pages
18,746 rows sorted by body
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
body 19 ✖
- CityCouncil 8,920
- PlanningBoard 2,990
- TransportationCommission 1,099
- RecreationandParkCommission 1,002
- CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities 652
- GolfCommission 644
- SocialServiceHumanRelationsBoard 534
- LibraryBoard 488
- HistoricalAdvisoryBoard 487
- CivilServiceBoard 420
- OpenGovernmentCommission 420
- RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee 344
- PublicArtCommission 245
- PensionBoard 157
- AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority 103
- SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard 59
- SubcommitteeoftheCityCouncilandSchoolBoard 39
- Mayor'sEconomicDevelopmentAdvisoryPanel/EconomicRecoveryTaskForce 17
- CityofAlameda-ACTransitInteragencyLiaisonCommittee(ILC) 4
Link | body ▼ | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-05.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-11-05 | 2 | any, are available without completing the project proforma and negotiating a DDA, which is due in June 2010. The CIC has made no commitment of funds to the project. Its only obligation is to negotiate in good faith on both the land plan and public./private partnership until the ENA expires in June of 2010. The DDA must be approved by the City Council and the CIC; and until the DDA is approved, it is not possible for the CIC to commit funds to the project. Under the terms of the ENA, SunCal is paying for all city staff costs and third party consultant costs consistent with the requirement for the fiscal neutrality that we demand. Member Matarrese referred to the comments included in the staff report and stated that it was important to make a distinction whether the points being raised were from the boards or from individuals. Pat Keliher, SunCal's Alameda Point Project Manager gave the presentation. The presentation will be made available on SunCal's website. At the conclusion of the presentation, Chair Johnson called all of the speakers first: Corinne Lambden - concerned about the historical relevant structures, and would like Board to consider all options of adaptive reuse before permanently destroying them. Mary Fetherolf - thanked SunCal for the presentation and asked a couple of process questions about where to find the financial models and assumptions of the project, and about the draft Master Plan. Elizabeth Krase - spoke on behalf of AAPS. She discussed concerns about the historic buildings planned for demolition, stating that it's not acceptable. Doug Biggs - APC has enjoyed participating in the SunCal community process and supports SunCal's plan. 'Chelle Fredrick - excited to see the progress that has been made, encouraged by the plan that acknowledges the unprecedented potential of Alameda point yet still recognizes the constraints. Diane Lichtenstein - echoed what Mi'Chelle Frederick said. Interested in how the development will happen, and would like to see more of the integration and diversity in the … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-11-18 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Tuesday, November 18, 2008 The meeting convened at 9:43 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2-B 1. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Beverly Johnson Boardmember Doug deHaan Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Lena Tam 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2-A. Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Amendment to Agreement with Russell Resources for Environmental Consulting Services for Alameda Point Extending the Term for 12 Months and Adding $147,500 to the Budget. 2-B. Approve a One-year Lease with Two One-Year Options with Makani Power for a Portion of Hangar 12. Member deHaan motioned approval of the Consent Calendar, seconded by Member Matarrese, and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes - 5, Noes - 0, Abstentions - 0. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS This portion of the meeting is a continuation of the Regular ARRA Meeting of 11/5, which was recessed by Chair Johnson. On 11/5, all Board members agreed that Item 3-A (SunCal's Development Concept) and the balance of the 11/5 agenda be continued at the Special ARRA Meeting scheduled on November 18, 2008. 3-A. Alameda Point Update - Review and Comment on SunCal's Development Concept (Continued from the November 5, 2008 Regular Meeting) Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, provided an overview regarding the purpose of presenting SunCal's Development Concept, which was to solicit feedback and comments from the ARRA to move forward with the draft Master Plan, which is due Dec. 19th Chair Johnson called the public speakers first. Michael Krueger reiterated a point that if any board member cannot support the plan for whatever reason, now is the appropriate time to discuss and raise objections, and what changes need to be made. Arthur Lipow discussed his concerns about the impact of the bankruptcies of SunCal Companies to the Alameda Point project. Susan Decker discussed her continued support of the Plan. The Board reminded the public that the list of q… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-11-18 | 2 | Member Gilmore stated that a key issue revolves around the feasibility of implementation and the traffic solutions - how to move people on and off the island. She discussed this as being a big part of her comfort level with regard to whether the plan can be executed. She wants to see real life examples of the solutions in place and working, and does not want Alameda to be the experiment. Member Matarrese had two transportation-related points: how we are addressing commute in the tube into China Town, and truck routes, how are we moving goods? Matthew Ridgway, consultant from Fehr & Peers, addressed the transportation issues. He stated that traffic congestion is expected to be worse, regardless of Alameda Point redevelopment, as moving traffic to/from Alameda Point is secondary next to the traffic moving through the tube and the 880 corridor. One of the questions was whether the option of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) was out. Mr. Ridgway responded 'no', but is reserving the right of way to bus transit alignment. He further discussed that the project is developer funded and funding will be sought from AC Transit and other funding sources. Another question was regarding buy-in of other stakeholders. Mr. Ridgway explained that they are working with AC Transit for funding issues and Caltrans on Broadway/Jackson improvements, but there is a much larger group of stake holders, and they are not assuming things outside of Alameda's purview. The Board had requested a matrix be created. Mr. Ridgway prepared a draft which highlights major differences between the three plans, the APCP plan, the WRT plan, and the current SunCal plan. One of the major differences they realized was having an onsite school, which was carried forward to the current AP transportation strategy. A rapid bus element was not definitive in other plans, but in the current AP transportation strategy, it is definitive to fund a rapid bus transit system, also proposing to fund construction and operating costs for an additional BRT line across the whole island … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-11-18 | 3 | Alameda Point. Mr. Ridgway explained that they have looked at the issue of relocation of the ferry terminal to the estuary or to sea plane lagoon, but have not looked at dredging or fueling stations; and have not reached that level of detail at this point. Another request from the Board was to provide examples of transit alternatives. Fehr & Peers provided a handout with information which cites several examples. Studies included comparative analysis of transit uses among specific cities in the bay area. They are diligent in citing statistics and research conducted nationally to reduce the number of auto trips. Regarding funds for island wide transportation solutions, Mr. Ridgway stated that operating and capital cost are being borne by the Alameda Point project. In response to the request to have an analysis of how many vehicle trips this plan will create, Mr. Ridgway said that a detailed phasing plan will be included in the Dec. 19 draft master plan. Member Matarrese reiterated that the PDC and concept plan didn't address the issue of goods and services moving on and off Alameda Point - truck routes, etc. for commercial and retail. He stressed that this is a critical component that needs to be addressed. For Peter Calthorpe addressed the next category of issues regarding adaptive reuse and light industrial questions, and questions regarding examples of other transit oriented development. Mr. Calthorpe gave a presentation of several examples of comparable mixed use developments, housing over retail, live-work - in other bay area cities including Oakland, Richmond, Daly City, San Mateo, and San Jose. Alameda Point has a unique component to offer which attracts entities to the various mixed-use elements, that Alameda Point has the ability to have a large company "campus". Vice Chair Tam asked Mr. Calthorpe to comment on creating that buffer between the different types of uses so there are no inherent conflicts that city councils have to deal with. Mr. Calthorpe explained that, until you get to real industrial uses,… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf,4 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-11-18 | 4 | the application for the historic district. Clear policies and a well-thought-of redevelopment effort requires patience, due diligence, and there will be verbal sparring - a challenge and constraint that they are ready to engage in. Mr. Tagami discussed a similar situation with the Fox Theatre in Oakland - there were more reasons why you can't renovate the building versus why you can - and there's a shorter time horizon here at Alameda Point, so they are willing to explore adaptive reuse prior to transfer and are ready to take that risk. Member Matarrese asked whether Mr. Tagami has had discussions with the City regarding transitional use prior to transfer and whether we are pursuing this. Member Matarrese stated that this option was a way to get us closest to the plan without losing the assets out there, as there is copper mining, vandalism, and no funds to secure property. Mr. Tagami said that he has expressed this desire and that SunCal has beginnings of communication with the City. It is an ongoing process, but they want to mind their role, focus on due diligence and underwriting, but said that when the time is appropriate, they would be prepared to engage in that dialogue. Member Matarrese asked if the appropriate time is now and if they are prepared to engage in that dialogue now. Member Matarrese expressed to the Board that they consider giving direction to move this issue as a priority. Vice Chair Tam discussed that the heavy capital makes the council and the board reluctant to make investments for property we don't own. Mr. Tagami explained that they often go at risk and are not asking the city to go at risk. They evaluate current increment expense, have a good track record of delivering value, all of which requires a team approach. They will expend the time, energy and money. Chair Johnson asked if DSD wants to move forward with interim adaptive reuse. Debbie Potter explained that the key components to the partnership and business deal is the leasing program and at what point to transition that leasing p… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf,5 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-11-18 | 5 | Vice Chair Tam expressed that the key to a successful project is flexibility in reacting to the changing economic conditions. In the next decade there is some expectation that the sustained downturn in economy will require job creation, and looking at the potential for self sustaining for energy level for the entire island, maybe there are some partnerships with AP&T, such as a solar farm, or other type of renewable energy source. Vice Chair Tam supports the plan, as it reflects and captures sentiment that we've been hearing throughout the community and public workshops. Chair Johnson stated that there needs to be discussion about the phasing of public amenities at some other appropriate point. FM - reiterate some comments from last time including that the plan needs work on environmental issues such as the working waterfront, which showers noise upwind. He expressed that it's an odd place to put a neighborhood. He also mentioned not wanting to see plans that have sidewalk dining because it's freezing cold near the waterfront - and no water play in park. He cited that there are plenty of lessons in town to learn from, discussing the Bay Street, Emeryville situation where there is residential over retail and the problems that come from that type of development. Member Matarrese stated examples are all around that we should consider, and would like the same level of detail in the final plan that has been given to residential, given to commercial and light industrial. Member dehaan asked SunCal about a survey that they were conducting with Alameda residents. Mr. Keliher clarified that the survey is preliminary and is sponsored by SunCal and not the City. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative. - Highlights of October 2 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. (Continued from the November 5, 2008 Regular Meeting) Member Matarrese provided a brief presentation. He discussed highlights from the ARRA meeting of Sept. 10th The BCT gave an update and of the fiscal year an… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-12-02.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-12-02 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Tuesday, December 2, 2008 The meeting convened at 11:18 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2-C 1. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Beverly Johnson Boardmember Doug deHaan Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Lena Tam 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2-A. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Petris Air Work Industries, Inc. dba Alameda Aerospace at Alameda Point. This item was pulled from the agenda and not addressed. It was continued to the January 7, 2009 regular ARRA meeting. (This item was subsequently submitted as an off-agenda). 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Approve the Community Reuse Plan Amendment and Legally Binding Agreement for the Homeless Accommodation at the North Housing Parcel This item was continued to a Special Joint Meeting of the ARRA and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners on February 4, 2009. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of November 6 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese did not attend the 11/6 RAB meeting and did not have a report. He was attending a Council meeting on 11/6. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-12-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-12-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-12-02 | 2 | 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 11:19 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-12-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-01-07 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, January 7, 2009 The meeting convened at 7:25 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2-A 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 November 5, 2008. 2-B. Approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of November 18, 2008. 2-C. Approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of December 2, 2008. 2-D. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Mariusz Lewandowski dba Woodmasters at Alameda Point. 2-E. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Alameda Soccer Club at Alameda Point. 2-F. Authorize the Sale of Four Boston Whalers to NRC for $44,500. Approval of the Consent Calendar was motioned by Member Matarrese, seconded by Member Gilmore and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Alameda Point Update - Presentation of SunCal's Draft Redevelopment Master Plan. Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, addressed several topics actively discussed in the community and clarified that tonight's update is for information only, neither staff nor SunCal has requested formal action on the Master Plan. It is an opportunity for the community to comment on the draft Master Plan and for the ARRA Board to provide feedback to SunCal. Because SunCal's plan is not consistent with the City's charter, as it proposes a mix of residential structures that include multi-family rental and condo projects, this master plan can only be approved by a vote of the people. SunCal anticipates placing its plan on the ballot for the communities' consideration in November of this year, and the ENA requires SunCal to notify the City no later than April 30 if it plans to proceed with the ballot initiative. Tonight's presentation is part of the ongoing community dialogue that will con… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-01-07 | 2 | 2) the amount of the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) investment in the Alameda Point project and whether or not that investment of redevelopment dollars adversely impacts the City's general fund which is responsible for financing critical city services. Ms. Potter discussed the Presidio conveyance model - a transfer from military ownership via special legislation to the National Park Service and was not subject to BRAC requirements - it was determined that the same conveyance model is not feasible for Alameda Point. Alameda Point is subject to BRAC, was previously screened for other federal agency uses, was screened pursuant to the McKinney-Vento act for homeless uses, and is required to be conveyed at fair market value for private ownership and reuse. The ARRA is working with the Navy to negotiate a conveyance term sheet to transfer the property and provide for its ultimate reuse as a mixed- use community that generates jobs, provides housing for all incomes, and opens up the waterfront and creates new recreational opportunities for Alameda and the region. To achieve that goal, the City entered into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with SunCal. Ms. Potter addressed the issue of tax increment funds, clarifying that there cannot be a pledge of tax increment funds without a DDA, approved by the City Council and CIC in public following a public hearing, therefore, any approval of tax increment funding will only happen after input and participation from the community. If tax increment funds are raised through the sale of tax increment bonds, those bonds are secured and repaid solely by tax increment funds generated in the Alameda Point Redevelopment Project Area (APIP), and in no way obligate the City's general fund. Based on current projections of the property value to be created by the build-out of the master plan, staff anticipates that a maximum of $184 million of tax increment will be created over the life of the project. This number is well short of the $700 million being referenced in the community. I… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-01-07 | 3 | determine how to actually finance the project, once the land is conveyed, there are several different mechanisms, including debt & equity. With regard to the bankruptcies on the other projects that SunCal was the operator on, not necessarily the owner of, most all of those were Lehman projects. When Lehman filed bankruptcy and decided to not fund SunCal, SunCal decided, involuntarily, to throw each of those projects into bankruptcy in hopes of forcing Lehman to start to fund those. These projects are independently financed and structured and have absolutely nothing to do with the Alameda Point project. Member Gilmore reiterated the concern regarding SunCall's ability to fund predevelopment expenses. Mr. Keliher explained that if SunCal defaults under the ENA and doesn't perform, it is simply over. He further stated that, to date, SunCal has deposited all the funds. Both Member Gilmore and Mr. Keliher clarified and confirmed that the ARRA is not obligated in any way to reimburse SunCal for the predevelopment funds that have been spent. There was discussion about the historic structures. Mr. Keliher is in agreement with the Board that it's not the wisest move to proactively rip down the structures, and that SunCal will work with staff on working out a process of evaluating the best direction. Member Matarrese offered comments for consideration, including requesting detail of commercial space, and what impact of those spaces would be with regard to traffic and truck routes, and the industrial-type uses. Member Tam also asked about industrial uses, mixed-use and residential. Peter Calthorpe described another similar project in San Jose where there was a balance of use in the commercial, civic, and retail areas. He stated that industrial development needs to be treated in special way, explaining that it has not yet been determined whether there are industrial users that are appropriate for this site and that should be part of the mix. Member Tam asked about the BCDC sea level rise, and the 24" that one speaker mention… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf,4 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-01-07 | 4 | At Chair Johnson's request, Ms. Potter summarized the process and milestones of the ENA so that the public understands that this is not the end of the process. This report was for information only and no action was taken by the Board. 3-B. VA/Navy Presentation Regarding the Navy/VA Federal-to-Federal Transfer at Former NAS Alameda. Ms. Potter gave a brief overview about the 600 acres on western portion of Alameda Point property. The Navy and VA have been in discussion for many years about its plans for the development of the portion of the wildlife refuge property. She introduced Claude Hutchinson of the VA. Mr. Hutchinson gave his presentation via Powerpoint to the Board and community, summarizing the status of the fed-to-fed transfer The plans include a 50-acre above-ground columbarium, a site for a VA outpatient clinic, and a non VA-owned hospital. Other presenters included Patrick McKay of the Navy BRAC office; Dr. Ron Chun, VA outpatient clinic site manager; Don Reiker, National Cemetary Assoc. regional director; Larry Jaynes, Capital Asset Manager of the VA; and Jayni Alsep, the VA's environmental consultant from EDAW. Chair Johnson clarified for the public that the ARRA is not a part of the transaction between the Navy and the VA, and has no decision-making power in this transaction. She stated her appreciation to the VA on its presentation and all its efforts for community involvement. Chair Johnson also stated that although the ARRA has no control over this issue, we might be able to cooperate if the VA was willing to look at other areas of the base. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of December 4 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese stated that the Dec. 4 RAB meeting was 1/2 Christmas party and 1/2 highlights of the coming year's projects. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 12:45 a.m. by Chair Johnson. Res… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-02-03.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-02-03 | 1 | UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA), AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) Tuesday, February 3, 2009 The meeting convened at 12:10 a.m. (on 2/4/09) with Chair Johnson 2-B 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 Special Joint City Council and CIC Meeting, and the Special CIC Meeting held on January 6, 2009. (City Clerk) [CIC]. 2-B. Recommendation to authorize the use of $350,000 of Tax Exempt Bond Funds from the Merged Area Bond (Funds 201.11 and 201.15) and appropriate the funds for use for the Fleet Industrial Supply Center (FISC) Emergency Water Repairs and Electrical Upgrades at Park Street and Buena Vista Avenue; and authorize FISC Lease Revenue for additional annual support of the Façade Grant Program. (Development Services) [CIC and ARRA] Item 2-B was pulled for discussion. Approval of Item 2-A was motioned by Member Matarrese and seconded by Member Gilmore and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Abstentions: 0. Discussion of Item 2-B: Leslie Liittle, Development Services Director, summarized the project and asked the Board for consideration so that the project can get underway for construction in the October timeframe. The request is essentially an appropriation of $800,000 that staff expects there will be a trade of some funds between the FISC and the CIC. The tax exempt bonds will go into the FISC water project as a Public Works project and the FISC lease revenues will come back to the CIC to be used outside of redevelopment project areas and does not have the same restrictions as redevelopment funds. Rob Ratto, PSBA Executive Director, discussed the current improvement program on Park Street and urged the CIC/Board to approve the money for the undergrounding, the façade grant, and the FISC property. Approval of Item 2-B was motioned by Mem… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-02-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-02-03.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-02-03 | 2 | Ms. Little gave a brief overview of Alameda Wine Company's request to amend their lease to change their hours of operation. Staff is recommending no change to their lease at this time. The tenant addressed the CIC explaining her request is due to financial reasons, stating that the hours of 11:00 a.m.- - 4:00 p.m. are the least profitable for her business. Member Matarrese motioned to follow staff's recommendation to keep the status quo and defer any change to the Alameda Wine Company lease until such time that there is the eventuality and risk of the business closing. Only at that time should this item be brought back to the CIC. Member Gilmore seconded the motion and it was passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 3 Noes: 1 (Vice-Chair deHaan) Abstentions: 1. (Member Tam) 3-B. Recommendation to approve a Five Year Lease and Repayment Plan/Write-off with AC Hornet Foundation. (Development Services) [ARRA] Ms. Little and Nanette Mocanu, Finance & Administration Division Manager, summarized the Hornet's' repayment plan to alleviate their debt. The Board gave direction to staff to bring this item back after revisions to the repayment plan to include that the Hornet provide: a new business plan, credible financial reports, evidence of creditors, and address the issue of the benefit to the ARRA of moving the Hornet for profitable use of Pier 3. The Board also requested that a representative from the Hornet attend the meeting when this item is brought back before the ARRA. 3-C. Recommendation to approve an amendment to Consultant Contract with Harris & Associates for On-Call Services for Review of Land Development Entitlement Applications for Redevelopment of Alameda Point. (Development Services) [ARRA] This item was continued to the next Regular ARRA meeting on March 4, 2009. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of January 8th Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese requested the Board review the handouts regarding OU-5 and OU-2B te… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-02-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-03-04.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-03-04 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING of the ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA), AND HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC) Wednesday March 4, 2009 The meeting convened at 10:30 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2-B 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,… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-03-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-03-04.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-03-04 | 2 | 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… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-03-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-04-01.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-04-01 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, April 1, 2009 The meeting convened at 7:14 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2-A 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 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. Staff requested to pull Items 2-E, 2-F, and 2-G. The balance of the consent calendar was motioned for approval by Vice Chair deHaan, seconded by Member Tam, and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes - 5, Noes - 0, Abstentions - 0. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. LRA Presentation of Treasure Island Redevelopment - Jack Sylvan, San Francisco Mayor's office. Jack Sylvan of the San Francisco Mayor's office gave a powerpoint presentation of the Treasure Island redevelopment project. After the presentation, Boardmembers asked questions regarding the Treasure Island Development Authority (TIDA), its relationship with the Navy, and if they were able to disclose their purchase price terms. Mr. Sylvan replied that he is not at | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-04-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-04-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-04-01 | 2 | liberty to discuss the term amount. The redevelopment challenges of the ARRA and TIDA are very similar (transportation, density, etc.) noting that ARRA's Measure A and environmental issues are a greater challenge. 3-B. Alameda Point Update. Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, gave an overview of SunCal's work over the past 60 days, including its work toward the March 26 submittal of its Ballot Initiative. SunCal requested a Tidelands Summary be prepared. The summary was prepared by City Attorney's office and transmitted to City Clerk's office. Once the notice is published, SunCal can begin its signature-gathering process to be completed by June 17. If the required number of qualified signatures is received, the City Council will have to take action to place the initiative on the ballot by Aug. 7. Pursuant to the ENA, SunCal has until April 30 to elect whether they're going to formally move forward with the ballot process or submit an application that is consistent with existing law. A second milestone to be completed by April 30 is the required deposit to begin CEQA work. Staff anticipates coming back to the ARRA in May with an award of contract for an EIR consultant. SunCal will also provide a presentation and summary of the components of their initiative which will include a specific plan, community plan, a Development Agreement, and various other amendments to the zoning ordinance and city's general plan. Member Matarrese requested that the timeline of the process be posted on the Alameda Point website. One speaker, Ashley Jones, directed a question to Mayor Johnson regarding her ability to be impartial regarding the Measure A issue as it pertains to the redevelopment at Alameda Point. Mayor Johnson replied that the speaker time is for the public to comment on the item and not for discussion. Janet Davis expressed concern about the contamination and the safeguards in place before development begins. David Brandt explained to Ms. Davis that the agencies that are overseeing the clean up … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-04-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-04-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-04-01 | 3 | Respectfully submitted, Airan Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-04-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-05-19.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-05-19 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Tuesday, May 19, 2009 The meeting convened at 7:47 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2-A 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 April 1, 2009. 2-B. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Extension for General Services Administration at Alameda Point. 2-C. Accept the Interim Executive Director's Statement of Emergency Regarding Expenditures for the Fire at the Fleet Industrial Supply Center and Approve the Project Budget Item 2-C was pulled by Member Tam for discussion. The balance of the Consent Calendar was motioned for approval by Member Tam, seconded by Member Matarrese and passed by the following voice votes: 5 ayes, 0 Noes, 0 Abstentions. Item 2-C - Member Tam asked for clarification on whether or not the debris retrieved was tested. Leslie Little, Development Services Director, explained that the debris was tested by quarter, and not tested individually, because the intent is to haul everything off. Member Tam also asked what kind of thresholds should be met to determine whether it was cleaned accurately. Ms. Little stated that the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) set the standards for the cleanup. Vice Chair deHaan and Member Matarrese expressed concerns that the ARRA is now footing the $1.6M bill for the demo of the burned building. They discussed Catellus' DA which obligates them to do demolition, which included this building. Ms. Little explained that they're not obligated to do the demo because they have not moved forward with any initial phase. She further explained that an issue such as this is an unanticipated cost which clearly demonstrates what these do to the fund balance. Member Matarrese requested that the cost be transferred to the project and that Catellus remain obligated to reimburse the ARRA. He request… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-05-19.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-05-19.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-05-19 | 2 | 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 4. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Vice Chair deHaan and Member Matarrese attended the last RAB meeting and had concerns about the Navy's cleanup direction - whether it is predicated on the PDC, or if the Navy is remediating according to SunCal's concept plan. Member Matarrese requested clarification of their method and also requested this item be agendized and brought back to the ARRA at its next regular meeting. 5. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 8:04 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-05-19.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-06-03.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-06-03 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING of the ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, June 3, 2009- 6:00 p.m. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Boardmembers deHaan, Matarrese, Gilmore, Tam and Chair Johnson - 5. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (54956.8): Property: Alameda Point Negotiating parties: ARRA and SunCal Under negotiation: Price and Terms The ARRA received a briefing from its Real Property Negotiator and provided direction on negotiations. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Airna Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority June 3, 2009 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-06-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-07-07.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-07-07 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Tuesday, July 7, 2009 The meeting convened at 8:20 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2-A 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 June 3, 2009. 2-B. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Vigor Marine, LLC at Alameda Point. 2-C. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Bay Ship & Yacht Co., Inc. at Alameda Point. 2-D. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Puglia Engineering of California, Inc. at Alameda Point. The Consent Calendar was motioned for approval by Member Gilmore, seconded by Vice Chair deHaan and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of June 4th Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese was unable to attend the June 4th meeting in which the OU-2 feasibility study was discussed. The July RAB meeting is cancelled, so Member Matarrese will report on the August Meeting. Member Gilmore asked a question about the RAB's decision to have a facilitator from the Navy to assist in conducting effective meetings. She was curious of the genesis of the idea, since the RAB has been in existence for many years, why only now is the Navy providing a facilitator? RAB member Michael Torrey stated that this is not the first time that the Navy is providing a facilitator, but that the previous ones had to be cut due to funding issues. George Brooks, the Navy's Environmental Coordinator, asked if there could be another facilitator. Member Matarrese explained that the RAB Board changed and agreed that it was a positive step for the RAB. | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-07-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-07-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-07-07 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Vice Chair deHaan asked for an update on the SunCal milestones. Assistant City Manager, David Brandt, stated that there is a payment requirement due on July 19th, , and qualified signatures, or an alternative plan, was due in mid September for the City Council to accept. The Navy requirement is now July 2010. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 8:24 p.m., by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-07-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-09-02.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-09-02 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING of the ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, September 2, 2009- 6:00 p.m. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:25 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Boardmembers deHaan, Matarrese, Gilmore, Tam and Chair Johnson - 5. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (54956.8): Property: Alameda Point Negotiating parties: ARRA and SunCal Under negotiation: Price and Terms The Executive Director discussed price and terms regarding Alameda Point. No action was taken. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Airna Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority September 2, 2009 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-09-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-10-07.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-10-07 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, October 7, 2009 The meeting convened at 7:12 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2-A 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 September 2, 2009. 2-B. Approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of September 15, 2009. 2-C. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Three-Year Sublease Renewal for Piedmont Youth Soccer Club at Alameda Point. 2-D. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Dreyfuss Capital Partners in Building 29 at Alameda Point Without a Waiver in Rent and a Right of First Offer for Building 29 Only. 2-E. Amend the Contract and Project Budget for the Fire at the Fleet Industrial Supply Center by Adding $500,000. 2-F. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sales Agreement, and Approve Disposing of Personal Property at Alameda Point - Proposed Sale of Ship Waste Off-Loading Barge. Item 2-D was pulled by staff and continued to the November meeting. Vice Chair deHaan pulled Items 2-C and 2-E for discussion. The balance of the Consent Calendar (Items 2- A, 2-B and 2-F) was motioned for approval by Member Tam, seconded by Member Matarrese and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 Discussion on Item 2-C: Leslie Little, Economic Development Director, summarized the staff report. There were several speakers. The speakers who were against the item were concerned about the soccer field and Alameda resources being ceded to another city. They questioned what their fees pay for and the availability of the fields to Alameda's soccer teams. Chair Johnson explained that the Jack London Youth Soccer League created and manages the pool of fields to which all the different soccer clubs can schedule games. The fields are not exclusive and are open to all the communities at all times. The annual maintenance of t… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-10-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-10-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-10-07 | 2 | Member deHaan was concerned that there would be a shortage of fields or available game-play on the field for Alameda clubs. Dale Lillard, Park and Rec Director, explained that there has not been a shortage of fields, and any shortage experienced was only due to the water rationing mandated by EBMUD to help with the drought, not by any scheduling conflicts. Member Matarrese clarified that this particular field at Alameda Point is not a City-owned field - it still belongs to the Navy and it is not being ceded to another city, it is being leased. He further explained that it is not any different than when the buildings are leased at Alameda point - leasing is not restricted to Alameda only - and if that land was not leased to the Piedmont soccer club, and because Alameda's Parks and Rec department didn't have the funds to maintain the field, it would be a weed field. There was further discussion from the representatives of the Jack London Youth Soccer Sports League, Alameda Soccer Club, and the Piedmont Soccer Club. They answered questions posed by the speakers and the Board, and further expressed their continued support and maintenance of the Alameda Point field for the benefit of all the youth soccer clubs. Item 2-C was motioned for approval by Member Matarrese, seconded by Member Tam and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 Discussion on Item 2-E: Leslie Little discussed staff's request to augment the existing budget for removal of fire debris of Building 6 by $500,000. She summarized that in late March, Building 6 caught fire. The initial debris removal was done, but asbestos and other contaminated building materials were found, and the remaining concrete tower structures were unstable. We are eligible for a $200,000 grant from DTSC to offset the $500,000. Vice Chair deHaan asked what the overall cost would be when complete; and if we were going to hold Catellus responsible to pay back the cost. Ms. Little stated the amount to be approximately $2 million by completion. She furthe… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-10-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-10-07.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-10-07 | 3 | Member Matarrese motioned to approve the allocation of the $500,000 to complete the demolition, and added that the entire cost of the demolition be assigned to Catellus. Member Gilmore seconded the motion and it was passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: o, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of September 3rd Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese said that the highlight of the meeting was an update and discussion on Site 1, the far northwest end of the wildlife refuge and lower part of Northwest Territories. The Navy presentation refreshed the RAB on boundaries and milestones, the Navy's containment preference to use an engineered four-foot soil cover, and their path forward which included a timeline to Record of Decision (ROD) and remedial action to begin in December of 2010. The RAB's discussion mostly challenged the assessment of that contamination - the fact that the sample site data was old and inadequate. Member Matarrese stated that discussions at the meetings have been heated and required a facilitator. There are people knowledgeable enough to ask very technical questions and the bottom line is that no one is satisfied with the Navy's proposal to cap it with four feet of soil. Member Matarrese was not able to attend the October 1 RAB meeting. The next meeting is Nov. 5. Member Tam asked what the Navy plans to do with the feedback and their plans to go forward with capping, even to our objection. Member Matarrese explained that the Navy was supposed to have a final ROD by September 17th, but does not know if it has been published. The Navy is also supposed to go through the pre-design work this December of whatever solution there might be. ARRA's letter to the Navy stating the objection to the soil capping was also copied to the Congressional delegation, which may garner a little more attention to slow this process down and get a different resolution. Member Matar… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-10-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-11-04.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-11-04 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, November 4, 2009 The meeting convened at 7:03 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2-A 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 October 7, , 2009. The Consent Calendar was motioned for approval by Member Tam, seconded by Vice Chair deHaan and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of October 1 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese did not attend the Oct. 1 meeting, but received a comprehensive listing (Alameda Point Site/Area Description) of Alameda Point IR Sites by name, by number, historic use, current contamination status and future reuse. He asked that this list be distributed to other boardmembers. The next RAB meeting is tomorrow, 11/5. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-11-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-12-02.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-12-02 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING of the ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, December 2, 2009 - 6:30 p.m. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:45 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Boardmembers deHaan, Matarrese, Gilmore, Tam and Chair Johnson - 5. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (54956.8): Property: Alameda Point Negotiating parties: ARRA and SunCal Under negotiation: Price and Terms The ARRA Board provided instruction to the Real Property Negotiator. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Itura Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority December 2, 2009 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-12-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-01-06.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-01-06 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, January 6, 2010 The meeting convened at 12:54 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 December 2, 2009. The Consent Calendar was motioned for approval by Member Tam, seconded by Member Matarrese and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of December 3 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese discussed the highlights of the December 7 RAB meeting, including that he received a preliminary report from Derek Robinson of the Navy stating that the large object in the Sea Plane Lagoon is a concrete block with pier material, not hazardous waste. Member Matarrese requested that the ARRA write a letter to the Navy to remove the concrete block. Member deHaan asked if radiation was found on that piece. Member Matarrese replied that it is unknown and a primary reason why it should be removed. Member Matarrese also discussed that the Navy wants to leave the radium contaminated sewer line in place under building 400, stating that removing it would cause the structure to be unsound. Member Matarrese, along with RAB members insist that the sewer line has to be removed. Another important point discussed was that the University of Florida and Purdue University received a large DOD grant to conduct remediation development studies; this grant represents several hundreds of thousands of dollars and put Alameda Point remediation on the map. Chair Johnson agreed that the ARRA send a letter to the Navy regarding the two key items: concrete block removal, and contaminated sewer line removal. Vice Chair deHaan discussed looking at the option of filling the are… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-01-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-01-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-01-06 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Matarrese discussed the visit to El Toro and Hamilton bases, particularly that the City of Irvine established a local development corporation to develop the Great Park. Member Matarrese would like to put an item on a future ARRA agenda to evaluate that particular option to see if it has utility for the ARRA or successor to the ARRA. He stated that Hamilton is farther along than most other bases - there are lots of houses; 10 hangars in use, eight of which have been rehabbed for public and private, with two hangars remaining in the Coast Guard. Member Matarrese recommends looking for potential military use for the hangars at Alameda Point. He stated that the most important and striking feature of Hamilton was that they were taking the runways and returning them to wetlands. Member Matarrese discussed that a wetlands option for the west end of Alameda Point might be a superior option to bolster the shoreline with an engineering solution. The wetlands are a carbon sink, and there may be future carbon credits; it filters runoff, provide better habitat for the environment and is a superior buffer to storm or wave action because it doesn't require maintenance. Vice Chair deHaan discussed that some of the dredging from the Port of Oakland was used for establishing that wetlands. Member Matarrese added that levies were built as well. Vice Chair deHaan stated that getting "tipping fees' is extremely important to jumpstart this type of operation. Chair Johnson liked the idea of wetland restoration. Member Matarrese reiterated that the ARRA remain insistent that the Navy scoop and remove Sites 1 and 2. Member Matarrese stated that there was concern expressed by two members of the RAB (one representative from the EPA and one from the Audubon Society) of rumors that the Bay Trail was in jeopardy, either from the Wildlife or the VA. Member Matarrese would like to find the source to the rumor to see if it… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-01-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-02-03.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-02-03 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, February 3, 2010 The meeting convened at 7:15 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 6, 2009. The Consent Calendar was motioned for approval by Member Tam, seconded by Member deHaan and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of January 7 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese discussed the highlights of the January 7 RAB meeting, including a report of Site OU-2C which has a contaminated discharge line under a slab in Bldg. 400. The RAB recommends it be removed, but the Navy is citing potential compromise to the structural integrity of building. The second highlight was a report on the block of cement in the seaplane lagoon, to which the Navy made no comment. Member Matarrese would like a presentation and technical summary from the Navy of cleanup activities and costs, including dollar figures, completed to date. Member Matarrese stated that it is good for the community to understand that remediation is an ongoing process. He will attend the next RAB meeting tomorrow (2/4). Member Gilmore asked if it was requested of the Navy to substantiate their claim about the structural integrity of Bldg. 400. Member Matarrese replied that a letter was sent to them with that request. Richard Bangert, speaker, supported the suggestion made by Member Matarrese calling for a public presentation of the clean up activities at the base. He agreed that such a presentation would benefit the community at large. He discussed the Record of Decision (ROD) document for Site 1, explaining that it comprises 43,000 pages of data, emphasizing the need f… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-02-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-02-03.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-02-03 | 2 | Chair Johnson agreed with Mr. Bangert that the regulatory agencies, including the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Water board should participate in the presentation. Chair Johnson further stated that the Board supports Member Matarrese's recommendation for a public presentation regarding the remediation activities at Alameda Point. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were several speakers. Jean Sweeney suggested a before and after" powerpoint presentation of the clean-up sites. Jim Sweeney agreed with Richard Bangert and Member Matarrese about a presentation to the public. Mr. Sweeney encourages educating the public about remediation, the plan, and what can be done realistically at Alameda Point. Gretchen Lipow - attends RAB meetings, was impressed with the bright, talented members and how they interact with the agencies. Ms. Lipow invites the public to observe these meetings, stating that the group looks out for the communities' welfare. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Vice Chair deHaan discussed the Special Election of Feb 2nd regarding Measure B. There were 14,000 votes cast - 85% NO and 15% YES. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 7:31 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, June Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-02-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-03-03.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-03-03 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, March 3, 2010 The meeting convened at 7:11 p.m. with Member Matarrese presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Boardmember Lena Tam Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Absent: Chair Beverly Johnson Vice Chair Doug deHaan 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2-A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 3, 2010. 2-B. Approve a Third Amendment to Agreement with Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., Increasing the Budget by $60,000 to Provide Ongoing Negotiation Support for the Redevelopment of Alameda Point. The Consent Calendar was motioned for approval by Member Gilmore, seconded by Member Tam and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 3, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of February 4 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese discussed the highlights of the February 4 RAB meeting, including a report on remediation and field work: The Navy is continuing to dig up and remove radioactive contaminated storm drain lines from Bldg. 5, there is active groundwater treatments at two sites along the Oakland inner harbor, north of Pier 1; and a petroleum contaminated groundwater treatment recovery operation near the Atlantic avenue entrance. There was discussion regarding issues relative to the disturbance of nesting of migratory birds at the Bay Trail, and that meetings with the Fish & Wildlife Service have been scheduled. There are expanded site inspections along the south east portions of Alameda Point to Hangar Row, on the western side of the lagoon. Lastly, there was discussion on RAB's purpose and processes governing the RAB, and how well the RAB communicates to the general public about clean-up efforts. ARRA will have a meeting on May 6 to promote and highlight clean-up work. Regulators from the EPA, DTSC, and Water Board will attend. The meeting is scheduled on May 6, 2010… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-03-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-03-03.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-03-03 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) No speakers 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Matarrese said that he and Chair Johnson attended the Association of Defense Communities (ADC) conference in Feb in Albuquerque, NM. He stated that they participated in various sessions and will prepare notes highlighting topics discussed in the sessions, including base conversion stories and reuse of former military bases that were better, similar, or worse off than Alameda Point. Regarding the base conversion and reuse, the spectrum ran from rural conversion of an army weapons depot in Kansas, to a small village in Illinois. Member Matarrese stated that there were a lot of contacts and exposure to all branches of service, their experts and their experience, including the Director of the Fort Ord Reuse Authority. Ann Marie Gallant, Interim Executive Director, expressed that she was pleased with the ARRA's involvement in ADC and that she, along with executive staff, was invited to sit on the host committee to plan the Annual ADC Conference taking place in San Francisco this year. The anticipation is that there will be more than 1000 people in attendance. She stated that the ADC accepted the ARRA's invitation to host an event at Alameda Point. She also said that the ADC is interested in having the ARRA do a forum on the base and its history, including all the different elements and components on remediation, phase-out issues, and that it would be a good case study in terms of how they can learn some lessons. Member Matarrese discussed two key items: 1) legislation on defense authorization bill, which help communities grapple with the cost of closed bases, and 2) the new Undersecretary's initiative to deal with green approaches, sustainability, and alternative energy sources. Member Gilmore asked what the dates for the ADC Annual Conference were. Ms. Gallant replied that it was early August, the 8th thru 11th. Member Tam reminded the Board of the Charter provision to make a conscious effort to go dark in… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-03-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-04-06.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-04-06 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Tuesday, April 6, 2010 The meeting convened at 7:11 p.m. with Member Matarrese 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 March 3, 2010. 2-B. Approve a Third Amendment to Agreement with Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., Increasing the Budget by $60,000 to Provide Ongoing Negotiation Support for the Redevelopment of Alameda Point. The Consent Calendar was motioned for approval by Member Gilmore, seconded by Member Tam and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 3, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of March 1 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese discussed the highlights of the February 4 RAB meeting, including a report on remediation and field work: The Navy is continuing to dig up and remove radioactive contaminated storm drain lines from Bldg. 5, there is active groundwater treatments at two sites along the Oakland inner harbor, north of Pier 1; and a petroleum contaminated groundwater treatment recovery operation near the Atlantic avenue entrance. There was discussion regarding issues relative to the disturbance of nesting of migratory birds at the Bay Trail, and that meetings with the Fish & Wildlife Service have been scheduled. There are expanded site inspections along the south east portions of Alameda Point to Hangar Row, on the western side of the lagoon. Lastly, there was discussion on RAB's purpose and processes governing the RAB, and how well the RAB communicates to the general public about clean-up efforts. ARRA will have a meeting on May 6 to promote and highlight clean-up work. Regulators from the EPA, DTSC, and Water Board will attend. The meeting is scheduled on May 6, 2010 at the Mastick … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-04-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-04-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-04-06 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) No speakers 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Matarrese said that he and Chair Johnson attended the Association of Defense Communities (ADC) conference in Feb in Albuquerque, NM. He stated that they participated in various sessions and will prepare notes highlighting topics discussed in the sessions, including base conversion stories and reuse of former military bases that were better, similar, or worse off than Alameda Point. Regarding the base conversion and reuse, the spectrum ran from rural conversion of an army weapons depot in Kansas, to a small village in Illinois. Member Matarrese stated that there were a lot of contacts and exposure to all branches of service, their experts and their experience, including the Director of the Fort Ord Reuse Authority. Ann Marie Gallant, Interim Executive Director, expressed that she was pleased with the ARRA's involvement in ADC and that she, along with executive staff, was invited to sit on the host committee to plan the Annual ADC Conference taking place in San Francisco this year. The anticipation is that there will be more than 1000 people in attendance. She stated that the ADC accepted the ARRA's invitation to host an event at Alameda Point. She also said that the ADC is interested in having the ARRA do a forum on the base and its history, including all the different elements and components on remediation, phase-out issues, and that it would be a good case study in terms of how they can learn some lessons. Member Matarrese discussed two key items: 1) legislation on defense authorization bill, which help communities grapple with the cost of closed bases, and 2) the new Undersecretary's initiative to deal with green approaches, sustainability, and alternative energy sources. Member Gilmore asked what the dates for the ADC Annual Conference were. Ms. Gallant replied that it was early August, the 8th thru 11th. Member Tam reminded the Board of the Charter provision to make a conscious effort to go dark in… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-04-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-05-06.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-05-06 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Thursday, May 6, 2010 The meeting convened at 7:42 p.m. with Vice Chair deHaan presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Boardmember Lena Tam Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Doug deHaan Absent: Chair Beverly Johnson (arrived at 8:40 p.m.) 2. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 2-A. Alameda Point Environmental Update - Presentation by the Navy and Regulatory Agencies. Vice Chair deHaan introduced Jennifer Ott, Deputy City Manager, to open the presentation. Ms. Ott gave an overview on what will be presented: a summary of the environmental program, the accomplishments that have been made to date, funds that have been expended by the Navy to date, as well as some of the economic development impacts of the process. The presenters were Derek Robinson of the Navy, Anna-Marie Cook of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Dot Lofstrom of the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). After the presentation, the Board discussed key issues with the presenters. Vice Chair deHaan commented on the long process and gave a brief background on the remediation efforts. He thanked the community and past chairs for their continued support. Member Tam expressed her appreciation for the update and the amount of work & effort that goes into the clean up. She asked how the funds are controlled and administered, who they flow through given the various jurisdictions involved (i.e., is the funding centralized through the BRAC and then through the other agencies) and how they are allocated through congressional authorizations. Derek Robinson explained that he will get clarification on the funding process and will report the information back to Member Tam. He also clarified that the Navy's focus is not on recouping the funds spent in the clean-up. Vice Chair deHaan discussed the change of philosophy regarding the remediation of Alameda Point. He clarified that the clean-up was under the complete control of the Navy, and that in 2000… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-05-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-05-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-05-06 | 2 | certification process after a parcel has been cleaned. Ann Marie Cook of EPA further explained this process: Once a site has reached a point where it is considered meeting the goals set for it to be cleaned, the Navy prepares a "Remedial Action Completion Report' and the EPA, because it is a Superfund site, is required to make the determination that all clean-up action necessary has been completed. The Navy then drafts a Finding of Suitability report to transfer that property. Member Gilmore asked for the status of the transfer process of cleaned VA lands and whether or not the Navy and the VA have reached a basic deal. Jennifer Ott explained that the transfer is moving forward, but awaiting approval from the administration to move forward. She stated that at this time, there are no details of a basic deal, but she will keep the Board updated on any further developments. Vice Chair deHaan asked about the status of remediation of the Seaplane Lagoon. Mr. Robinson stated that they are currently in Stage 1, which includes removing large debris piles on the north side, and that Stage 2 will include remediating soils from the outlet of the storm drain systems. Construction activities will start in Sep./Oct. 2010. Vice Chair deHaan also asked about Site 2 wetlands. He was concerned that the estimated cost of clean-up for Site 2 was approximately $100 million. Mr. Robinson stated that number seems high, and is more likely $20 million - but will get the correct information to report back to the Board. There were three speakers: Jim Sweeney discussed the potential adaptive reuse of Building 5. According to Ann Marie Cook, Building 5 is one million square feet, is 65 feet tall, and qualifies as a historical building. She managed to secure funding from an EPA pilot program and they are looking at costs associated with reusing portions of the building and demolishing other portions. She will be able to provide an update in three months, with a final report in about seven months. Irene Dieter, speaking on behalf of community,… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-05-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-07-07.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-07-07 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, July 7, 2010 The meeting convened at 7:21 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. Responses to Questions Posed by the ARRA Board at the May 6th, 2010 Special ARRA Meeting Regarding the United States Navy's Environmental Program at Alameda Point. Member Gilmore requested additional information regarding the VA transfer and related agreement in response to the May 25, 2010 letter from the Navy which addressed the questions from the May 6th meeting. Staff stated that the information will be provided at the next ARRA meeting. The Consent Calendar was motioned for approval by Member Tam, seconded by Member Matarrese and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of June 3 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese gave an overview of the June 3rd RAB meeting. He discussed the summary of the radiological surveys and clean ups that have been done at Fed sites 1 and 2. He also discussed the Bldg. 5 storm drain which was removed because of radium contamination, and that additional contamination was found in other storm drains; and site 17 sediment sampling of the seaplane lagoon. Member Matarrese stated that there is a new schedule of evaluation and remediation that runs from Aug thru Nov of 2010. Member Matarrese discussed two commentary papers prepared by RAB member and physical engineer, George Humphreys. One of the papers was on basewide radiological contamination, and the other on site 25 ground water plume above the FISC near Coast Guard Housing, Tinker-Stargell extension. There is a Navy-sponsored tour of the sites on Saturday, July 17 from 9-11:00 a.m. Interested parties can go to the … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-07-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-07-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-07-07 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) One speaker, Jon Spangler, discussed clean-up of Alameda Point. He inquired what will happen with everything that is above-ground at Alameda Point, the crumbling infrastructure, buildings that were built with toxic materials, and contaminated buildings. He asked who will pay for remediation and up-keep if SunCal's contract is not renewed. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Considering the investigatory report against Councilmember Tam, Vice-Chair deHaan offered to attend the League of California Cities meeting as the alternate representative for the City of Alameda. He asked if this issue should be agendized for the next regular Council meeting. The General Counsel clarified that because Vice Chair deHaan is already the alternate, no official action is required, but if the Board would like to take a vote, this cannot happen tonight and would have to be at another meeting. Member Matarrese concurred with Vice-Chair deHaan and requested this issue be agendized for the next council meeting. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 7:34 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-07-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-09-01 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, September 1, 2010 The meeting convened at 7:03 p.m. with Vice Chair deHaan presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Boardmember Lena Tam Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Doug deHaan Absent: Chair Beverly Johnson (arrived at 8:00 p.m.) 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2-A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 7, 2010. 2-B. Adopt a Resolution Amending Resolution No. 001 Amending the Order of Business of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting. 2-C. Approve a Fourth Amendment to Agreement with Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., Increasing the Budget by $25,000 for Providing Negotiation Support for the Redevelopment of Alameda Point. Member Tam asked to pull Item 2-C, and moved to approve the balance of the Consent Calendar. Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by following voice vote - Ayes: 4. Member Tam requested more clarification on the amount of the EPS contract amendment and asked if SunCal was consulted on the overage, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services, responded in the affirmative, explaining that the Negotiating Cost Ledger has been made available to SunCal, and all invoices are included in the ledger. Member Tam asked what the ENA obligations are if the budget or scope is exceeded for consultant contracts. The Deputy City Manager, Development Services, responded that contracts are separate from the SunCal Cost Recovery account, and the amount of the EPS contract has not exceeded any Cost Recovery provisions under the ENA. Member Tam asked what the total budget was for EPS under the Cost Recovery Account, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services, responded that the total budget for the quarter was approximately $372,000 for all consultants. Based on this clarification, Member Tam stated she will abstain from this item. Member Gilmore asked if there are sufficient funds in the Cost Recovery account to cover the overage of … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-09-01 | 2 | Member Matarrese moved for approval of Item 2-C. Vice Chair deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice votes: Ayes: 3, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 1 (Tam) 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Adopt a Resolution Supporting the United States Navy's Transfer of 549 Acres of the Former Naval Air Station in the City of Alameda to the United States Department of Veterans Affairs for the Development of an Out-Patient Clinic and Columbarium. The Deputy City Manager, Development Services clarified that the staff report combines an information piece which addresses the VA-NAVY deal, and requires no action; and a 'recommendation' portion to adopt a resolution in support of property transfer to the VA. The Deputy City Manager, Development Services summarized the background of the proposed VA project and property transfer. Member Tam inquired if it was necessary that the resolution exclude the 9.7 acres of the Least Tern colony, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services explained that the 9.7 acres is included, along with the buffer zone surrounding the Wildlife Refuge, which is more than half of the 549 acres. The Deputy City Manager, Development Services introduced Larry Jaynes, Capital Asset Manager from the Department of Veteran Affairs. Mr. Jaynes gave a brief presentation of the status and projected timeline of the VA project. Speakers: Proponents: Mark Chandler, Commissioner of the Alameda County Veterans Affairs Commission; Alex McElree, Operation Dignity; Aidan Barry. Opponents: Gary Bard; Leora Feeney, Friends of the Alameda Wildlife Refuge (FAWR) Committee; Ron Barklow; Cindy Margulis; Michael Lynes, Golden Gate Audubon; Jean Sweeney; Jon Spangler; Jim Sweeney; Adam Gillitt; William Smith, Sierra Club; Joyce Larrick, FAWR; Nancy Hird Chair Johnson inquired if there is a specific location identified in the resolution for the VA project, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services responded in the negative, further explaining that the 549 acres are part of a formal request that include… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-09-01 | 3 | Member Tam brought attention to the alternative resolution from the Golden Gate Audubon Society which includes recognition that there should be protection for the Least Terns, based on a biological opinion issued by the US Fish and Wildlife. Member Gilmore inquired why the VA was requesting 549 acres when they only require approximately 100 acres for their project, to which Mr. Jaynes replied that the Navy stated the transfer would be the 549 acres or nothing. Mr. Jaynes further explained that it is not part of the VA's mission to manage that portion of property, so the VA is planning to have a separate agreement with the USF&W to oversee the remaining 449 acres, just as the Navy has the same agreement with them right now; the funding will come from the VA instead of the Navy. Member Matarrese inquired if the property was transferred to the ARRA, could the ARRA then dispose of it to the VA, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services responded in the affirmative. Mr. Jaynes expressed that there may be stumbling blocks without proceeding with the BRAC process. Member Matarrese inquired whether the city will be able to participate in the VA project process, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services responded in the affirmative. Member Gilmore requested more details from the VA regarding what their plans are with USFW, and the proposed annual budget, so that it does not become an afterthought. Member Tam suggested adding the language from the Golden Gate Audubon Society regarding the protection of the Least Tern colony to the ARRA Resolution. Vice Chair deHaan moved for approval of Item 3-A, with a revision to the Resolution adding "Whereas, the City of Alameda will continue to prioritize the protection and conservation of the California Least Tern in its planning documents and decisions". Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by a unanimous voice vote: 5 Ayes. 3-B. Presentation: Alameda Point - 'Going Forward'. The Interim City Manager announced that Item 3-C will be combined w… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf,4 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-09-01 | 4 | mean the base is going to be completed in 15 months, rather, the 15 months timeline is for planning an assessment. The Board will have an opportunity to augment the timeline in more detail after subsequent discussions and at subsequent meetings. Member Matarrese stated that on strategic alliances, the regulators should be recognized, the EPA & DTSC for clean-up, and USF&W for the environmental. Regarding policy questions, Member Matarrese also expects certain questions to resurface, i.e., finances and how tax increment might be used, where the shortfalls are, how they will be backfilled, and where there are opportunities for early transfer for land that has already been cleaned up. Member Matarrese also suggested looking at the potential for having a citywide Project Labor Agreement (PLA) . There also needs to be discussion about jobs-housing balance, to give an opportunity for public to weigh in on it. Member Matarrese remarked on the notion of using "other peoples money", i.e., funds from the Federal Government and MTC, as these funds could add up. Member Gilmore echoed Member Matarrese's comments and requested to see a primer of what the lease environment looks like in the Bay Area, regarding the asset management application. If the ARRA is renegotiating leases, it would be good to know realistically what the competition is, in order to have a more realistic expectation in terms of putting in more capital into a building or not. In terms of leasing strategy, Member Tam inquired whether or not there is opportunity to adjust the restriction in the LIFOC which says the Navy can give minimal notice to terminate a tenant, recommending that it is something that should be pursued. There was discussion about the amount of documents that have been produced and compiled through the years, and where they are made available to the public on the City and Alameda Point websites. The Interim City Manager stated that staff is working on implementing a new Alameda Point website which will focus strictly on Alameda Point and th… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf,5 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-09-01 | 5 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 10:03 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Airan Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-10-06 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, October 6, 2010 The meeting convened at 7:10 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 September 1, 2010. 2-B. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for Jim Bustos Plumbing, Inc., Building 612, at Alameda Point. 2-C. Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Amendment to an Agreement with Russell Resources for Environmental Consulting Services for Alameda Point Extending the Term for 12 Months and Adding $140,000 to the Budget. 2-D. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease for NRC Environmental Services, Inc. Building 616 and Yard D-13, at Alameda Point. Vice Chair deHaan moved for approval of the Consent Calendar. Member Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of September 2 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese was not able to attend the Sept. 2 meeting but received materials regarding remediation activity in progress with a new technology, and a brief report on the University of Florida study of the remediation technique. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS 6-A. Presentation on "Going Forward" Community Forums for Alameda Point | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-10-06 | 2 | The Planning Services Manager gave an oral presentation on the schedule of the Alameda Point Community Forums, an initial eight month public outreach effort of the first phase of planning, which would end in June 2011 and restart the environmental review process. The Planning Services Manager explained that while the City of Alameda is doing a CEQA document EIR, the Navy will be doing a NEPA document. The Navy process won't start until there is a project description or general description of the City's plan. The goal is eight months. The eight-month schedule starts with a series of community outreach efforts, including community workshops and internet outreach. The tentative schedule of the first three meetings is: November 9 at the Grand Pavilion, November 18 at Mastick, and December 8 in west Alameda. These workshops and key components of each meeting will be consistent from meeting to meeting. The Planning Services Manager summarized the six key areas as noted in the staff report: 1) Community Facilities, 2) Land Use Mix, 3) Streets, Parks, and Open Space, 4) Transportation Access, 5) Architectural Character and Building Types, and 6) Historic Character and Adaptive Reuse. There are plans for a Tenant Forum in the spring focused on economic development strategy, a Developer and Business Forum, and discussions with each of the Boards and Commissions. A summary will be presented to the ARRA Board in March 2011, and a project description in June 2011. Member Gilmore requested an overview of where Alameda and the Bay Area stand in the commercial and industrial real estate market. The Interim City Manager discussed the application of a citywide real estate management policy which will include the information Member Gilmore requested about comparable leases. Member Tam requested an evaluation of internal competition, i.e., Marina Village VS. Alameda Point. Member Matarrese discussed the commercialization and industrialization approach to development at Alameda Point, stating that the markets already out there are no… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-10-06 | 3 | Member Tam inquired if there was opportunity for Alameda to get funding for the EIR process. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded in the affirmative, stating that staff has discussed funding possibilities with the Navy. There are some technical issues as the Navy has a contract for their NEPA process, and the City has a CEQA contract, but it may be possible to combine the processes so that it is cost efficient. Member Tam inquired if there are synergies between the sister federal agencies (Lawrence Berkeley Lab is with the Dept. of Energy, and the Veterans Administration has close ties with Navy). The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that, regarding the VA, the Navy understands that there has to be coordination to the extent that City staff can work with the VA to leverage their infrastructure and develop that relationship, not just in terms of regulatory process, but also with actual physical improvements and infrastructure. With regards to the Lawrence Berkeley Lab's requests for proposals for land to host their second campus, the City is prepared to submit a proposal in coordination with the Navy. The Interim City Manager added that the City is prepared to respond to the Lawrence Berkeley Lab RFP process with a very competitive proposal. There are opportunities to have strategic alliances as a result of the DOE and the Navy that makes Alameda Point uniquely competitive. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that staff will be providing the Board with updates at the monthly ARRA meetings. Vice Chair deHaan inquired if the Navy is willing to do phased conveyance. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that the Navy is exploring the boundaries, the pros and cons of phased conveyance, and that the Navy is open and listening to ideas. There was discussion from the Board about the management of the utilities at Alameda Point and whether there was a formal decision made about it. The Assistant General Counsel - ARRA stated that there has never … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf,4 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-10-06 | 4 | 9. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 8:09 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Itema Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-11-03 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, November 3, 2010 The meeting convened at 7:29 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 October 6, 2010. Member Matarrese moved for approval of the Consent Calendar. Vice Chair deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Consider Request from Alameda Point Collaborative to Support their Community Planning Efforts by Reimbursing Unpaid SunCal Consultant Expenses and Collateralizing a $50,000 Loan for Relocation Planning Studies Should Funds from Private Development Be Unavailable within 36 Months. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services provided an overview of the staff report. Chair Johnson inquired if the expenditure is considered a predevelopment cost for SunCal, to which the Deputy City Manager - Development Services answered in the affirmative. Chair Johnson inquired if staff has made efforts to have SunCal fulfill their commitment for payment. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that the Alameda Point Collaborative (APC) has tried diligently, without success, to have SunCal fulfill its commitment. Chair Johnson recommended continued efforts to pursue SunCal and inquired why funds from the SunCal escrow account are not being used to pay this bill. The Executive Director explained that the predevelopment escrow account is for obligations that SunCal has to the City and that the terms of the escrow account do not allow the City to direct the escrow agent to pay any invoices. Also, the City cannot interfere in the contractual relationship between SunCal and APC. Doug Biggs, Executive Director of APC further explained that he has contacted SunCal multiple times to request payment, and the responses provided no resolution to the pro… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-11-03 | 2 | Member Matarrese commented that SunCal had no problem spending approximately $50,000 on an election mailer a month ago. Member Matarrese supports APC's request, but would like to require that APC start the proceedings on their contractual remedy to the outstanding bill. Member Gilmore requested an update and report on the status of the predevelopment costs, and of the ARRA budget. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services informed Member Gilmore and the Board that staff will incorporate the ARRA budget and Predevelopment costs information into the update/staff report that will be presented to the Board in January. Vice Chair deHaan inquired how the APC will pay back a $50,000 loan. Mr. Biggs explained that the Project Implementation Loan (PIL) is from the Corporation for Supportive Housing. Traditionally, these loans are paid off by development fees, but since the development plans for Alameda Point are uncertain at this time, APC is asking the City to back them up. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that the predevelopment planning cost will be wrapped into the total cost of the project and financed through every available funding source to make the consolidation and relocation work. Speakers: Jon Spangler spoke in support of APC's request. Member Matarrese motioned to approve the recommendation to collateralize $50,000 for the pursuit of the planning study, with the requirement that the APC formally invoke their remedy in their contract in pursuit of reimbursement by SunCal. Member Matarrese also requested that the work done by the contractor be under public domain so that it is not proprietary to APC since it is being underwritten by the ARRA. Vice Chair deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of October 7 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese did not attend the October 7th meeting but will attend the RAB meeting on Nov. 4. Member Matar… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-11-03 | 3 | ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-12-01.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-12-01 | 1 | UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, December 1, 2010 The meeting convened at 7:01 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 November 3, 2010. 2-B. Approve a Waiver of License Fees for American Red Cross, Bay Area Chapter at Building 8. Member Gilmore moved for approval of the Consent Calendar. Member Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Designate a Member of the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Board to Serve as the New Alameda Point Restoration Advisory Board Representative. Vice Chair deHaan offered to serve as the RAB representative. Member Gilmore moved for approval to appoint Vice Chair deHaan as the new RAB representative. Member Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Effective first RAB meeting in January 2011. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of November 4 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese addressed three key points: 1) The Navy will be revamping the records Repository, including all of the Records of Decision (ROD), environmental studies, presentations, and information on the history of characterization; 2) there was a presentation on the draft final site investigation of the Federal Parcel Transfer, the south west portion of the base. The Navy is completing the surveying; 3) Member Matarrese would like Member deHaan and staff to continue tracking Sites 1, 2, & 32 on the north west side. These sites are the most vulnerable parts of the base in that they have high ground water, are susceptible to sloughing off into the bay, and are replete with radium T26 contamination. Member Matarrese stated it is important the City take a position that the Navy sho… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-12-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-12-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-12-01 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS 6-A. Alameda Point Community Forums Update. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services gave a presentation and an overview of the community forums. She provided a link to the workbook that people can participate in the going- forward process: ww.alamedapoint-goingforward.com Speakers: Philip Tribuzio, Henry Hernandez 6-B. Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Board Composition: Options for New Structure (continued from November 16, 2010). The Interim City Manager provided a presentation to update the Board on the 'Going-Forward" plan. Speakers: Honora Murphy, John Knox White, Anne Spanier, John Spangler There was confusion among the public regarding the topic of Item 6-B. Member Tam explained that the confusion comes from the wording of the item. The item is an update of the Going- Forward plan, and not a recommendation to change the ARRA Board Structure. Chair Johnson further clarified that this item is not before the Board for a decision, and that the Interim City Manager presented the item as an introduction of the concept, which the Board could either pursue or abandon. Member Gilmore expressed concern that there were advisory groups for Alameda Point that were active for many years [Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG), Alameda Point Advisory Commission (APAC)], but that they were ultimately dissolved by the ARRA. Member Gilmore's concern was that expanding the ARRA Board meant putting important decisions in the hands of non-electeds. Vice Chair deHaan expressed concern that he didn't want his elected position to be undermined by introducing a new structure or re-establishing an advisory group. It would be counter- productive to the long-standing mechanisms currently in place. Member Tam premised her statement by requesting that her comments be taken in the context that she is giving her opinion, and not trying to develop consensus for direction. Member Tam commented that the ARRA's amended by… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-12-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-12-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-12-01 | 3 | The Interim City Manager suggested adding an element to the process -- a community forum for principle stakeholders and other governmental agencies/bodies focused on government regulations. Member Tam requested that this issue be included as a future item where the Board can give direction. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services replied that it will be placed on the February agenda. 7. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 8. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Gilmore reminded staff that she requested a presentation regarding the commercial real estate market as it exists. Vice Chair deHaan stated that the ARRA should be involved in the City of Oakland's discussions regarding the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the Oakland A's stadium in Jack London Square. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services informed Vice Chair deHaan that Alameda city planning staff is aware of the NOP and will be following it. 9. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 9:11 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-12-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-01-05.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-01-05 | 1 | 1 UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, January 5, 2011 The meeting convened at 7:02 p.m. with Chair Gilmore presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Marie Gilmore Boardmember Lena Tam Boardmember Doug deHaan Boardmember Beverly Johnson Vice Chair Rob Bonta 2. CONSENT CALENDAR (*11-001) Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 1, 2010. (*11-002) Approve a Waiver of License Fee for Michaan's Auctions for Use of Portions of Building 20. Member deHaan moved for approval of Item 2-A of the Consent Calendar. Member Tam seconded the motion, which carried by voice vote - 4, Abstentions - 1 (Bonta). Member deHaan moved for approval of Item 2-B of the Consent Calendar. Member Tam 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 None. 4. ORAL REPORTS (11-003) Oral report from Member deHaan, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of December 2, 2010 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member deHaan did not attend the December 2, 2010 RAB meeting and has no report. Member deHaan will attend the next RAB meeting on January 6, 2011 and will provide a report at the February ARRA meeting. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services will also attend the January 6th RAB meeting. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS (11-004) Mayor Gilmore asked the Deputy City Manager - Development Services to provide an update on the Lawrence Berkeley Lab (LBL) RFQ for a 2M square foot campus, with Alameda Point in consideration. The RFQ was sent out on January 3 and is due March 4th. Staff and a | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-01-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-01-05.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-01-05 | 2 | 2 consultant team are working together to respond to the RFQ. Placeholders have been put on all Council/ARRA agendas before the March due date in case policy direction is needed. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services summarized the RFQ, stating that the initial phase is for 500,000 sq. ft. of space. Staff is working closely with the Navy (property owners) on policy issues that may need to be discussed with the Board. The short list will be in April. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services will discuss the developer solicitation process on the 18th in response to the RFQ, and before the short list. Other bases have been jump-started by large institutional user like LBL, it is a great catalyst and opportunity to get Alameda Point started. Member Johnson asked about the location and competitors. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded that the location was very specific: 20 - 25 minutes from blackberry gate; and that the biggest competitor is LBL's own property at Richmond Gild Station, 90 acres along the waterfront. The cities of Berkeley and Emeryville are also included. Member deHaan inquired if LBL is looking for land site or adaptive reuse. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that since LBL needs state of the art R&D facilities, they want to find new construction. In initial conversations, the area that stands out is the area south of Atlantic. Construction would start in July 2013 in areas without cleanup issues. Chair Gilmore requested the RFQ be posted on the City's website so that the Board can access it and be prepared to get questions answered. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that the Golden Gate Yacht Club and Oracle Racing announced that the America's Cup #34 will be held in San Francisco in 2013. In anticipation of the event, staff sent event organizers a letter reemphasizing the city's support for the San Francisco bid, and where Alameda can be helpful, i.e., host supportive services on Alameda Point for the America's Cup - ha… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-01-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-01-05.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-01-05 | 3 | 3 7. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY (11-005) Referral from Chair Gilmore to change the order of the ARRA meetings. Member Johnson moved to approve the referral to change the order of the ARRA meetings. Member Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote 5. 8. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY (11-006) Member Tam commented that with the emerging opportunities, the ARRA should focus on reshaping its Going Forward process and be more "shovel ready"- more prepared with property, parcels, and infrastructure to maximize its competitiveness at Alameda Point. Chair Gilmore requested a timeline of the Going Forward process so that the Board and the public can makes comments and any changes necessary. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that an update will be presented at the 2/2 ARRA meeting, and the ARRA predevelopment budget would be presented at the 2/15 mid year budget adjustment. Member deHaan asked if staff has interfaced with the new owners of Catellus, TPG Capital LP. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services replied that the Economic Development Director and City Manager were getting up to speed with the new partner. A designated project manager is working with staff. TPG Capital will likely need to come to the Council/CIC because they are changing the development entity in agreement with the CIC. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services discussed that there will be a staff report, update, and presentation from the new partner in the next couple of months. Member deHaan inquired about the interview timeline for the Alameda Point RFQ consultants. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that there were two days of interviews with four consultants: real estate economics, master planning, sustainable design and green infrastructure consultants, and transportation consultants. Contracts will be negotiated in January and will be brought back as part of the mid year budget adjustment to demonstrate to the ARRA how the project will be paid for. There… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-01-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-02-02 | 1 | 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, t… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-02-02 | 2 | 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 "Goi… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-02-02 | 3 | Chair Gilmore inquired where the developer's economic incentive would 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 could 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 bas… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf,4 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-02-02 | 4 | 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 short listed. 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 would 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 unanim… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf,5 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-02-02 | 5 | 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 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-03-02 | 1 | 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, t… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-03-02 | 2 | 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 "Goi… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-03-02 | 3 | Chair Gilmore inquired where the developer's economic incentive would 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 could 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 bas… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf,4 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-03-02 | 4 | 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 short listed. 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 would 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 unanim… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf,5 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-03-02 | 5 | 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 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-04-06 | 1 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, April 6, 2011 The meeting convened at 7:47 p.m. with Chair Gilmore presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Board Members Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Chair Gilmore - 5. Absent: None. 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR (*11-032) Approve the Minutes of the Regular ARRA Meeting of March 2, 2011, Minutes of the Special Joint City Council/ARRA/Community Improvement Meetings held on March 15, 2011. (*11-033) Approve a Waiver of License Fees for Pacific Skyline Council and BSA Sea Scouts - Ancient Mariner Regatta. (*11-034) Approve the Proposed Sale of Two Grove Cranes to NRC Environmental Services. (*11-035) Authorize the ARRA Port Manager, NRC Environmental Services, to Replace the Pier 2 Fendering System in an Amount Not to Exceed $260,000. (*11-036) Authorize PM Realty Group to Enter into a Contract with Scott Electric for Pier 3 Electrical Upgrades at Alameda Point for a Contract Not to Exceed $238,266 Using Remaining ARRA Bond Funds. Member Tam moved for approval of the Consent Calendar. Member Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] Chair Gilmore moved Item 7-A to be the first item discussed under the Regular Agenda Items. 4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (11-037) Alameda Point Commercial Market Assessment. The Deputy City Manager gave a presentation focusing on Alameda and East Bay market conditions and the implications for Alameda Point and its redevelopment, strictly to provide a market overview and not a development strategy, to determine the state of the market as it exists today. | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-04-06 | 2 | John McManus, senior director of Cushman & Wakefield was available to answer questions. Chair Gilmore expressed concern that implementing a long term lease strategy that is niche- focused will take as long as implementing a development plan. Mr. McManus replied that a reuse strategy is different than a build-to-suit strategy, stating that it is important that it is clearly defined what is available. Advised a strategy to show potential office buildings with a potential floor plan and be able to explain to potential tenants that all risks have been removed and understand what can be delivered. Chair Gilmore clarified that in order to effectively market Alameda Point, money needs to be spent upfront to determine concept buildings or concept plans apart from what the master plan ends up being. Mr. McManus agreed with Chair Gilmore, stating that there needs to be a clear definition, and if it is left to the potential tenants to figure out, in an environment where there is so much vacancy, chances are that Alameda Point will not get their attention unless it's a very unique use with a big footprint. Member Tam inquired about the element of competition in the marketplace, asking what kind of recommended capital outlay is needed for Alameda Point to have a competitive edge. Mr. McManus stated that the good competitive news is that redevelopment and enterprise zones are not going to be competitors for Alameda Point. Joe Ernst, SRM associates, added that there is so much obsolescence of space - there is no longer a need for more plain office space -- and it is a function of understanding the market for spaces and uses that cannot be developed elsewhere, and aligning with the right team to develop it. Vice Chair Bonta inquired if there are market segments performing differently than the market trends. Mr. Ernst replied that those segments with superior performance include life sciences, such as the LBNL opportunity, light industrial, and R&D flex space. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that the next st… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-04-06 | 3 | Member Tam concurred with Chair Gilmore and added that economic underpinnings are critical at Alameda Point. Member Tam and Chair Gilmore expressed their appreciation to staff and the community for all their time and effort in the Community Planning Process. 5. ORAL REPORTS (11-039) Oral Report from Member deHaan, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Representative - Highlights of March 3, 2011 RAB Meeting. Member deHaan reported that the RAB discussed the San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring program, a program that monitors 22 water sites in bay, and 47 sediment sites. The RAB would like the program to take on one area of Alameda Point to monitor. The OU2A site, adjacent to Encinal High School, was also discussed. Surface remediation was done, and final remediation will be completed. Tomorrow's meeting (3/4) will include an update on the Seaplane Lagoon. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS (11-040) Update on Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Second Campus Request for Qualifications. The Deputy City Manager-Development Services gave a presentation on the LBNL Campus opportunity. Representatives from the development teams introduced themselves to the Council: Joe Ernst, SRM; Mary Pampuch, Lankford & Associates, Inc. Speakers: Robert Todd Member Tam inquired whether any of the 21 applicants that had responded have the same type of potential development partner in RFQ process, in particular inquired if Alameda's partners are unique to Alameda. The Deputy City Manager-Development Services responded that to her knowledge, the other sites are already owned by developers or have already teamed with private property owners; the other applicants did not go through an RFQ process for a developer like Alameda, and none of the other teams are teamed with the other sites. Vice Chair Bonta inquired when the announcement of the short list will be made and how short is the short list. The Deputy City Manager-Development Services replied that the call can come throug… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf,4 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-04-06 | 4 | 8. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 11:16 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-06-01 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, June 1, 2011 The meeting convened at 7:04 p.m. with Vice Chair Bonta presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Vice Chair Bonta, Members deHaan, Johnson, and Tam and Chair -4. (Note: Member Johnson arrived at 7:07 p.m.) Absent: Mayor Gilmore - 1 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR (*11-048) Approve the Minutes of the Regular ARRA Meeting of April 6, 2011 and the Special ARRA Meeting of May 17, 2011. (*11-049) Approve a No-Cost, Two-Year Lease Agreement with Friends of Alameda Theater, Inc. for a Portion of Building 91 at Alameda Point. (*11-050) Transmittal of May 18, 2011 Webinar Presentation. Vice Chair Bonta pulled item 3-B (Building 91) for clarification. Vice Chair Bonta inquired why the rent for Building 19 is being waived, instead of having a paying tenant. Nanette Mocanu, Economic Development Division Manager, explained that Building 91 is being split between two tenants, one on a month-to-month term. The entire space is currently being marketed, and the lease has a 90-day termination clause. The building would be vacant otherwise. Member Tam moved for approval of the balance of the Consent Calendar. Member deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 3. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] Member Tam moved for approval of Item 3-B. Member deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 3. 4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 5. ORAL REPORTS (11-051) Oral Report from Member deHaan, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Representative - Highlights of April 7 and May 5, 2011 RAB Meetings. | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-06-01 | 2 | Member deHaan reported that the RAB is starting to look at the fuel distribution system underneath the runway, adjacent to the lagoon. He explained that since it is fuel, the clean up might be problematic, but easier to remediate than heavy metals and PCBs as in other sites. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS (11-052) Alameda Point Update The Deputy City Manager - Development Services gave a short update. Alameda Point was among six other sites LBNL short-listed for its second campus. Staff is working with the development team daily to prepare high quality responses to upcoming submittals to LBNL. The final selection process will be in November. A two-hour developer interview was held on May 31st, which included a 30-minute presentation, by the development team. The presentation included case studies of projects they worked on, project delivery, and public outreach plans. Staff plans to have other informal meetings with the development team. A community meeting is scheduled for July 13th from 7-9:30 p.m. Staff is looking at various suitable venues, in terms of capacity and access. There will be an extensive outreach plan, including revamping and developing a separate website focused on LBNL, and a Facebook page which will be managed by a marketing company - all in an effort to access different populations that have not been accessed before. Staff and the development team will be making presentations to different organizations throughout the city. Staff will provide a packet of the community outreach materials to the City Council at its June 21st meeting. Regarding the larger master planning efforts of Alameda Point, staff held its first webinar on May 18, 2011 to impart the financial basics on how the pro forma works more generically, and details on infrastructure costs related to the existing entitlement, which is the general plan. A Transportation workshop was held on May 26, 2011. There was a presentation that detailed case studies of how other commun… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-06-01 | 3 | more improvements needed. Staff is also working with Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) on the calculations. AMP will be able to serve the first phase without a lot of improvements. Vice Chair Bonta inquired what the average number of participants was for the community engagement events and how the information is being disseminated. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that the Transportation Workshop was not well attended, as there was a League of Women Voters event on the same night. There were fewer than 20 people at the Transportation Workshop, and approximately 50 people attended the webinar (35 people attending online with approximately 10-15 present in person). The recording of webinar is available online, and the pdf of presentations will also be posted online. Vice Chair Bonta inquired if the Sustainability workshops will be recorded, stating that the community would take the opportunity to participate and view if it were available online, and that there is value to holding the events in Chambers so that they can be broadcast and recorded. Member deHaan agreed, stating that the community watches meetings on the City's channel 15, and although the audience is small in chambers, there are a lot of home viewers and may reach more people. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that with the Sustainability Workshop in particular, the element of interaction from community is needed. Vice Chair Bonta expressed his appreciation for staff's efforts regarding the July 13th event and inquired about other smaller events for community outreach. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that the team has a calendar of events scheduled. They have met with the Chamber of Commerce, and plan to attend and present at several joint mixers with the WABA, PSBA, Rotary, League of Women, Business Association newsletters, Concerts at the Cove etc. Member Johnson suggested giving a presentation to school board. Member Tam suggested including the Peralta Community College District Board… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf,4 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-06-01 | 4 | Member deHaan inquired how the legislators discussed slicing out base conversion. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services discussed a bill in circulation that carves out military bases, a new bill from the League of Cities, and the CAL Redevelopment Agency and Association of Defense Communities. Senator Wiggins introduced a bill on behalf of communities with Bases, which staff will be monitoring. The Acting City Attorney reminded the Board that this discussion couldn't continue, as it is not on the agenda. It can be agendized on a future meeting if they want to discuss it further. Member Tam concluded her report. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Vice Chair Bonta adjourned the meeting at 7:42 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-09-07.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-09-07 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, September 7, 2011 The meeting convened at 7:12 p.m. with Chair Gilmore presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Board Members Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Chair Gilmore - 5. Absent: None. 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR (*11-063) Approve the Minutes of the Special ARRA Meetings of July 13, 2011 and July 19, 2011. Member Tam moved for approval of the Consent Calendar. Member deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] 4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 5. ORAL REPORTS (11-064) Oral Report from Member deHaan, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Representative - Highlights of August 4, 2011 RAB Meetings. Member deHaan stated that Site OU-2C, a major contamination area, was discussed. The site has been worked on in many phases. The RAB has set an alternative for Site D-6 which is $16M, stating that the Navy wants to go with the $5.8M. The issue is still being discussed and under evaluation. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS (11-065) Provide Update on Status of Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Process and Redevelopment of Alameda Point. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated that LBNL members visited the site and were given a guided tour and presentation. LBNL and consultants are currently reviewing site submittals. In Sept/Oct staff will compile one final response. LBNL stated that they will review final submittals and make a recommendation to the UC Regents in Regular Meeting ARRA September 7, 2011 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-09-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-09-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-09-07 | 2 | November. Regarding the larger redevelopment of Alameda Point, there are ongoing negotiations with the Navy re: conveyance of property, continuing conversation with State Lands re: Tidelands Trust Exchange. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point will come back to the ARRA with updates in the next couple of months. Member deHaan asked to confirm the LBNL timeline. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point explained that the UC Regents meets every two months, if the timeline were to slip, or if they were not ready to make a selection in November, the issue will slip to the next meeting in January. The City Manager informed the Board that staff has informally heard that the selection may indeed slip to January, but reassured the Board that staff is completely ready and has not asked for any extension as others have. Alameda is on time, on budget, and will be ready for a November meeting if it happens. Staff is urging a prompt decision. 8. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member deHaan discussed that the Associated Community Action Plan (ACAP) will have their last meeting next week. He recommends that community members view their audit, which was released to the public. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:19 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Regular Meeting ARRA September 7, 2011 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-09-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-10-05.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-10-05 | 1 | 80 UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, Ocotber 5, 2011 The meeting convened at 7:07 p.m. with Chair Gilmore presiding. Chair Gilmore requested that the Pledge of Allegiance be added to the ARRA agenda. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Board Members Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Chair Gilmore - 5. Absent: None. 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR (*11-069) Approve the Minutes of the Special and Regular ARRA Meetings of September 7, 2011. Member deHaan moved for approval of the Consent Calendar. Member Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] 4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (11-070) Approve Term Sheet between United States Navy and the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority for No-Cost Conveyance of Alameda Point. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point summarized the Term Sheet. Pursue no-cost conveyance for LBNL, Navy Comprehensive conveyance strategy for entire base - discussed the major terms. Next steps to negotiate amendment to existing economic development conveyance memorandum of agreement bring back to ARRA for approval. The Acting City Attorney asked the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point to explain the Environmental Review of the term sheet. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point explained that Alameda Point does not constitute a project under CEQA, therefore the Board is able to approve the term sheet without conducting additional environmental review. Speaker: Diane Lichtenstein, HOMES, congratulated staff on a job well done after 14 years. Ms. Lichtenstein discussed hope for the housing plan to move ahead, and hopefully with LBNL at the Point. Regarding the enforcement provision of the market rate residential, Chair Gilmore requested confirmation that the City will not have to pay the $50,000 fee per unit to the Navy. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded in t… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-10-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-10-05.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-10-05 | 2 | 81 Member Tam discussed the City's other obligation to provide work-force and affordable housing. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point informed the Board that since staff has been receiving a lot of inquiries regarding remediation, there will be a presentation from the Environmental Consultant, Peter Russell, at the November ARRA meeting. Chair Gilmore stated that, in addition to the no-cost conveyance, the City gets control over the land. This is a valuable opportunity to develop more long term leases because we can provide tenants with certainty. Member deHaan recognized and thanked the members of the BRAG and other numerous community organizations over the past 15 years. Chair Gilmore joined Member deHaan in recognizing the community organizations that brought us to this point. Member Bonta moved to approve the Term Sheet. Member Tam seconded the motion. On the call for the question, the motion carried by a roll call vote: Member deHaan - Aye, Member Johnson - Aye, Member Tam - Aye, Vice Chair Bonta - Aye, Chair Gilmore - Aye. Ayes: 5. Noes: 0. Abstentions: 0 5. ORAL REPORTS (11-071) Oral Report from Member deHaan, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Representative - Highlights of September 1, 2011 RAB Meetings. Member deHaan introduced Richard Banger, RAB member, who was present in the in audience. Mr. Banger compiled a great amount of information on the history and activity regarding the remediation of Alameda Point on his website: www.alamedapointenvironmentalreport.com The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point added that, with Mr. Banger's help, key information about remediation will be included on the City's website. Staff is also working with the Environmental Consultant, Peter Russell, to provide a less technical, shorter executive summary, but have technical minutes still available. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) Carol Gottstein, Alameda citizen, spoke about the base cleanup and informed the public about the repository at City Hall West which includes a large amount of inform… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-10-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-10-05.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-10-05 | 3 | 82 None. 9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Regular Meeting ARRA September 7, 2011 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-10-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-11-02 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, November 2, 2011 The meeting convened at 7:32 p.m. with Chair Gilmore presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Board Members Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Chair Gilmore - 5. Absent: None. 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR (*11-073) Approve the Minutes of the Special Meetings of September 20, 2011 and the Special and Regular Meetings of October 5, 2011. (*11-074) Approve a 47-Year Legally Binding Agreement with Alameda Point Collaborative for Buildings 802, 803, 806, 809, 810, 811 and 812 (30 Units of Housing) and Authorize the Executive Director to Execute the Agreement and any Related Documents. Chair Gilmore pulled Item 3-A (minutes) to make a correction. Member Tam moved for approval of the balance of the Consent Calendar. Vice Chair Bonta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Member Tam moved for approval of Item 3-A with the corrections. Vice Chair Bonta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (Note: Chair Gilmore and Member Johnson abstained from approving the Minutes of Sept. 20, as they were not present at that meeting). [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] 4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (11-075) Presentation on Status Report of Environmental Conditions of the Alameda Point Site. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point introduced the Environmental Consultant of the Alameda Point Project, Peter Russell, Russell Resources. Dr. Russell provided a powerpoint presentation on the status of the remediation and environmental issues of Alameda Point. Dr. Russell's remediation experience includes numerous sites: Fort Ord, Tustin Air Station, Benicia Arsenal, Mission Bay clean up, and the Southern and Union Pacific rail yards in Sacramento. Member deHaan commended Dr. Russell and the RAB for all their efforts in the environmental program of Alameda Point. Speakers: Dale Smith, Community Cha… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-11-02 | 2 | Chair Gilmore thanked Dr. Russell and members of the RAB for their technical expertise and diligence over the decade and more. 5. ORAL REPORTS (11-076) Oral Report from Member deHaan, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Representative - Highlights of October 6, 2011 RAB Meetings. Member deHaan echoed the statements from Dr. Russell's presentation and reminded the public that the remediation is ongoing, and that a vast majority of property will be given to the ARRA with certain restrictions. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS None. 8. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 8:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Regular Meeting ARRA November 2, 2011 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-11-02 | 3 | Response to Comments on Status Update for the ARRA Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting - November 2, 2011 Time Comment Marker Response Comments by Dale Smith, Alameda Point Restoration Advisory Board Community Co-Chair 33:49 The residential standards are for groundwater only, and they At Alameda Point, cleanup to residential standards means are not for soil. So the soil has high levels of lead, mercury, that the health risk and health hazard from both soil and cadmium, vanadium, and other toxic metals in the soil that is groundwater (combined) are health-protective for single- not being addressed. family residential land use; which is the most stringent land- use standard. This principle applies to both the CERCLA (Full Comment: The talk of residential standards, when I talk and Petroleum Programs. Accordingly, the concentrations of to community members, they seem to get confused because toxic metals in soil are explicitly considered by the Navy the residential standards are for groundwater only, and they and the environmental regulatory agencies in deciding are not for soil. So the soil has high levels of lead, mercury, whether soil remediation is needed to allow residential land cadmium, vanadium, and other toxic metals in the soil, and use and, if so, the type and extent of that remediation. that is not being addressed as far as we can tell.) 34:14 Slide 13 represents the CERCLA sites only. There are Contamination in soil and groundwater at Alameda Point is petroleum sites that move in and out of CERCLA. One addressed by either the CERCLA or Petroleum Program, month they'l be in, and the next month they'l be out. For whichever appears to be most appropriate. For example, a example, the plume under Kollmann Circle originally was in site with petroleum contamination is typically managed the petroleum site, got put in the CERCLA site. under the Petroleum Program, unless non-petroleum contamination also is present. Occasionally, management of (Full Comment: The graphs in the document, according to a … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf,4 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-11-02 | 4 | Response to Comments on Status Update for the ARRA Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting - November 2, 2011 Time Comment Marker Response remediation. However, the cleanup is going on for much contamination. The remediation of many Alameda Point longer than that. For example, the RAB had a presentation groundwater contamination sites follows two principal on one site (groundwater at OU-2B), where the cleanup was steps. The first is an initial phase, during which the going to take 22 to 35 years, and there'll be severe contamination, especially the source area, is treated, for restrictions on the use of that site. example by injection of chemicals or by heating. The second phase typically consists of periodic groundwater (Full Comment: Cleanup as defined in the presentation, as I sampling to monitor progress of natural processes in further read it or I hear it, means the active remediation done by the reducing contamination concentrations. The first phase often military, meaning trucks and things are out there. Scoops are takes three years or less. The second phase lasts until clean- digging up dirt. Otherwise the cleanup is going on for much up goals are reached. The commenter is correct in that the longer than that. We had a presentation on one site two second phase can last for several decades, as in the example months ago where the cleanup was going to take 22 to 35 of Operable Unit 2B (OU-2B). years, and there'll be severe restrictions on the use of that site. So bear that in mind.) During the second phase, land-use restrictions may be applied to protect monitoring wells and to prevent use of the groundwater. Depending on the type of groundwater contamination, land-use restrictions may also require that building designs include vapor barriers, special ventilation, etc. to safeguard public health. Land-use restrictions during the second phase typically do not preclude most uses of the site. Thus, "severe restrictions" on land use typically apply only to the first few years of cleanup. 35:44 Quite a … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf,5 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-11-02 | 5 | Response to Comments on Status Update for the ARRA Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting - November 2, 2011 Time Comment Marker Response technologies, which eventually don't work, and cost a lot of Alameda Point. In such cases, a pilot test (a form of money. So, but they, the Navy then is able to make experiment) typically is conducted to evaluate how well the presentations to scientific boards saying that they tried this technology would work. A pilot test of in-situ thermal technology and it did not work.) treatment to treat groundwater was tried at OU-2C and found to be very cost-effective. Alternatively, a pilot test of nano-zerovalent-iron injection was tried at OU-2B and found not to be effective. In both cases, the Navy and the environmental regulatory agencies unanimously agreed the pilot testing (experimenting) was a prudent way to evaluate the promising technology. The principal instance where experimentation with technologies has occurred at Alameda Point is regarding groundwater in another area of OU-2B. In this case, a university and an EPA national laboratory approached the Navy for permission to conduct an experiment on groundwater contamination. The experiment was primarily funded externally, and the information obtained by the project has improved clean-up decision making for OU-2B groundwater. 36:16 An "active cleanup" site on Slide 13 means a site for which The "Active Cleanup" column in the graph on Slide 13 the regulators have signed off on site characterization and includes sites which have completed their RODs and design remedial investigation, and is to move on to Proposed Plans, or implementation of the active remediation is in progress. RODs, and Work Plans. So a lot of sites in that category Sites that are in the Proposed Plan or draft ROD stages are don't have those in place yet, but they're put in the active categorized on Slide 13 as "Under Investigation" CERCLA cleanup column anyway. requires that remedial activities in the field begin within fifteen months of completing… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf,6 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-11-02 | 6 | Response to Comments on Status Update for the ARRA Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting - November 2, 2011 Time Comment Marker Response there are Proposed Plans, RODs, and Work Plans. So a lot of it doesn't have those in place yet, but they're put in the active cleanup column.) 36:46 The presentation (Slide 15) indicated portions of the The IR Site boundaries on Slide 15 accurately reflect the Northwest Territories are white (outside of IR Sites). But BCT's current understanding of the extent of radium in soil most of these areas have recently been found to have radium at Northwest Territories. Within the last few years, the contamination in soil. There is no plan for remediation of boundaries of the site in the area the comment references this contamination. (IR Site 32) were expanded to account for low-level radium contamination in soil extending over a greater area than was (Full Comment: The map showed the Northwest Territories originally recognized. The Navy is currently completing an to be white, but they have recently been found to be covered extensive radiological survey of soil in this area. The with radium to a depth of a half foot to a foot and a half, as I preliminary results from this investigation indicate that the recall, in most of it. And there has been no plan as to how extent of radium in soil does not extend beyond the current that's going to be remediated, as far as we know.) IR Site boundaries (into the white areas shown on Slide 15). 37:09 Natural attenuation hasn't occurred for 60 years. Why expect Natural attenuation consists of a variety of natural processes it to occur in the next five or ten years? that reduce contaminant concentrations over time, usually relatively slowly: biochemical degradation, dispersion, (Full Comment: And one of, George Humphries, who is my volatilization, etc. These are commonly effective in cohort in this battle, likes to point out that natural attenuation reducing contaminant concentrations to remedial goals after hasn't occurred for 60 years. Wh… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf,7 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-11-02 | 7 | Response to Comments on Status Update for the ARRA Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting - November 2, 2011 Time Comment Marker Response First, underground bacteria and other microbes degrade many contaminants, often an important component of natural attenuation. However, initial site conditions may include contaminant levels that are so high that they are toxic to the very microorganisms that, with more dilute concentrations, would readily consume the contamination as food. Thus, following an initial phase of active cleanup of the higher concentration zones, natural attenuation can proceed more effectively. Second, with initial high contaminant concentrations, the effect of natural attenuation often is not discernible. This is because of the inherent variability of sampling and analysis. A simple example illustrates this point. With an initial contaminant concentration of 10,000 micrograms per liter (ug/L) and an inherent sampling variability of plus or minus ten percent, duplicate sampling and analysis of the same groundwater could yield analytical results anywhere between 9,000 ug/L and 11,000 ug/L. Say for discussion purposes, that natural attenuation reduces the contaminant concentration by 10 ug/L each year. This rate of natural attenuation would be difficult to detect in a reasonable period of time by sampling. On the other hand, after an initial phase of active remediation that reduces contaminant levels, to say 300 ug/L, then analysis of duplicate samples would yield results between 330 ug/L and 270 ug/L (+/- 10%). Now, natural attenuation at a rate of 10 ug/L would be both meaningful and discernible by sampling and analysis. 37:25 Planting trees will not be allowed. Gardening and fruit Restrictions on digging are used sparingly at Alameda Page 5 of 5 November 7, 2011 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf,8 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-11-02 | 8 | Response to Comments on Status Update for the ARRA Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting - November 2, 2011 Time Comment Marker Response growing will be allowed, but digging a hole in the soil will Point: in only three instances. not. First, the Marsh Crust Ordinance restricts digging below the (Full Comment: And then to answer, I think, your question Threshold Depth, unless a permit is obtained first. about planting trees: no, you will not be able to plant trees. You'll be able to plant You'l be able to have a garden, Second, soil cleanup at North Housing (IR Site 25) was and you' 'll be able to grow fruit, but you will not be able to conducted in landscaped areas, but not under buildings or dig a hole in the soil.) pavement. Accordingly, major site work is restricted without first obtaining approval from the BCT. Additionally, digging deeper than four feet below ground surface at North Housing is prohibited without approval from the BCT. These restrictions may affect tree planting. In any case, BCT approval would be granted provided digging were conducted while following a site management plan that appropriately manages potential encounters with contaminated soil. Third, at Todd Shipyards (IR Site 28), a non-residential area, digging deeper than two feet below ground surface is restricted without first obtaining approval from the BCT. Page 6 of 6 November 7, 2011 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-12-07.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-12-07 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, December 7, 2011 The meeting convened at 7:21 p.m. with Chair Gilmore presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Board Members Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Chair Gilmore - 5. Absent: None. 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR (*11-081) Approve the Minutes of the Special and Regular Meetings of November 2, 2011. 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.] 4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (11-082) Presentation on Status of Disposition and Development Strategy for Alameda Point. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point gave a power point presentation summarizing the next steps for moving forward with the no cost reconveyance and development strategy for Alameda Point. Staff is providing the update to the Board before moving into the next phase of making recommendations. The summary focused on entitlement, transportation infrastructure, solicitation and transaction. Speakers: Carol Gottstein discussed maximizing the land value of Alameda Point, specifically Building 94, Chapel. Chair Gilmore stated accountability issues are a downside to Phased Development. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point explained the key is to have really good design up front, and guiding documents that dictate how larger engineering and structure will work globally, so that the design is solid. There is concern about different developers doing backbone infrastructure for small pieces. Having a uniform developer for larger, 100- acre parcels, would narrow accountability issues with fewer people. Member Tam discussed concerns about funding of predevelopment costs, backbone infrastructure, and that the days of tax increment bond funding may not be available because of the elimination of redevelopment. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Poi… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-12-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-12-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-12-07 | 2 | With reasonable costs, a developer can provide ideas to test assumptions. ARRA has a fund balance, with a certain amount spent on planning. Options will be explored to find ways to leverage for upfront costs. Staff is exploring other sources of low cost capital with contingencies built into the costs, with the same analysis used for other options. Vice Chair Bonta inquired about the developer role as an advisor to ARRA. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point explained that ARRA would be the property owner and maintain control over entitlement process. With the understanding that ARRA is not a developer, put out an RFQ for a development advisor, with a recommendation that the advisor actually be a developer with experience working on large-scale projects, not just a consultant. In this advisor role, the developer would actually work for the ARRA, are paid a monthly fee, but their contract can be terminated by the ARRA. The advantage from a transaction standpoint is that it would be a simple contract; the advisor has no actual rights to development or land. The concept is that the ARRA maintain control, work in a partnership, but ARRA would be the leader. Vice Chair Bonta inquired if there are any examples of that type of partnership. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated that Hamilton AFB is a similar example. Hamilton hired a team of advisors, which included attorneys and economic consultants who planned and entitled all of Hamilton. They did an RFQ with developers and negotiated purchase and sale, but had entitlements all upfront. Member Johnson expressed concern about handling the most difficult parcels or areas that will take longer to clean up. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point discussed starting up efforts and creating value will make the property more valuable. Less money is taken out of the project by a master developer, which leaves more money in the project for development itself. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point informed the Board that staff would be coming back to… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-12-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-12-07.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-12-07 | 3 | 9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member deHaan gave a brief report on the December 1 RAB meeting. The main issue was the RAB's plan for ongoing years, specifically the schedule and frequency of meetings. The Navy proposed to meet on a quarterly basis to cut back on operations costs. Various options are still being explored, including teleconferencing capabilities. The RAB elected Dale Smith as Co-chair and Carol Gottstein as Vice Co-chair. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 8:13 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Regular Meeting ARRA November 2, 2011 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-12-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf,1 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2012-01-04 | 1 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, January 4, 2012 The meeting convened at 7:10 p.m. with Chair Gilmore presiding. 1. ROLL CALL Present: Board Members Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Chair Gilmore - 5. Absent: None. 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) (12-001) Cara Kuhlman, Alameda, discussed starting dialogue with the ARRA to open a community sailing center program at Alameda Point. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR (*12-002) Approve the Minutes of the Special and Regular Meetings of December 7, 2011. (*12-003) Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Amendment to an Agreement with Russell Resources for Environmental Consulting Services for Alameda Point Extending the Term for 12 Months and Adding $165,000 to the Budget. (*12-004) Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Amendment to an Agreement with Carlson, Barbee & Gibson for Civil Engineering and Surveying Consulting Services for Alameda Point Extending the Term for 24 Months and Adding $74,400 to the Budget. Member Tam moved for approval of the Consent Calendar. Member deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] 4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (12-005) Award Contract in the Amount of $225,000 to Keyser Marston Associates to Prepare an Economic Development Strategy for Alameda Point. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point discussed the Office of Economic Adjustment $225,000 award to the ARRA to conduct economic development strategy. Member Johnson expressed concern that any economic strategy or plan may be irrelevant because of the elimination of the redevelopment agencies. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point explained that it is even more important to have a strategy in place and be prepared to attract industrial and commercial users that can help bring in the infrastructure. Member Tam inquired if there will be an increased dependency on private funds because of the… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2012-01-04 | 2 | Member deHaan expressed concern about how to address the community process. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point explained that there was feedback from the community that there is a bit of fatigue on community meetings. The focus now is to engage the tenants. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point agreed with Member deHaan that the Economic Development Commission and other formal bodies should be engaged. Vice Chair Bonta moved for approval of the staff recommendation. Member Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (12-006) Approve Amendment No. 2 to the Memorandum of Agreement between the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and the United States Navy for the Economic Development Conveyance of Portions of the Former Naval Air Station Alameda. Chair Gilmore stated that although the No-Cost Economic Development Conveyance is overshadowed by the redevelopment news, it is still amazing and exciting news. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point agreed and provided a summary of events. The ARRA approved a term sheet with the Navy on October 5, 2011. The term sheet contemplated a no-cost conveyance of Alameda Point from the Navy to the ARRA consistent with the 1996 Reuse Plan. The Term Sheet became the final amendment to the existing 2000 Memorandum of Agreement with the Navy. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point discussed the changes, including the conveyance schedule, the enforcement mechanism, use of proceeds, and the addition of submerged lands. The conveyance schedule contemplates a vast majority of the property coming to the ARRA by the end of 2012. Chair Gilmore thanked staff for working tirelessly and effortlessly over the years to make the No- Cost Economic Development Conveyance happen. Proponent: Helen Sause, Housing Opportunities Make Economic Sense (HOMES). Member Tam moved for approval of the staff recommendation. Member Johnson seconded the motion. Chair Gilmore requested a roll-call vote be conducted: Vice Chair Bonta - aye, Member deHaan - aye… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2012-01-04 | 3 | 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS The Executive Director re-emphasized the news of the ARRA receiving portions of Alameda Point at a No-Cost Conveyance. 8. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:49 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Regular Meeting ARRA January 4, 2012 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf,4 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2012-01-04 | 4 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY- -JANUARY 4, 2012--6:00 P.M. Mayor Gilmore convened the meeting at 6:05 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Mayor Gilmore - 5. Absent: None. The meeting was adjourned to closed session to consider: (12-015) Conference with Labor Negotiators (54957.6); Agency Negotiators: Human Resources Director and Masa Shiohira; Employee Organizations: Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA), Alameda City Employees Association (ACEA), International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), and Police Officers Non-Sworn (PANS). Following the closed session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Gilmore announced that the labor negotiators provided the status of negotiations with four bargaining units: IBEW, ACEA, PANs, and MCEA. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council January 4, 2012 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf,5 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2012-01-04 | 5 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC) MEETING WEDNESDAY- -JANUARY 4, 2012- -7:02 P.M. Mayor/Chair Gilmore convened the meeting at 7:51 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers/Commissioners Allen, Bonta, deHaan, Johnson, Tam and Mayor/Chair Gilmore - 6. Absent: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. AGENDA ITEM (12-017 CC) Resolution No. 14634, "(1) Determining It Will Serve as a Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda ("CIC"); (2) Electing Not to Retain the Housing Assets and Functions Previously Performed by the CIC; (3) Authorizing Assumption by the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda ("Housing Authority") of the Rights, Powers, Assets, Liabilities, Duties, and Obligations Associated with the Housing Activities of the CIC; and (4) Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into an Agreement with the Housing Authority to Fund Costs Associated with the Transferred Housing Activities." Adopted; and (12-001 A HABOC) Resolution No. 836, "(1) Agreeing to Assume the Rights, Powers, Assets, Liabilities, Duties, and Obligations Associated with the Housing Activities of the Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda; and (2) Authorizing the Executive Director to Enter Into an Agreement with the City of Alameda to Fund Costs Associated with the Transferred Housing Activities." Adopted. The Housing Development and Programs Manager gave a brief presentation. Mayor/Chair Gilmore stated redevelopment agencies would cease to exist on February 1st, but agreements for 400 redevelopment agencies would not suddenly come into existence on February 2nd The Housing Development and Programs Manager stated agreements would exist because of each agency's enforceable obligation schedule. In response to Mayor/Chair Gilmore's inquiry, the Housing Development and Programs Manager stated the County Auditor-Controller would need to audit each agency's enforceable obligation schedule by July 1st. Councilmember/Commissioner Tam inquired wheth… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf,6 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2012-01-04 | 6 | automatically established by ABX1 26, to which the Housing Development and Programs Manager responded in the affirmative. Mayor/Chair Gilmore stated on February 1st, responsible agencies would start expending funds in the normal course of business; hopefully, reimbursement would be set in place on July 1st. The Housing Development and Programs Manager stated an administrative budget needs to be presented for each successor agency by February; the legislation has some inconsistencies; last year, an obligation schedule was done which predicted payment obligations pursuant to enforceable obligations; the next one would be due March 1st, which would cover January 1st to June 30th; schedules would need to be approved by the Oversight Board that would review work of the successor agency; the Oversight Board would not come into existence until May 1st; suggested amending Section 7 to read: "This resolution shall take effect and be enforced as of the deadline for adoption of this resolution established pursuant to State law as may be amended from time to time". Councilmember/Commissioner Tam's inquired whether the City could recover money, to which the City Manager/Executive Director responded the money has not been submitted yet. Mayor/Chair Gilmore stated the State was not hitting budget targets before the ruling; it appeared that automatic cuts would go into effect; the State will not receive $1.7 billion due to legislation being declared unconstitutional. The City Manager/Executive Director stated that the State has centralized what the payments would be but has created chaos throughout the system. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Bonta stated things are moving very quickly; that he wants to ensure that the City does not do something it will regret later; inquired what precautions would be taken if another legislative remedy caused the City's successor agency role to not be advantageous, to which the City Manager/Executive Director responded the resolutions could always be amended. In response to Vice Mayor/Commissioner Bonta… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE "pages" ( [body] TEXT, [date] TEXT, [page] INTEGER, [text] TEXT, [path] TEXT, PRIMARY KEY ([path], [page]) );