCUSSION Dreyfuss Capital Partners has occupied Hangar 22 at Alameda Point for the past three years as a subtenant to Creative Technologies. Creative Technologies has decided not to exercise their option to extend in the building and will vacate at the termination of the current lease. In terminating their lease, Creative Technologies also relinquishes their purchase option contained in their original lease. Dreyfuss Capital Partners has asked to lease Hangar 22 in its entirety. The building is used for non - destructive testing, including the use of x -ray equipment, fabrication, light manufacturing and general office. Attachment A describes the business terms for the proposed sublease for Dreyfuss Capital Partners in Hangar 22. The rent for Dreyfuss Capital Partners is $273,000 annually, or $0.35 per sq. ft. in the first year. There is a 3% increase in each subsequent year. The building will continue to be used for non - destructive testing, including the use of x -ray equipment, fabrication, light manufacturing and general office. Hangar 22 is in fair condition. In accordance with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the ARRA and SunCal Companies, this lease has been discussed with representatives from SunCal Companies and has their concurrence. BUDGET CONSIDERATION / FINANCIAL IMPACT This lease will generate $273,000 in the first year. These funds will be retained by the ARRA. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority RECOMMENDATION April 1, 2009 Page 2 Authorize negotiation and execution of a sublease for Dreyfuss Capital Partners at Alameda Point. Respe fully submitted, Leslie Little Development Services Director By: Nanette Banks Mocanu Finance and Administration Manager Attachment: A. Proposed Sublease Business Terms B. Site Map ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED SUBLEASE BUSINESS TERMS TENANT BUILDING SIZE (SF) TERM RENT Dreyfuss Capital Partners 22 65,000 5 yrs + 5 yr option to extend $22,750/mo. ATTACHMENT B a L r L 0 in Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Memorandum To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: David Brandt Acting Executive Director Date: April 1, 2009 Re: Approve a Waiver of License Fees for Pacific Skyline Council, BSA Sea Scouts, Ancient Mariner Regatta BACKGROUND For the past several years, Pacific Skyline Council, BSA Sea Scouts, Ancient Mariner Regatta (Sea Scouts) has utilized space at Enterprise Park for their annual regatta held during Memorial Day weekend. DISCUSSION The Sea Scouts regularly make a request for the use of Enterprise Park and fee waivers. They plan to use the park for six days for set-up, May 16 — 21, four days for the event, May 22 — 25, and three days for tear-down, May 26 — 28. They are seeking approval of fee waiver for this event. The Sea Scouts will be required to provide insurance and comply with all regulations for use of Enterprise Park at Alameda Point. BUDGET CONSIDERATION / FINANCIAL IMPACT The license fee for this type of event is $1,000 per day for set-up and tear-down, and $2,000 per day for event days. The total fee that is being requested for waiver is $17,000. RECOMMENDATION Approve the waiver of the license fees for the Pacific Skyline Council, BSA Sea Scouts, Ancient Mariner Regatta. Respect ully submitted, si- Development Services Director Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority By: Nanette Banks Mocanu Finance and Administration Manager April 1, 2009 Page 2 of 2 cy) N) 01 0) N) 0) ATTACHMENT B 3-A Item 3-A is an oral report and Powerpoint presentation of Treasure Island Redevelopment by Jack Sylvan, San Francisco Mayor's Office Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Memorandum To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: David Brandt Acting Executive Director Date: April 1, 2009 Re: Alameda Point Update BACKGROUND Pursuant to the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) between SCC Alameda Point, LLC ( SunCal), the City, Community Improvement Commission (CIC) and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA), SunCal has a number of mandatory performance milestones. On December 19, 2008, SunCal submitted its draft master plan that it presented to the ARRA Board on January 7, 2009. On March 4, 2009, staff provided a summary of the joint project pro forma to the ARRA. SunCal's next mandatory milestone is a ballot initiative determination. By April 30, 2009, SunCal must submit a written election to either submit an Entitlement Application or pursue a ballot initiative. DISCUSSION Over the past 60 days, SunCal has been preparing the documents that will comprise its ballot initiative, including a Community Plan, Specific Plan and Development Agreement (DA). The ballot initiative was submitted to the City Clerk's office on March 26, with a request that the City Attorney's office prepare a ballot title and summary. By law, the City Attorney's office has 15 days to prepare the title and summary. Following preparation of the ballot title and summary, SunCai must publish a Notice of Intention and the title and summary of the proposed measure in a newspaper of general circulation. Once the notice has been published, SunCal can begin gathering signatures to place the measure on the November 2009 ballot. Signature gathering must be completed by June 15, 2009, and the City Council must act to place the measure on the ballot, so long as a sufficient number of valid signatures have been obtained, by August 7, 2009. SunCal will present its Specific Plan and summary of the DA, and provide an update on the initiative process, at the ARRA's May 6, 2009 meeting. In addition to the work SunCal has been engaged in regarding the ballot initiative, staff and SunCal continue to update the fiscal neutrality analysis and project pro forma in Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority April 1, 2009 Page 2 of 2 preparation for a possible Conditional Acquisition Agreement. As requested, the Navy provided an initial response to the project pro forma on March 16. The Navy has requested that the ARRA consider an alternative valuation proposal for establishing a and sale price. Staff and Sun Cal are analyzing the Navy's proposal and expect to respond to the Navy in the next several weeks. Pursuant to the ENA, Sun Cal is obligated to deposit $250,000 with the City to commence California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis of the project by April 30, 2009. The resulting Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be considered, along with the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA), by July 20, 2010. Staff anticipates requesting ARRA approval of an award of contract for preparation of the EIR at the ARRA's May 6 meeting. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no financial impact from receiving this Alameda Point update. RECOMMENDATION This report is for information only. No action is required. Respectfully submitted, Development Services Director Debbie Potter Base Reuse and Community Development Manager DP:ig Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Memorandum To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority From: David Brandt Acting Executive Director Date: April 1, 2009 Re: Alameda Point Environmental Issues Update: Radiological Substance at West Shore of Seaplane Lagoon and Block of Oversize Debris at North Shore of Seaplane Lagoon BACKGROUND The Navy recently made two unexpected discoveries at Alameda Point, both in or near Seaplane Lagoon. First, a radiological substance was discovered immediately behind the western riprap wall of Seaplane Lagoon. Second, a large, submerged block of oversized debris was found near Seaplane Lagoon's north shore. This staff report discusses both of these recent discoveries. DISCUSSION Radiological Substance at the West Shore of Seaplane Lagoon On February 10, 2009, the Navy unexpectedly discovered an area of radiological contamination that appears to be about ten feet by five feet in size. The anomalous area is located in an area of ice plant, immediately west of Seaplane Lagoon's riprap wall, about 280 feet south of the northwest corner of Seaplane Lagoon, and about 35 feet south of Stormwater Outfall F. The Navy's initial observation of the substance cites a hard and brittle white substance with shades of purple streaked through it. The chalk - like substance's radioactivity is due to radium 226. The origin of the substance and its extent are both unknown. Perhaps significant, Stormwater Outfall F, which is near the substance, serves a storm drain line that is radiologically contaminated because it historically discharged from radium paint shops in IR Sites 5 and 10. The Navy has suggested that the substance might be radium paint waste. To date, the Navy has taken several actions as a result of discovering the substance: • A sample of the substance was collected for further study; • The area of the substance was fenced and warning signs posted; Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority April 1, 2009 Page 2 of 4 • On March 4, 2009, the Navy performed a preliminary health and safety radiological scan along the entire western bank of Seaplane Lagoon; and • The Navy decided to scan radiologically all large sized concrete debris that is being excavated from the debris piles along the north shore of Seaplane Lagoon before shipping the debris to a concrete recycler. At the March 17, 2009 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Clean —up Team (BCT) meeting, the Navy discussed its plans for removing the radiological substance. Within two weeks, the Navy expects to have modified an existing contract to include removal. That contract, for a time - critical removal action (TCRA) for the storm drain leading from radium paint shops in IR Sites 5 and 10 to Stormwater Outfall F, involves many of the same issues as does removal of the substance. Within two months, the Navy expects to have prepared a work plan for review by the BCT. Preliminarily, the substance removal will include the following components: • Remove riprap from the location of the substance northward to Stormwater Outfall F (about 35 feet) and for a similar distance south. Riprap will be removed down to the level of higher high tide. • Scan the exposed area for radiological contamination. • Excavate any radiological contamination encountered. • Analyze samples of the material and of soil for chemical contaminants. The analytical results will be useful for informing offsite disposal decisions. They may also help with understanding what the material is and why it is present at this location. • Further review Alameda Point records for information relevant to the radiological substance. The removal action does not extend into Seaplane Lagoon or into groundwater, even if radiological contamination is observed to reach into those areas. This limitation is designed to prevent unintended spreading of the contamination into water. If radiological contamination appears to extend below the level of groundwater or into Seaplane Lagoon, a subsequent, more detailed work plan will be prepared for its removal. The unexpected discovery of the radiological matreial raises the question of whether other such anomalies may be present at Alameda Point. The Navy completed a basewide historical radiological assessment that should have identified all locations at Alameda Point where radiological contamination might be present. However, the assessment's report does not indicate that the location of the radiological substance has the potential for radiological contamination. Because the assessment relies heavily on historical documents, it mainly identifies locations that where authorized for use, storage, handling, and disposal of radiological materials. This radiological substance may be the result of unauthorized disposal, which likely would not have been noted in historical documents. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority April 1, 2009 Page 3 of 4 It may be appropriate to scan the entirety of Alameda Point for radiological contamination, a course that several environmental regulators and RAB members have suggested. The Navy should make a determination about whether other areas of Alameda Point should be scanned after the Navy has completed its near -term substance removal action. The removal action may reveal valuable information that bears on the likelihood that other such incidents are present at Alameda Point. For example, if the substance's radioactively contaminated material is shown to be sediment from a storm drain line, then it is probable that the contamination is associated with maintenance of Stormwater Outfall F. In that case, similar anomalies may be present near other outfalls, particularly outfalls for storm drain lines that serve areas where radiological materials were used, stored, handled, or disposed. Other areas would not be suspect if they are remote from storm drain lines and outfalls downstream of former radiological materials handling areas. Unless the Navy develops information to support a conceptual model that rules out certain areas as potentially containing radiological materials, then the Navy should conduct a radiological scan of the entire base. Block of Oversized Debris at the North Shore of Seaplane Lagoon While conducting a TCRA to remove debris piles along the north shore of Seaplane Lagoon, the Navy unexpectedly encountered a large, submerged block. The block appears to be made of concrete, with perhaps some wood. It is located about 80 feet from the shore and about 40 feet west of Seaplane Lagoon's Ramp 2. The block is about 15 feet by 15 feet by 15 feet in size and, if it is solid concrete, weighs about 250 tons. The Navy has no information about the block, such as, what is was used for, where it came from, why it is present in the debris -pile area, whether it is hollow, what it is made of, and whether it contains hazardous materials. The Navy has not yet decided whether to remove the block. Navy environmental restoration funds generally can be used only to clean up contamination and safety hazards. Because so little is known about the block, it is unclear whether it represents a safety hazard or is contaminated. The Navy plans to investigate the block before deciding whether to remove it. The block appears not to represent an imminent hazard, so decisions about whether it must be removed will be determined after the Navy has investigated it further. FINANCIAL IMPACT This report has no financial impact. RECOMMENDATION Direct staff to send the attached letter to the Navy expressing the ARRA's concern regarding the recently discovered radiological material at Seaplane Lagoon and the block of oversized debris. Honorable Chair and Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Leslie Little Development Services Director By: ebbie Potter Base Reuse and Community Development Manager DP:ig Attachment: 1. Draft letter to the Navy April 1, 2009 Page 4 of 4 ATTACHMENT 1 April 2, 2009 George Patrick Brooks BRAC Environmental Coordinator BRAC PMO West 1455 Frazee Road, Suite 900 San Diego, CA 92108 -4310 Re: Radiological Anomaly at West Shore of Seaplane Lagoon and Block of `Oversize Debris at North Shore of Seaplane Lagoon, Alameda Point, Alameda, California Dear Mr. Brooks: At its April 1 meeting, the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) Board directed staff to notify the Navy of its concern about to discoveries the Navy recently made: a radiological material at the west shore of Seaplane Lagoon and a large, submerged block at the north shore of Seaplane Lagoon. Both of these discoveries raise important questions. In the case of the radiological material anomaly, serious, implications for the rest of Alameda Point also arise. Radiological Material Anomaly The ARRA appreciates that the Navy promptly, secured the- area of the radiological material discovery and conducted a preliminary health -and safety radiological scan along the western bank of Seaplane Lagoon.�:We understand the Navy and the environmental regulators intend to act as expeditiously _ as possible to- and implement a work plan for removing the substance and other radiological contamination that may be present in its immediate vicinity. Dr. Peter Russell, the ARRA's ;environmental consultant, should be involved in designing and executing this removal work. An important part of this work is chemical analysis of the material anomaly and surroundaing soil to help develop a conceptual model for the material anomaly. The unexpected discovery of, the radiological material anomaly raises troubling questions about whether other such material,may be present at Alameda Point. Prior efforts to discover areas at the foiuier _base that may be radiologically impacted have been inadequate, as evidenced by the presence of this material. Unless the Navy develops information to support a conceptual model that rules out the presence of radiological materials in other areas, then the Navy should conduct a radiological scan of the entire base. The ARRA intends to remain involved in any decisionmaking about next steps of this nature.' Oversized Debris The presence of a large, submerged block in Seaplane Lagoon is incompatible with, and presents a safety hazard to, the planned reuse as a marina. This incompatibility is even greater if the block is contaminated. We understand the Navy plans to investigate the block further before deciding about whether and how to remove it. Please include Dr. Russell in the investigation process and the subsequent removal decisionmaking. The ARRA believes that the block's composition and whether it is hollow are vital factors in deciding the block's disposition. Of course, if the block is hollow, its contents, if any, must be investigated, as well. Thank you for your prompt attention to both of these issues. Sincerely, David Brandt Acting Executive Director cc: Anna -Marie Cook, U.S. EPA Dot Lofstrom, DTSC John West, Water Board Alameda Point RAB Russell Resources, Inc. Item 4 -A environmental management Alameda Point RAB Meeting on March 5, 2009 Highlights and Analysis RAB members present: Dale Smith (Community Co- chair), Fred Hoffman, George Humphreys, Joan Konrad, Jim Leach, Kurt Peterson, Jean Sweeney, Jim Sweeney, and Michael John Torrey Remediation and other field work in progress: Although Mr. Pat Brooks, the RAB Navy Co- chair, did not discuss fieldwork at the RAB meeting, the following fieldwork activities are in progress: o Debris pile removal along north shore of Seaplane Lagoon continuing — removal of piles 1 and 2 complete. Additional debris has been identified between piles 1 and 2. This material is being removed as an additional component of the cleanup, in the same fashion as the two original piles. The excavated debris pile material is to be hauled off site for disposal. o Replacement of storm drain lines that are contaminated by historic discharges from radium paint shops at IR Sites 5 and 10 is about 50 percent complete. o Remediation of groundwater petroleum contamination near the Atlantic Avenue entrance is continuing. o Groundwater treatment at IR Site 5 to remove solvent (Plume 5 -3) using 6 -phase heating is nearing completion. o The petroleum remediation system at the southern end of the western hangar row is continuing to extract much more jet fuel than was originally expected. o The air sparge /vapor extraction system to treat groundwater contaminated with benzene and naphthalene at Alameda Point OU -5 and FISCA IR Site 2 is starting up. IR Site 26 (Western Hangar Zone) Groundwater Treatment The Navy is treating a relatively small plume of solvent - contaminated groundwater using in situ chemical oxidation (ISCO). This treatment process involves injecting treatment chemicals into the groundwater plume to chemically destroy the solvent contamination. The Navy's initial attempt using ISCO to clean up the plume was largely unsuccessful, in part because unexpected petroleum contamination was encountered. The Navy is now repeating the ISCO process, but with a different treatment chemical and a modified way of injecting the treatment chemicals into the plume. This second injection event has just been completed and the Navy is giving the injected chemicals time to react with the solvent contamination before collecting groundwater samples to evaluate whether residual contamination remains. In late February, the RAB held a technical session that provided an in -depth discussion of ISCO remediation of this site. The Navy drew upon RAB members' suggestions in modifying the ISCO process for the second round of injections. RR/, 440 Nova Albion Way, Suite 1, San Rafael, California 94903 415.902.3123 fax 815.572.8600 Page 2of2 April 1, 2009 Alameda Point RAB Meeting, March5, 2009 Highlights and Analysis Removal of Debris Piles along the North Shore of Seaplane Lagoon The Navy updated the RAB about the time- critical removal action (TCRA) to remove the debris piles along the north shore of Seaplane Lagoon. Excavation of the two debris piles that were originally targeted by the TCRA is complete. Third Debris Pile During the removal of these debris piles, the Navy encountered another, smaller debris pile between the original two piles. The Navy estimates the size of the third pile to be 1,500 cubic yards. Removal of this pile will take a few months, depending on contracting issues. Radiological Scanning of Concrete to be Recycled Oversize chunks of concrete in the debris excavated from the Seaplane Lagoon are to be sent to a concrete recycler. Considerable discussion occurred about testing the oversize concrete for contamination before it is sent to the recycler. Currently, the Navy plans testing for chemical contamination only, but several RAB members urged the Navy to test for radiological contamination too. At the RAB meeting, the Navy maintains there is no basis for expecting the oversize concrete to be radiologically contaminated. However, subsequent to the RAB meeting, the Navy is agreeing to conduct the radiological testing, based on discussions with environmental regulators and the recent, unexpected discovery of radiological contamination near the western shore of the Seaplane Lagoon. (Further discussion of this issue appears below.) To date, none of the oversize concrete debris has been shipped to the recycler. Soil, sediment, and smaller debris, which is shipped offsite for disposal in landfills, is scanned upon arrival at the landfill. No detections of radiological contamination at landfills have been reported. Submerged Block The RAB briefly discussed a large block of oversize debris that the Navy encountered while excavating debris pile 1. The item appears to be a 15 -foot by 15 -foot by 15 -foot block of concrete, which potentially has wood components. If the block is solid concrete, it would weigh about 250 tons. The block is about 80 feet offshore and about 40 feet west of Seaplane Lagoon's Ramp 2. The top of the block is submerged even at lower low tide. The Navy did not explain what the block might be, how it came to be in the Seaplane Lagoon, and whether the Navy will remove it. This block of oversize debris is discussed further in an accompanying staff report to the ARRA Board. Radiological Anomaly near West Shore of Seaplane Lagoon The Navy briefed the RAB about its unexpected discovery of radiological contamination in soil immediately west of the western riprap wall of Seaplane Lagoon. The anomaly is located about 280 feet south of the northwest corner of Seaplane Lagoon and about 35 feet south of Stormwater Outfall F. Stomiwater Outfall F serves the storm drain line that is the subject of a Navy TCRA due to contamination by historic discharges from radium paint shops at IR Sites 5 and 10. The Navy has secured the area of the anomaly and plans to remove it as expeditiously as possible. Several RAB members urged the Navy to radiologically scan all of Alameda Point to evaluate whether other such unknown anomalies are present. This issue, too, is discussed further in a staff report to the ARRA Board. 440 Nova Albion Way, Suite 1, San Rafael, California 94903 415.902.3123 fax 815.572.8600