2011-03-02 ARRA PacketCITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY - - - MARCH 2, 2011 - - - 5:30 P.M.
Location: City Council Chambers Conference Room, City Hall, corner of Santa Clara
Avenue and Oak Street
Agenda:
1. Roll Call — City Council
2. Public Comment on Agenda Items Only
Anyone wishing to address the Council on agenda items only, may speak for a
maximum of 3 minutes per item
3. Adjournment to Closed Session to consider:
3-A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency negotiators: Joe Wiley, Craig Jory and Human Resources Director
Employee organizations: Alameda City Employees Association, Alameda Fire
Managers Association, Alameda Police Managers
Association, Alameda Police Officers Association,
Alameda Police Officers Non-Sworn, International
Association of Firefighters, International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers, and Management and
Confidential Employees Association
4. Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session, if any
5. Adjournment — City Council
Marie L. Gilmore, Mayor
CITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY
IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC), AND HOUSING
AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC)
WEDNESDAY - - - MARCH 2, 2011 - - - 6:59 P.M.
Location: City Council Chambers, City Hall, corner of Santa Clara Ave and Oak Street
Public Participation
Anyone wishing to address the Commission/Board on agenda items or business
introduced by the Commission/Board may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per
agenda item when the subject is before the Commission/Board. Please file a speaker's
slip with the Assistant City Clerk if you wish to speak.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. ROLL CALL - CIC, HABOC
2. AGENDA ITEM
2-A. Recommendation to Approve an Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) and
Authorize the Acting Executive Director to Execute an OPA and Other Related
Documents with Resources for Community Development and the Housing
Authority. [CIC]
• Recommendation to Approve an OPA and Authorize the Acting Chief
Executive Officer to Execute an OPA and Other Related Documents with
Resources for Community Development and the Community Improvement
Commission. [HABOC]
• Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of Tax Allocation Housing
Bonds to Provide Financial Assistance to the Housing Authority of the City of
Alameda and as Otherwise Required for the Acquisition and Rehabilitation of
a Rental Housing Facility Commonly Known as 2428 Central Avenue to be
Occupied by Very Low-Income Households. [CIC]
4. ADJOURNMENT - CIC, HABOC
Met/24,2
Marie L. Gilmore, Chair
CIC and HABOC
AGENDA
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
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m.
2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
(A limited number of speakers may address the governing body in regard to any
matter over which the governing body has jurisdiction or of which it may take
cognizance, that is not on the agenda; this section is limited to 15 minutes;
additional public comment will be addressed under Item 6.)
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
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.
3 -A. Approve the minutes of the Special Meeting (Closed Session) and Regular
Meeting of February 2, 2011; and the Special Joint City Council and ARRA
Meeting (Closed Session) of February 15, 2011.
3 -B. Approve an Environmental Testing Contract with Pacific EcoRisk to Support 2011
Dredging in an Amount not to Exceed $138,740 to be Reimbursed by the Maritime
Administration.
3 -C. Reserve Building 22 for Active Recruitment of a Food and Beverage Tenant
Compatible with the Existing Neighboring Tenants.
4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
4 -A. Award Contract for the Alameda Point Resource Team to Perkins + Will in the
Amount of $200,000 for Land Use Planning Consulting Services.
5. ORAL REPORTS
5 -A. Oral Report from Member deHaan, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)
Representative — Highlights of February 3, 2011 RAB Meeting.
ARRA Agenda- March 2, 2011 Page 2
6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
(Any person may address the governing body in regard to any matter over which
the governing body has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance, that is not
on the agenda; speakers not called under Item 2 may address the governing body
at this time.)
7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS
7 -A. Update on Alameda Municipal Power's Response to Lawrence Berkeley National
Lab's Request for Qualifications.
8. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
10. 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
747 -4800 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.
CITY OF ALAMEDA
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Community Improvement Commission
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Board of Commissioners
From: Lisa Goldman
Acting Executive Director/Acting Chief Executive Officer
Date: March 2, 2011
Re: Approve an Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) and Authorize the
Acting Executive Director/ Acting Chief Executive Officer to Execute an
OPA and Other Related Documents with Resources for Community
Development, the Community Improvement Commission and the
Housing Authority to Acquire and Rehabilitate the Property at 2428
Central Avenue (Islander Motel) for use as 62 Units of Affordable
Workforce Housing
Adopt a Resolution of the Community Improvement Commission of the
City of Alameda Authorizing the Issuance of Tax Allocation Housing
Bonds to Provide Financial Assistance to the Housing Authority of the
City of Alameda and as Otherwise Required for the Acquisition and
Rehabilitation of a Rental Housing Facility Commonly Known as 2428
Central Avenue to be Occupied by Very Low-Income Households
BACKGROUND
On November 16, 2010, the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) authorized the
Interim Executive Director to negotiate and execute a purchase and sale agreement
(PSA) for the Islander Motel property located at 2428 Central Avenue, and issue a
Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to secure a development partner for conversion of the
property from a motel to affordable workforce housing and approved an $150,000
appropriation to fund required due diligence reports and deposits.
On January 19, 2011, the Housing Commission approved the selection of Resources for
Community Development (RCD) as the development partner for acquisition and
rehabilitation of the Islander Motel. RCD was founded in 1984, and has completed over
1,700 affordable housing units, with an additional 500 units in the construction or
predevelopment stages. RCD has previously partnered with the Housing Authority on
Joint Agenda Item #2-A
03-02-11 CIC HABOC
Honorable Chair and Members of the CIC
Honorable Chair and Members of the BOC
March 2, 2011
Page 3 of 5
All of the outside funding sources require that the applicant (RCD and the Housing
Authority) demonstrate site control as well as the required local funding commitments.
An Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) between the CIC, Housing Authority and
RCD (on file in the City Clerk's office) documents each of the parties' obligations to fund
and carry out the project. On February 9, 2011, the Housing Commission
recommended that the BOC approve an OPA consistent with the key deal points
contained below:
• The CIC is obligated to issue affordable housing TABs in an amount sufficient to
raise $9 million for the project;
• The Housing Authority is obligated to execute the PSA consistent with the term
sheet approved on November 16, 2010, attached as Exhibit 1;
• The Housing Authority will be a co-applicant with RCD for 9% tax credit funding
and County affordable housing funding pursuant to its NOFAs, and other outside
funding as appropriate;
• The Housing Authority has the right to own the improvements after the 15-year
"recapture period" required for 9% tax credit projects;
▪ The Housing Authority will provide 15 Project-Based Section 8 vouchers;
• RCD will secure all necessary planning approvals and project financing;
• RCD will comply with the Federal Uniform Relocation Act; and
• RCD will construct the improvements and lease up the project.
A key provision of the OPA requires the CIC to issue affordable housing TABs for this
project. On February 22, 2011, the State Finance Department issued its bill language to
implement the Governor's proposal to eliminate community redevelopment agencies
throughout the State. It is widely anticipated that the bill could be approved as early as
March 10, 2011. As drafted, the bill will permit redevelopment agencies to carry out
some contractual obligations entered into prior to the effective date of the legislation;
however, there is a prohibition on agencies issuing debt after the legislation takes effect.
It is not known at this time how a "valid" contractual obligation entered into prior to the
effective date of the legislation that requires issuance of bonds to fulfill CIC funding
commitments will be reconciled if the legislation is adopted as drafted. Staff has been
advised by outside bond counsel and the City Attorney's Office to request CIC and BOC
consideration of the OPA, a contractual obligation, and have the CIC authorize the
issuance of the bonds, prior to the proposed effective date of the legislation, in order to
maximize the CIC's position relative to its obligation to fund this project. Due to the
uncertainty regarding the CIC's ability to ultimately provide funding for the project, the
OPA has explicit language that neither the City nor the Housing Authority has any
obligation to fund this project in the event that the CIC is unable to provide funding.
In addition to consideration of the OPA, other project milestones include a community
meeting hosted by RCD on March 10, 2011, Major Design Review at the March 14
Planning Board meeting, and City Council consideration of $1.3 million in Federal
HOME funding on March 15. Following these actions, RCD and the Housing Authority
will submit the 9% tax credit funding application on March 23. While the Governor's
proposal to eliminate redevelopment has introduced wide-spread uncertainty about
Honorable Chair and Members of the CIC
Honorable Chair and Members of the BOC
Respectfully submitted,
/7
M chael T. Pucci
Executive Director
B •
eb ie Potter
Housing Development and Programs Manager
Approved as to funds and account,
Fred Marsh
Controller
MTP:DP:sb
Exhibit:
1. Purchase and Sale Term Sheet
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ALAMEDA AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF TAX ALLOCATION
HOUSING BONDS TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE HOUSING
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA AND AS OTHERWISE REQUIRED FOR
THE ACQUISITION AND REHABILITATION OF A RENTAL HOUSING FACILITY
COMMONLY KNOWN AS 2428 CENTRAL AVENUE TO BE OCCUPIED BY VERY
O w LOW- INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
H�. �
z
O
a WHEREAS, Part 1 of Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code of the
: State of California, as amended (the "Law "), authorizes redevelopment agencies to
incur indebtedness for the purpose of financing and refinancing redevelopment and
0 housing activities within or of benefit to redevelopment project areas of redevelopment
agencies; and
APPROVED
WHEREAS, in furtherance of the housing activities of the Community
Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda (the "CIC "), the CIC plans to assist in
the financing of the acquisition and rehabilitation of a rental housing facility commonly
known as 2428 Central Avenue (the "Project ") to be occupied by very low- income
households; and
WHEREAS, in order to provide such assistance, on March 2, 2011,the
CIC entered into an Owner Participation Agreement (2428 Central Avenue) (the "OPA ")
with the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda (the "Housing Authority ") and
Resources for Community Development, a California nonprofit public benefit
corporation (the "Developer "), pursuant to which the Housing Authority will agree to
acquire the Project, and the Developer will rehabilitate and operate the Project; and
WHEREAS, in order to make the Project economically viable, the Housing
Authority has requested that the CIC provide $8,000,000 to the Housing Authority to be
used by the Housing Authority to acquire the Project (the "Housing Authority Grant "),
and $1,000,000 to the Developer in the form of a noninterest bearing residual receipts
loan (the "CIC Loan ") to be used to pay costs of the rehabilitation of the Project, all as
contemplated by the Project financing provisions of the OPA; and
WHEREAS, in order to have the funds necessary to make the Housing
Authority Grant and the CIC Loan, the CIC has determined at this time to authorize the
issuance of tax allocation housing revenue bonds (as further described below, the
"Bonds "), under the provisions of the Law; and
WHEREAS, the payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds is
to be secured by a pledge of the tax increment revenues received by the CIC from the
CIC's merged Business and Waterfront Improvement Project and West End Community
Improvement Project (the "Merged Redevelopment Project ") required to be set -aside in
Resolution #2 -A
03 -02 -11 CIC HABOC
desirable or appropriate, and the execution of the final Official Statement by the Acting
Executive Director shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of any such additions
and changes. The Agency hereby authorizes the distribution of the final Official
Statement by the Underwriter.
Section 4. CIC Loan and Continuing Disclosure Agreement. The C1C
hereby authorizes the Acting Executive Director to make the C1C Loan pursuant to the
OPA and the Promissory Note — CIC Loan referenced therein. The CIC hereby
authorizes the Acting Executive Director to accept the Promissory Note — CIC Loan and
to execute a Continuing Disclosure Agreement with respect to the Bonds, each in a
form acceptable to the Acting Executive Director following consultation with the Acting
City Attorney and Bond Counsel (and, with respect to the Promissory Note — CIC Loan,
to the extent consistent with the terms of the OPA), and the acceptance by the Acting
Executive Director of the Promissory Note — CIC Loan and the execution of the
Continuing Disclosure Agreement by the Acting Executive Director shall be conclusive
evidence of the approval by the Acting Executive Director of the Promissory Note — CIC
Loan and the Disclosure Agreement.
Section 5. Bond Counsel. The firm of Quint & Thimmig LLP is hereby
designated as bond counsel to the CIC with respect to the Bonds. The Acting City
Attorney, in her role as general counsel to the CIC, is hereby authorized to enter into a
contract with Quint & Thimmig LLP for its services as bond counsel for the Bonds, in a
form acceptable to the Acting City Attorney.
Section 6. Financial Advisor. On September 23, 2010, the CIC issued a
Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for financial advisory services for an affordable
housing bond issuance. The firm of CSG Advisors Incorporated ("CSG") was selected
to provide such services and is hereby designated as financial advisor to the CIC with
respect to the Bonds. The Acting Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed
to enter into a contract with CSG for its services as financial advisor with respect to the
Bonds, in a form acceptable to the Acting Executive Director.
Section 7. Official Action. The Chair, the Acting Executive Director, the
Treasurer and the Secretary of the CIC, and any and all other officers of the CIC, are
hereby authorized and directed, for and in the name and on behalf of the CIC, to do any
and all things and take any and all actions, including execution and delivery of any and
all assignments, certificates, requisitions, agreements, notices, consents, instruments of
conveyance, warrants and other documents which they, or any of them, may deem
necessary or advisable in order to consummate the lawful issuance and sale of the
Bonds and the provision of the Housing Authority Grant and the CIC Loan as described
herein. Whenever in this Resolution any officer of the CIC is authorized to execute or
countersign any document or take any action, such execution, countersigning or action
may be taken on behalf of such officer by any person designated by such officer to act
on his or her behalf in the case such officer shall be absent or unavailable.
-3-
1
UNAPPROVED
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m. with Chair Gilmore presiding.
Roll CaII —
Present: Board Members Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Chair
Gilmore — 5.
Absent: None.
The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
( *11 -010) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (54956.8):
Property: Footprint of Veterans Administration proposed federal entity to federal entity
transfer at Alameda Point, and area known as Northwest Territories at Alameda Point
(maps of the areas on file with ARRA Board secretary at City Hall, City Clerk's Office).
Negotiating parties: Veterans Administration, US Navy, ARRA
Under negotiation: Price and Terms
Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Chair Gilmore announced that
regarding Real Property, the ARRA provided direction on terms.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Irma Glidden
ARRA Secretary
12
UNAPPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
The meeting convened at 7:31 p.m. with Chair Gilmore presiding.
1. ROLL CALL
Present: Board Members Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Chair
Gilmore — 5.
Absent: None.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
( *11 -011) Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 5, 2011.
( *11 -012) Adopt a Resolution Amending Resolution No. 49 Setting the Order of Business of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meetings.
Member Tam moved for approval of the Consent Calendar. Vice Chair Bonta seconded the
motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote — 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are
indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]
3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(11 -013) Endorse "Going Forward" Process and Schedule for Alameda Point Redevelopment.
The Deputy City Manager — Development Services /project manager, summarized the Going
Forward process. The interdepartmental team includes the Planning Services Manager and Public
Works Director. The Going Forward process is a two -tier process: Tier 1 is developing a vision and
project description for Alameda Point through July 2011 to use as a basis to start the City's
environmental review process (CEQA); and the Navy for their NEPA process in terms of
conveyance. Tier 2 is the Entitlement process from July 2011- July 2013, which has four major
entitlements: Specific Plan, Master Infrastructure Plan, a Conveyance Agreement, and State Lands
Exchange Agreement. A community - planning workbook was developed and provided online. The
workbook was used to facilitate several community workshops that were held. Staff will prepare a
summary report that will be presented at the March 2 ARRA meeting. A tenant forum is scheduled
next week. The next six months of the Going Forward process will focus on several efforts. The
first and biggest is the Master Planning effort, which will include the project management team and
a team of consultants: land use planning, economics, civil engineering, transportation,
environmental, sustainable infrastructure. There is also a plan to work with ARRA staff and PM
Realty on a long -term leasing strategy to leverage additional funding and create momentum for
longer term leases on buildings that will be remaining, as well as work with the Navy and State
Lands on joint proposed conveyance objectives and principles regarding land conveyance. There
will be a pro forma, and discussion of land value and structuring how the land is transferred from
the Navy.
Member Johnson inquired whether there is an ARRA agreement with PM Realty and the status of
an RFP for a property manager. The Acting City Attorney responded that there is a property
management agreement with PM Realty from 2004. Regarding the status of the RFP for a property
13
manager, the Deputy City Manager — Development Services replied that an RFP has not been done
yet, but staff will make it a priority as time permits.
Chair Gilmore reminded staff that she has asked for a real estate leasing primer from staff, and
would like this primer before a property manager RFP, because it will inform the RFP. The Deputy
City Manager — Development Services replied that the leasing primer has been put in a draft scope
for an economics firm to help staff put together a presentation. The primer will be done as soon as
there is an economist on board.
The project management team is working with the Federal Government, Veteran's Administration,
on their project as a potential institutional user; as well as with the Alameda Point Collaborative
(APC) and Building Futures for Women and Children, consolidating their facilities to meet their
longer term needs, but on a smaller piece of land. The Public Works department will be
implementing a federal transportation administration grant for transportation improvement and
routes at Alameda Point.
The Deputy City Manager — Development Services prepared a budget of the project, which will be
discussed further on 2/15 at the mid year adjustment.
The Planning Services Manager discussed the adopted general plan for Alameda Point.
Member Tam discussed the importance of engaging the school district, East Bay Regional Park
District (EBRPD), Peralta Community College District, as they were not included in the outreach.
The Deputy City Manager — Development Services explained that staff will be meeting with the
EBRPD tomorrow, and will include these agencies in the outreach.
Vice Chair Bonta supports moving forward with the Going Forward process, as the plan provides
specificity and focus, with flexibility - an important balance. Member Johnson and Chair Gilmore
also support moving forward. Chair Gilmore emphasized the importance of flexibility. She stated
that the process and plan couldn't be so rigid that opportunities are missed.
Speakers: Doug Biggs, Rob Ratto, Elizabeth Greene, Helen Sause, Carol Gottstein, Nancy Hird,
Gretchen Lipow, Karen Bey.
Member deHaan moved to approve endorsing the Alameda Point "Going Forward" Process.
Member Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote — 5.
(11-014) Provide Direction on Key Aspects of Response to Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory's Request for Qualifications for a Second Campus at Alameda Point and Approve
Issuance of Request for Qualifications for Developers.
The Deputy City Manager — Development Services gave an overview on the Lawrence Berkeley
National Lab (LBNL) RFQ for a second campus. The interdepartmental team lead by the Deputy
City Manager — Development Services, includes the Public Works Director (Matt Naclerio), Planning
Services Manager (Andrew Thomas), Alameda Municipal Power General Manager (Girish
Balachandran), and Economic Development Manager (Eric Fonstein). The team has prepared the
first draft of the response, identified key aspects and would like policy direction on four key points to
finalize a competitive response: 1) Site Location, 2) Planning Guidelines 3) Financial Incentives 4)
Developer RFQ.
The Deputy City Manager — Development Services discussed the Next Steps and timeline for the
decision-making process and selection of development team.
14
Chair Gilmore inquired where the developer's economic incentive will come from. The Deputy City
Manager — Development Services discussed initial ideas, including fee development and private
development to land adjacent, and that it was structured in the RFQ to ask each of developers to
put forth recommendations.
Member Johnson commented that the zero cost idea is worth it to have LBNL at Alameda Point.
Member Johnson stated that the project should have a defined, tight design and review process.
The Planning Services Manager discussed various ways to structure a design and review process
that would give the community assurance of high quality design buildings that would fit within the
design expectations of the city and minimize the time and energy LBNL would have to spend in a
normal design and review process.
Member Tam discussed LBNL's expectation that the ARRA will engage an entity with appropriate
development experience. Member Tam inquired whether LBNL can be part of the developer
evaluation process so that there is an even playing field with everyone else. The Deputy City
Manager — Development Services explained that LBNL clearly stated that a developer team was
not required in the initial process but that the project team would check to see if LBNL would like to
weigh in on the evaluation so that the ARRA doesn't end up with a partner that could be of a
disadvantage.
Speakers: Rob Ratto, Elizabeth Greene, Seth Hamalian, Phil Owen, Karen Bey, Nancy Hird.
Vice Chair Bonta asked for clarification on the $14M in benefits to the city, inquired about the time
period and the assumptions. The Deputy City Manager — Development Services explained that the
$14M is based on an economic impact study done for the second campus, and contemplates 800
jobs in the first phase. The economic development manager stated that the study is based on
facilities in Walnut Creek and Emeryville, and how much revenue and impacts there were on those
host communities. Since that study was done, the LBNL's conception of the second base initial
phase has grown much larger, as it would be consolidating not just those two facilities, but also the
Oakland & Berkeley facilities. Vice Chair Bonta clarified that the ARRA would be proposing a no-
cost long -term lease and an option to buy at no cost. The Deputy City Manager — Development
Services confirmed that when the City receives the land from the Navy, it would then be transferred
to LBNL. The Acting General Counsel explained that the ARRA has a Lease in Furtherance of
Conveyance (LIFOC) so will be providing a sublease, and when title to the property is received, it
will be title going to LBNL.
Vice Chair Bonta inquired whether there is a site that staff determined to be second best, and what
were the drawbacks as compared to the preferred site. The Deputy City Manager — Development
Services explained that there are some outstanding leaseholds the project team felt would create
some uncertainty, so the preferred site had the least number of issues. The Planning Services
Manager stated that both sites are great and the ARRA is open to discussing variations of the sites.
Vice Chair Bonta suggested the ARRA be more bold to attract LBNL by offering to provide a menu
of other options and be aggressive in financial incentives and no -cost incentives, AMP discount,
reduced planning fees, and tax rebates. Member Johnson agrees and supports making that part of
the initial proposal so that it is more attractive and highly competitive.
Member Tam inquired if LBNL's existing facilities in Walnut Creek and Emeryville were able to
generate the $14M tertiary economic benefit from those communities. The Economic Development
manager explained that the analysis by CBRE looked at direct and indirect spending and the
tertiary, multiplier effect of payrolls, of employee spending; including spending in restaurants,
shopping, and sales tax.
The Board discussed the existing amenities on Alameda Point, Webster Street, and Marina Village.
15
The Deputy City Manager — Development Services explained the main reason why staff did not
propose any additional waivers or fees. The project team does not yet have enough information on
potential impacts, or what LBNL is proposing, especially in terms of how much money is brought to
the table for infrastructure. There is also no developer on board yet that could advise on the
financial side of the deal. The project team is concerned about giving away too much too soon
because there are still transportation infrastructure burdened out at Alameda Point.
Member Johnson discussed not proposing anything specific, but suggested indicating a catalog of
other incentives the ARRA is open and willing to discuss with LBNL. Member deHaan commented
that owning an electric company is extremely powerful. The Deputy City Manager — Development
Services informed the Board that the Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) General Manager has
discussed the proposal with the Public Utilities Board. There are mitigateable risks and concerns
about load and usage, AMP has to be careful not to offer discounts on rates that might spike usage.
Staff can be more responsive and can start addressing and negotiating terms if /when the ARRA is
shortlisted.
Member Johnson commented that there is a risk if a long term contract for power is given, and the
user goes away, making a comparison to when the Navy closed the base. Fortunately for the City of
Alameda, because of the long term power contract it had with the Navy, the City had excess power
which was sold back to the grid during the power crisis. Member Johnson stated that the LBNL
scenario should not be viewed as risk, but as an opportunity.
Chair Gilmore requested a full report from the AMP General Manager on the electric issue. The
Acting City Manager stated that a report will be presented at the next ARRA meeting on March 2.
Member Johnson motioned to direct staff to prepare and put forth an RFQ for a Developer
for the LBNL project. Vice Chair Bonta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote — 5.
4. ORAL REPORTS
(11 -015) Oral report from Member deHaan, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative
- Highlights of January 6, 2011 Alameda Point RAB Meeting.
Member deHaan reported that the RAB discussed Building 5 and 5A (Site OU -2C), a 1.5M square
feet complex, to make a determination to bring the site to remediation level. The site was the
center and hub of industrial operation, there was lots of activity causing a major impact to the
environment, including radiation concerns. The Navy has four proposals: 1) take no action, 2)
cement the pipes, 3) tear the building down, and 4) dig and haul. Member deHaan commented that
he is impressed with the dedication of the RAB members and the community, they have depth of
knowledge which they lend as community support and have come up with good recommendations.
The RAB also discussed the conveyance status and the redevelopment planning status. Member
deHaan stated that the Deputy City Manager — Development Services presented the Going
Forward process to the RAB and it was well received. Member deHaan stated that he will not be
able to attend the February 3 RAB meeting due to a scheduling conflict.
Member Johnson also reminded staff and the public not to forget the commitment of the Navy
during the remediation process. The Deputy City Manager — Development Services stated that staff
will ask the Board for policy direction on the OU -2C site in coming months.
Speaker: Gretchen Lipow
16
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
None.
6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS
None.
7. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
None.
8. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
None.
9. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 10:06 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Irma Glidden
ARRA Secretary
UNAPPROVED
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND ALAMEDA
REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) MEETING
TUESDAY- - FEBRUARY 15, 2011- -6:00 P.M.
Mayor /Chair Gilmore convened the meeting at 6:00 p.m.
Roll CaII —
Present: Councilmembers /Board Members Bonta, deHaan,
Johnson, Tam and Mayor /Chair Gilmore — 5.
Absent: None.
The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(11 -068 CC) Conference with Legal Counsel — Anticipated Litigation; Significant
exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases:
Two
(11- ARRA) Conference with Real Property Negotiators; Property: Alameda Point;
Negotiating parties: ARRA and Navy; Under negotiation: Price and terms
* **
Mayor /Chair Gilmore called a recess to hold the regular meeting at 7:50 p.m. and
reconvened the closed session at 12:30 a.m.
* **
Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor /Gilmore
announced that regarding Anticipated Litigation, legal strategy was discussed and the
City Council provided direction; and regarding Real Property, price and terms were
discussed; direction was given to staff.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor /Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 1:38
a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
February 15, 2011
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
From: Lisa Goldman
Acting Executive Director
Date: March 2, 2011
Re: Approve an Environmental Testing Contract with Pacific EcoRisk to
Support 2011 Dredging in an Amount Not to Exceed $138,740 to Be
Reimbursed by the Maritime Administration
BACKGROUND
The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) is proposing to dredge the
navigational entrance channel to Alameda Point to accommodate Maritime
Administration (MARAD) vessels and dispose of the dredged material for the third time
in order to comply with the Technical Requirements of the MARAD lease. The Alameda
Point entrance channel is located in the eastern portion of San Francisco Bay, at the
west end of Alameda.
The proposed maintenance dredging involves the removal of accumulated sediment in
order to return the channel to a depth that would allow unencumbered maneuvering of
commercial and recreational vessels over its entire length. The proposed dredge depth
is —34 feet below Mean Lower Low Water ( -34 feet MLLW) with a two -foot over dredge
tolerance, two feet deeper than previously performed dredge activities. Weston
Solutions, Inc. performed baseline testing to determine dredge depth and channel
conditions as a subcontract to the Moffatt & Nichol engineering contract in 1995. This
work must now be updated to provide accurate information about current channel
conditions. MARAD will reimburse the ARRA for the cost of updated environmental
testing and of the subsequent dredging consistent with their lease.
DISCUSSION
As was the case in 2008, the proposed dredging event will require more extensive and
deeper testing because of the depth of the dredging. In addition, as a result of the
November 2007 San Francisco Bay oil spill, regulators are asking communities planning
to dredge to conduct additional testing. The proposed budget includes a large
contingency because the regulators may ask for more specialized testing
Once the testing is done, bid documents for the dredge can be developed and
advertised. The contract award will require ARRA action in late summer.
Agenda Item #3 -B
ARRA
3 -2 -2011
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FINANCIAL IMPACT
March 2, 2011
Page 2 of 2
Fund 858, ARRA Lease Revenue, will be used and will be reimbursed by MARAD. The
amount budgeted for the contract is expected to be approximately $138,740, including a
40% contingency. The final contract amount will be determined by the amount of
testing required. There is no impact to ARRA lease revenue or the General Fund.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve an Environmental Testing Contract with Pacific EcoRisk to support 2011
dredging in an amount not to exceed $138,740 to be reimbursed by MARAD.
Rspe ffully submitted,
Jen ite Stt
Deputy Manager
By:
N nette Mocanu
Finance & Administration Manager
Approved as to funds and account,
Fred Marsh
Controller
NBM:dc
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
From: Lisa Goldman
Acting Executive Director
Date: March 2, 2011
Re: Reserve Building 22 for Active Recruitment of a Food and Beverage
Tenant Compatible with the Existing Neighboring Tenants
BACKGROUND
Building 22 is a and plane hangar located in the western row of hangars near the
wildlife refuge (Exhibit 1) at Alameda Point. The hangar was constructed in 1941 and is
approximately 65,000 square feet. The tenants along that row of hangars include St.
George's Spirit (B21) and Rockwall Winery (B24), both of which provide tasting rooms
open to the public.
In December 2010, the City was contacted by a potential tenant looking for warehouse
space for an exercise and training facility. The potential tenant was shown Building 22
and advised that Bladium Sports (Bladium) would need to approve the use because of
Bladium's exclusivity clause contained in its lease. To staffs knowledge, Bladium has
not provided approval of the proposed training facility use.
DISCUSSION
On July 27, 2010, the City Council approved an Asset Management Strategy (AMS) for
all of the City's real estate assets. One of the long -term leasing strategies discussed in
the AMS was to develop industry clusters and to modify leasing practices in order to
attract specific industries. Because of its location and its existing neighbors, staff is
recommending that Building 22, which will be vacant by June 30, 2011, be reserved and
actively marketed for the next six months for uses that are compatible to the food and
beverage industry, consistent with the cluster that already exists. Specifically, staff
intends to actively recruit and attract a microbrewery. Commercial marketing materials
for Building 22 will be developed, and staff will attend a microbrewery conference in San
Francisco next month.
However, the tenant who viewed Building 22 in December has submitted a Letter of
Intent for staff's review and comment (Exhibit 2). Staff is seeking direction on how to
move forward with this opportunity at Alameda Point. The options include:
Agenda Item #3 -C
ARRA
3 -2 -2011
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
March 2, 2011
Page 2 of 2
1. Supporting the staff recommendation, which focuses on attracting a long -term
compatible use for Building 22 and working with the potential tenant to find an
alternative location that meets its needs for a two -year lease.
2. Moving forward with a two -year lease with the proposed new tenant to the
extent Bladium approves of the facility, and earn between $130,000 and
$260,000 in the first year, depending upon the timing of the tenant's property
takedown.
3. Postponing the decision for 90 days to see what staff learns from the
microbrewery conference. Staff would return with an update at the May
ARRA meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact at this time from reserving Building 22 for a food and
beverage tenant.
RECOMMENDATION
Reserve Building 22 for active recruitment of a food and beverage tenant compatible
with the existing neighboring tenants.
ectfully submitte
Jen
Dep`, ty s ity Manager
By:
ocanu
Finance & Administration Manager
NBM:ig
Exhibits:
1. Location of Building 22 at Alameda Point
2. Letter of Intent
EXHIBIT 1
N
\ :\
, --\
,... \
, \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 39 I
-,‘ =
,
..„_
CAD
z\D
0
0
0 !
Cil Z\D I
NACU ST.
EXHIBIT 2
!Mariner Square Athiebc,
Jantraity 31. 2011
City of Alameda
Alarneard Reuse. 5 Redevelop-right Authority
2253 Santa Clara Ave.
Alameria.
(14 24501
RE: Proposed Lease Of Western Half Of 2501 Monarch St, (HANGER 22) Alameda, CA
lin Whom It May Cortocret
Tied partners of Marinek Square Athleti:, luu are dritighted to present the attached proper:sal to you of
401 intenthanii tc..; !ease the western had of felassigier 23 . lecated at 2501 Monarch. st, Alameda. GA
ilitt501
Ats you are aware, Mariner Square Athletic. Inc has been operating a thil service hedith ciuta for the
ens: 30 years. We have recoginzed the nee.d Int a dtath Ott the att fratning facility for the get.teter bay
area which would lac isteusee at the Aiameda Point: Hanger 22..
The space: virre are proposi.lg to lease et Hanger 22 tits::: altoyi us to haunch our or- 0ricr 10 the
narap!etton of ner new slate of the art Paining laciiity which win he located in the Cats:dies roject.
Alameda Lanaing
:Dar
11 1140 pia:Jet:inns yid inch...tee the training of yoUth hign sebum coliege. and r:litt: 'at.htetet't as aveii
art tanticet traliting for rridtrary, fliettghthie pate-tie end SWAT tosucriaters We heiieve our eirtritations
nave a raga:hoard benefit to thc. community 4 Alartleda. thitll regard wa poets:on working in
chatikinotion taith 1 - 3 it/free:top. NBA Restidets. and NFL. tr*e advantage of the various thiefing and
trietientamdi programs that. nouid be offered at cut training :facility We wtii di:rm., otter 040(11 14)
programs 1 benefit the 0.1.. 101 which will be bfritteo peon need timid or ttiCadwrr r)erformance
These
31 '1 win sante t(tlhertellt the Alameda comment?, menseridenaly.
To encore the siii:mess of our ordmattions, we heve assembled d team of leading excauthes in the
sparks arid thinning indestry as board members irk:Pealing snorts trrertmeys, sports physicians and
theragirsts, leading matters, NFL and Nf3A exactioves, itthri 0:.0. er:Siena: etnieles.
Vile took forward to your 0430(188 1011111 ercieettai as soon as p.,:).ssIb;t--:
Sincerely,
Kettny Vitaatter
PteSitttet-lt
04,:ittrter Sonare Athlete,: inc.
at_onfai
jamerarA Sites 204
Pre;attilent & CEO
Sird's Snorts Martecerrent
R I C H K R I N K S
BROKER ASSOCIATE
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
January 31, 2011
Sent via email: nunoreno@pmrg.com
jott(cici.alameda.ca.us
athornas s,ci.alameda.ca.us
Manny Moreno
PM Realty Group
Dear Manny:
On behalf of my client, Mariner Square Athletic, Inc., I am pleased to submit the following proposal to
lease warehouse space at 2501 Monarch Street (Hanger 22), Alameda. Our client has reviewed and
approved this proposal.
LEASE PROPOSAL :
LANDLORD:
l'ENANT:
LOCATION:
SIZE:
TERM:
LEASE
COMMEN CEMENT
DATE:
BASE RENT:
NNN:
FREE RENT:
EARLY
OCCUPANCY:
Owner of Record.
Mariner Square Athletic, Inc. A New dba is Under Construction.
2501 Monarch Street (Hanger 22), Alameda, CA 94501
32,500 sf of the Western Side Upon Execution of a Lease and possibly
adding the 32,500 sf of the Eastern Side Upon Current Tenant Vacating with
a Right of First Refusal for the Additional Space.
Three (3) Years.
March 1, 2011 or Sooner.
$0.40/sf/month.
l'BD. We have not been given these numbers in advance.
Months 1, 2 and 13.
Two weeks prior to Lease Commencement Date. This period will be used to
begin Tenant Improvements. No rent charge.
SECURITY DEPOSIT: Equal to one month's base rent.
ANNUAL
RENT INCREASES: None.
OPTION TO
EXTEND LEASE:
Two (2) -- One (1) Year Options. Rent to be Market Rate, but not to exceed
a Three Percent (3 %) Increase over Month Thirty -Six (36) for the First
Option Period and the same for the Second Option Period, but using Month
Forty -Eight (48) as the Basis for the Three Percent (3 %) Increase.
Mariner Square Athletic, Inc.
Lease Proposal
January 31, 2011
Page 2
USE: Athletic and Tactical Training Center. To Include Pro - Athletes, College
Athletes, High School Athletes, Military, Firefighters, Police, and SWAT etc.
CONDITION OF
PREMISES:
TENANT
IMPROVEMENTS:
"AS IS" with Full Disclosures Regarding Any Environmental Issues.
1. Installation of Indoor Athletic Field with Artificial Turf.
2. Classrooms- Physical Therapy Rooms - Chiropractic Rooms
3. Locker Rooms with Showers.
4. Work Out Studios.
5. Offices and Reception and Kitchen.
6. Special Lighting for Athletic Field.
7. Communication Equipment.
8. Possibly Some HVAC Installation.
SIGNAGE: Tenant can install signs (at Tenant's expense) on the exterior /interior of the
space per the City Sign Ordinance.
COMMISSION: Harbor Bay Realty will be paid a commission by the Landlord on the Lease at
a rate agreed upon in advance of the Lease being executed.
Please review and call me at 510 - 381 -3434 or email me at rkrinks@hbrinfo.com with any
questions.
This proposal is intended solely and exclusively as a preliminary expression of general intentions. The
parties mutually intend that neither shall have any binding contractual obligations to the other with
respect to the matters referred to herein unless and until a formal written lease has been prepared with
adequate opportunity for legal review by legal counsel and has been fully executed and delivered by the
parties.
Sincerely,
Harbor Bay Realty
Rich Krinks
Broker Associate
DRE #01095444
510 - 814 -4802 office
510 - 381 -3434 cell
rkrinks(a�hbrinfo. corn
www.rkrealestate.com
855 Island Drive, Alameda, CA 94502
cc: Jennifer Ott
Andrew Thomas
HARBOR
BAY
REALTY
SALES • AENEAS • EROPERT1r T.UNAG NENf
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Memorandum
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
From: Lisa Goldman
Acting Executive Director
Date: March 2, 2011
Re: Award a Contract for the Alameda Point Resource Team to Perkins + Will
in the Amount of $200,000 for Land Use Planning Consulting Services
BACKGROUND
In September 2010, staff initiated a City -led planning and community engagement
strategy for "going forward" at Alameda Point. The purpose and intent of the "going
forward" community engagement strategy is to identify and describe a community
supported, financially feasible land use plan for Alameda Point. Staff intends for the
"going forward" process to be a two- tiered effort with key "decision points" by the ARRA
on whether to proceed at each stage:
1. Vision and Project Description. The first tier of the Alameda Point planning
process will be to build community support for a feasible vision for the
redevelopment of Alameda Point, which serves as the basis for a project
description sufficient to commence the state and federal environmental review
process. [Estimated completion date: September 2011]
2. Plan Preparation and Entitlement Approvals. The second tier of the
Alameda Point planning effort will be to complete the entitlement process and
approvals necessary to commence the conveyance, disposition and
development of land at Alameda Point based on the vision and project
description developed as part of the first tier. [Estimated completion date: July
2013]
The ARRA endorsed the "going forward" process and considered the budget for both
tiers of the Alameda Point planning process at its February 2, 2011 meeting (Exhibit 1).
At the meeting, the ARRA emphasized the need to maintain flexibility throughout the
"going forward" process to respond to potential development opportunities that may
arise over the next several years, similar to the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
planning process. As discussed on February 2 "d, the two- tiered process is designed to
allow the ARRA to evaluate the success of the first tier Vision and Project Description
process before committing the resources necessary for the second tier Plan Preparation
and Entitlement process.
Agenda Item #4 -A
ARRA
3 -2 -2011
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
March 2, 2011
Page 2 of 6
Staff does from time to time receive calls and requests for information from developers
interested in the status of the Alameda Point redevelopment project. They are
interested in staying informed about the process and potentially participating in the
project in the future. Staff has expressed a desire to provide opportunities for their
involvement and continue contact with them as the ARRA's project evolves. Staff also
keeps a list of developer interest. As a first opportunity for the development community
to become involved in the "going forward" process, staff will hold several days of
interviews with numerous developers and other industry professionals with different
specialties, including master development, retail, housing, hotel, commercial, marina
and private financing and investment. Staff also intends to include two community
members in the interviews so that the community can hear the feedback from the
private sector directly. The results of these interviews will be presented to the ARRA at
its April meeting, along with the summary report from the lessons learned workshops
and tenant forum.
At any time during the planning process, the ARRA can consider options for going
forward including: (1) continuing with the City -led effort; (2) continuing with the City -led
effort while issuing a Request for Qualifications or Proposals (RFQ /P) from a single
development partner for the entire 918 -acre property; (3) continuing with the City -led
effort while issuing an RFQ /P from multiple specialty development partners for smaller
portions of the property with potential for different types of land use (i.e., residential
portion, retail, and commercial); (4) halting the City -led effort and issuing an RFQ /P
process for a development partner(s); and (5) continuing or halting the City -led effort
while the City discusses coordinating with the Navy on a joint auction of the property.
On February 15, the ARRA approved mid -year budget adjustments to its budget to fund
the Vision and Project Description process through the end of this fiscal year. The final
proposed budget for the first year of the Plan Preparation and Entitlement Approvals
process will be presented and recommended for approval when the ARRA decides if it
will proceed with the City -led effort. City staff is also seeking grant funds from the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for $750,000 to help fund this
predevelopment process.
DISCUSSION
One of the key aspects of the Vision and Project Description process planned for the
next six months will be a planning effort led by an inter - departmental staff team in
conjunction with a team of key consultants, consisting of land use planning, real estate
economics, civil engineering, sustainable infrastructure planning, transportation, and
environmental (Alameda Point Resource Team). The Alameda Point Resource Team
will prepare and evaluate development alternatives for Alameda Point, according to
financial /fiscal, transportation and environmental sustainability criteria, and, based on
ongoing community feedback and technical analysis, propose a vision concept and
project alternatives for acceptance by the ARRA in September 2011. As described
above, this project description will serve as the basis for commencing both state and
federal environmental review.
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
March 2, 2011
Page 3 of 6
In November 2010, staff issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the Alameda
Point Resource Team. The City received 37 responses for Urban Design and Land Use
Planning. After evaluating all of the submittals, staff identified 12 firms to be interviewed.
For the two days of . land planning firm interviews, the staff team of three was
supplemented by the President of the Planning Board, the Executive Director of the
Alameda Point Collaborative, and the City of San Francisco Project Manager for the
Hunters Point Redevelopment Project. After the two days of interviews, the panel
narrowed the selection to the top two firms for a second round of interviews. After the
second interview, the staff team identified Perkins + Will as the best - qualified firm for the
Vision and Project Description work. The decision was based upon the extensive
experience in similar complex planning projects, their understanding of the unique
characteristics of Alameda Point, and their demonstrated ability to bring new ideas to
the community discussion and planning effort. Perkins + Will's experience includes work
on the Hunters Point Redevelopment Project, the Treasure Island Redevelopment
Project, the Concord Naval Weapons Station, and the 2006 Alameda Landing Mixed
Use Project.
Perkins + Will will be instrumental in assisting the staff team and Alameda community
develop a financially feasible Vision and Project Description and alternatives for City
Council review and consideration within the six -month time period. During this period,
the staff team, with assistance from Perkins + Will and the remainder of the Alameda
Point Resource Team, will:
• Conduct a workshop to educate and inform the community regarding proforma
basics and infrastructure costs associated with redeveloping Alameda Point.
This workshop will educate the community about the extensive costs necessary
to redevelop Alameda Point and the possible sources of revenue available to
achieve financial feasibility and fiscal neutrality. This work will be essential in
enabling the community to actively and knowledgeably participate in the difficult,
but necessary, discussion of trade -offs that will be critical to the development of a
financially feasible development concept.
• Conduct three sustainability workshops to educate and inform the community
about transportation, environmental, and financial and fiscal sustainability and
prepare related performance criteria that will be used to evaluate proposed
alternatives.
• Prepare materials and information for the community that will inform and enable
the community to understand the relative benefits and costs of different trade -offs
and relative strengths and weaknesses of different alternatives for Alameda
Point.
• Identify, describe, and illustrate a Vision and Project Description as well as three
other alternatives necessary to initiate the next phase of the planning process.
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
March 2, 2011
Page 4 of 6
• Present options and analysis to the ARRA to decide whether to authorize the
resources necessary to complete the second tier of the "Going Forward" process
with the preparation of a Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report for
Alameda Point.
The recommended contract for $200,000 with Perkins + Will is on file with the City
Clerk.
As shown in Exhibit 2, there are existing and proposed contracts that comprise the
majority of the budget for the Vision and Project Description process proposed for the
next six months. The following provides a summary of the existing and proposed
contracts for the Vision and Project Description process, a brief summary of the scope
of work proposed for each, and how it builds upon, and avoids duplicating, past efforts.
Existing Alameda Point Contracts
Carlson Barbee Gibson (CBG) — Civil Engineering: CBG currently conducts
technical engineering analysis and cost estimating for the ARRA in support of its
Alameda Point Going Forward process and response to the Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory (LBNL) Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for a Second
Campus. CBG has worked for both previous master developers and for the City
during previous predevelopment efforts. They have been working closely with
the Public Works Department to refine the engineering analysis performed during
the City's past planning efforts, with particular attention paid to issues related to
flood protection and sea-level rise. The cost estimates refined by CBG are a
fundamental component of the financial feasibility analysis.
• Russell Resources, Inc. — Environmental: Russell Resources has been
providing environmental consulting services directly for the ARRA for many
years. They review environmental documents issued by the Navy at all stages of
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) process and provide comments to ensure that the ARRA's interests
are incorporated into the Navy's environmental clean-up process. Russell
Resources also supports the ARRA's redevelopment and LBNL planning process
to ensure that all planning efforts are consistent with the extent and timing of
environmental clean-up.
• Holland & Knight (H&K) — Federal Legislative Services: The H&K contract for
federal legislative services was amended in January 2011 by the City to add
legislative services specifically for Alameda Point. H&K will provide federal
legislative services to obtain potential grant funding sources, secure other federal
funding, where possible, and support and value negotiations with the Navy, as
directed.
• City Design Collective (CDC) -- Community Outreach: CDC assisted ARRA
staff in preparing the Community Planning Workbook for the "lessons learned"
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
March 2, 2011
Page 5 of 6
community workshops held in November and December 2010 and facilitated the
Neighborhood and Building Character table at the workshops. CDC also
developed the online interactive version of the Community Planning Workbook
and the report format for presenting the results of the online feedback provided
by the community.
• Urban Design Associates (UDA) — LBNL Land Use Planning: UDA is
currently providing limited urban design and land use planning services to the
ARRA in preparation of its response to the LBNL Second Campus RFQ. UDA
helped identify the appropriate size and location of the proposed site for the
Second Campus. UDA is also creating a massing model, report template and
maps to be included in the response.
Proposed Alameda Point Contracts
• Perkins + Will (P +W) — Land Use Planning: As described above, P +W will
provide land use planning and urban design services to the ARRA as part of the
Visioning and Project Description process. P +W's scope was carefully crafted to
build upon past efforts by identifying land use elements and catalyst projects
from existing plans and efforts that will serve as the basis for preparing four
development alternatives for Alameda Point. There is some limited budget to
explore new and creative ideas, but with a focus on quickly integrating any new
elements with the elements from past efforts that are determined should remain.
• Nelson /Nygaard (N /N) — Transportation Planning: N /N, a premier
transportation planning firm that specializes in transit planning and transportation
demand management (TDM), will be assisting the ARRA in preparing a
transportation plan for the proposed Vision and Project Description. The N/N
services will include developing transportation performance criteria for the
Alameda Point redevelopment; facilitating and preparing materials for a
community workshop on transportation sustainability; helping to prepare and
evaluate the four potential development alternatives; and summarizing the
preferred transportation plan in a vision concept document. N/N will be able to
provide these services in a cost- effective manner by leveraging their other
contracts with the City, including a transportation analysis funded by a Federal
Transportation Authority (FTA) grant that is currently underway. These
transportation planning and analysis efforts will supplement and drill down on
technical issues and questions that were not addressed during past efforts.
• ARUP — Sustainability/ "Green" Infrastructure Planning: ARUP will play a
new and unique role on the planning team with a focus on creating a sustainable
vision and framework for the Alameda Point project. Their services will include
developing a vision framework for the entire project; conceiving of performance
criteria for environmental sustainability, especially "green" infrastructure planning;
preparing presentation materials for a environmental sustainability workshop;
Honorable Chair and
Members of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
March 2, 2011
Page 6 of 6
facilitating the workshop; evaluating the alternatives according to these criteria;
and helping to prepare the vision concept document.
• Real Estate Economics: The real estate economics firm has not yet been
selected. It is expected that this firm will prepare market and financial feasibility
analysis for the Vision and Project Description process. All project proformas
used to evaluate the feasibility of the four potential development alternatives will
be developed based in large part on previous market and financial work.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
On February 15, 2011, the ARRA approved a mid-year budget adjustment to the ARRA
budget to fund only the first tier Vision and Project Description process through the end
of this fiscal year (Exhibit 1). The final proposed budget for the first year of the Plan
Preparation and Entitlement Approvals process will be presented and recommended for
approval when the ARRA decides if it will proceed with the City-led effort. City staff is
also seeking grant funds from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for
$750,000 to help fund this predevelopment process.
RECOMMENDATION
Award contract for the Alameda Point Resource Team to Perkins + Will in the amount of
$200,000 for land use planning consulting services.
ctfully submitted
Je nifb Ott
Executive Director
Exhibits:
1. Alameda Point Going Forward Process Budgets Presented to the ARRA on
February 2, 2011 and February 15, 2011
2. Alameda Point Going Forward Consultant Contract Budgets — Existing and
Proposed
Exhibit 1 -- Table 1
Alameda Point Predevelopment Budget -- Visioning Process
July 1, 2010 -- June 30, 2011
FY 1
July 2010 thru
June 2011
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Existing ARRA Budget $555,000
ARRA Fund Balance $332,700
MTC Grant $0
Other Potential Funds $0
TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS $887,700
USES OF FUNDS
Planning
Land Use Planning $200,000
LBNL Planning $20,000
Community. Outreach $60,000
Civil Engineering $67,000
Environmental $90,000
Transportation $60,000
Sustainability $56,000
Economics $80,000
Environmental Review (i.e., CEQA) $0
Federal Legislative Services $24,000
Legal
State Lands $50,000
Conveyance $50,000
CEQA/NEPA $10,000
Other Transactional $40,000
Contingency @ 10% $80 700
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS $887,700
FUND BALANCE - Beginning (1) $7,523,802
AP Predevelopment Mid-Year $332,700
Other Known ARRA Mid-Year $407,000
Already Budgeted Drawdown $543,975
FUND BALANCE - Ending $6,240,127
(1) Audited actual amount, which is $1,365,054 higher than projected.
ARRA
Exhibit 1 to
Agenda Item #4-A
3-2-2011
0
k
E
0
=
w• m
m0
O t.1
"41
> m
NI:1W
4)C
0"C
70orn
40
I
1-
50
1 m8
rimN
w4
22)-
x2-5
w4m
SOURCES OF FUNDS
00000
000-69.0
0 M 0 en
Liico6 r•
MMM
MNN 0
Ln
-bel. ke,'
411-
]
000000 00000
000000 00000
000000 0000M
r,dec:c36 dciOci o
McNIMMMN 001-4,TO
MMMMN,4 MMr-It'tD
,4-64-64-64,4-64 -44-64-64-64
-E4
0
0
tfr
0
000000 000000
000010 000000 000000
+40-640 000000 0000000
M m OLrici 6 tri- no' LriLnoomp:
g.
N is:. ONMMN't NNMOM
M tn
W MM,--1,-IU 1-4,-4-64NN
M -64iii—M ift-E4 -Efi- W
NZ 0
N
4,9- f%r 4").
if
00000
+400440
MO m
NO
0 M
Nr-bq. C4).
eg
00000
0 0 -bl—Eft 0
0 N
117 r
r4-
M M
M M
000000 00000
000000 00000
000000 0000M
omootilm Lrividem
ONMMN't NNMOM
,-1,144NN
+4+4 +ft
000000 00000
00004A-0 00000
0000 0 0000N
nri 66' ‘1= Oc:ic:;-Oo
MNMM N MMr-i,tcp
Mi4-6A--64 +4 -64-0-64-64
0
0
>.
4-,
=
..o
(0
C <
Pa a
4, w
(I) o
m
(I) (1) ,:i'm
0 4.# . W. 8
Z c a
(1)
u.
n3
4., V3 1.1. W4a
-00 44 o >0) (0O
w
.. IL CO00 = (n
0 C C C.) C CC 17:, 014
11-W U'l
mm
g ru C‘
2 .4.7,,
... co) ww -auci_cuw
11. m 6-6.1E E-1 c
mM-1na -0
c L1 ,-
no
= 113 0 D ro
47J. ,C C
Ln (..)(,21-..
HO CWM.F.JOW4-,c1...
b. (0- C
(4-1°W Wil-wMUU000
w<zol— E. ...1 U F.-
N
0
C
(9
0)
a
U')
0
r‘.9.
co
a
0)
a
(r)
(1)
-0
c
co
CO
LL
i e"4
to N
C
O 0
M
U
M C
cu 0
a n
F--„ I
0,
� 0 N
• m
W Q
TOTAL RESOURCES(1)
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
AP Maint Expenses
Personnel Services
Capital Outlay
Fixed Charges
Debt Service
ts
t( 0
Tr CO
CO l r
M N
a)
0
C y
Ts c
CO to
c m
To
W w "C 0I
O cri C c
• c To 'Eh Ts
(1) 1— 1-- m w
(1) Includes Alameda Point predevelopment sources and uses of funds from Tables 1 and 2.
1 FORECAST
1 FY 13 -14
Ct 0
e-
itc 0
V.
N
e-
t-
O
N
Tt
t.
00)1
tO
00)
0
03
T
d'
0
T
0
11)
T
co
T
CO"
0
O V.
N
000
01
0)
Co
to
to
T
O
0)
hN.
W.
T
T
1 FORECAST
CI
N
V.
7..
LL
e-
T
tic
co T
CNr
N
T
¶
0
N
et
t.
Chi
to
00)
CO
d0•
t
CD
CO
T
0
0
T
(00
T
C)
Co
O
O
to
CV
T
O
O«
tOD
T
0
t'..
M
N
tl•
T
FORECAST
FY 11 -12
O
Tt T
V.
oo
N
T
N
T
e=
N
N
Tr 0
ti
'cf'
to
CO
CO
ti)
CO
t..
14)
0
T
N
0
T
w!'
CO
M
0
0
O
a-
0 CO
Ch
T
0
CO
CD
0)
t0A
w-
15,520,700
BUDGET
FY 10 -11
T
03
1,
N
T
to
N
T
w-
d'
N
to
h
00))
to
M 0
0)
to
tl'
OLO
T
O
co
O
00 hi
it)
T
0a0
r
M
0
to•
ID
CD
M
N
N
T
•Ct
0
t(0
to
r
0
CO
0
O
at
Ch
T
PROJECTED
0
N.
01
0
>-
LC.
0
CO
�-
CV
0)
0
Cy'
T
M
"7
0
N
N
Ce
0 0
tD
t:
T
t•.
CD
CD
O"
00
T
t`
CO O
CO
t:
0
OV
CD
(0
t•.
T
C.
0
O
O
0)
0
t•.
c'
0)
M
M
e-
N
v-
r)
h
T
T
14,567,820
BUDGET
co
T
■
0
y.
1.1.
0 10
0
0
T
CO
Tr
0
(0
00
(•.
CD
0
0
to
T
0
CO
m
t`
T
M
0
0
0
P-
LO
M
1.
0)
10
M
r
T
_ CO
a
0)
.00
CO
T
0
00
ai
N
CO
C)
,c-
ACTUAL
FY 08 -09
O
T
10
01
hh..
N
00
O
wt.
e=
T
T
0
to
T
0
CO
et
CO
M
Cp
N
0
0
0
to
T
CO
CO
N
!t
N
to
T
CO
N
tom.
00
M
N
Tr
N
0
M
C0f)
h.
T
TOTAL RESOURCES(1)
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
AP Maint Expenses
Personnel Services
Capital Outlay
Fixed Charges
Debt Service
ts
t( 0
Tr CO
CO l r
M N
a)
0
C y
Ts c
CO to
c m
To
W w "C 0I
O cri C c
• c To 'Eh Ts
(1) 1— 1-- m w
(1) Includes Alameda Point predevelopment sources and uses of funds from Tables 1 and 2.
Consultant
0) 0 CT 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 CT -EA-
O 0 N
4- CO
t.0 bor
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0000 000000
000VI 00000LA
R o". O QS' LA- o
t.0 C\I Ill -EA- 0_tLt
CO
4A- NI VI-
-Eft
{ft
Civil Engineering
Environmental
(f)
a)
0 (11
u — 0) u
.—
a) i'a 3 c E
(f) E E"
cu, = r c 1,7, = .E 0
1 1:-- + ° 0( .1 M M la c U
0_ t 00 ra LU
46
— . )
a
• cl
(r) co 4-,
6) g CD D c tn J-J -J co
ca z
---1 E F7.. cn -0 2 = cIli
o 0
c, _ j
a3 E CO PC)
4_Q _I --I (13
CU 0 a)
-0 ce
a)
Li-
o
cu
C .4.
o (a
v)
Jo -C-:1 c)
(r) a▪ )
_• c
2
o < c
L.) 0, cr) ._
a) -- (I) = (a CE
s) CO c 0 .-, ra 0)L
co cp >,
4-,
1:3 I ▪ 0 0
0 0 CU
c 0 0) - C
Lu ( i ) .—c o a_ 2 a)
c 0 0 -Y Ul D
s- us ID C13
tts (LS = 0 0" (0 rr) , 'CD --(1-5 Ce ,- 0
in_z<D1__
X 0 1 < v 1-
ILI O.
Total Consultant Amounts
Item 7-A is an oral report
by
Girish Balachandran, General Manager
Alameda Municipal Power