Recommendation to Approve an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) between the City of Alameda and a consortium of four developers made up of MidPen Housing, Alameda Point Collaborative, Building Futures with Women and Children, and Operation Dignity for Planning and Development of a 13.2-Acre Parcel in the Main Street Neighborhood Area at Alameda Point bounded by West Midway Avenue, Orion Avenue, West Tower Avenue, and Main Street to Enable Predevelopment Activities for Designing and Constructing New Supportive Housing Facilities for these Existing Supportive Housing Providers. (Base Reuse 819099)
, Ryan Avenue, West Tower Avenue and Main Street to enable pre-development activities for designing and constructing new supportive housing facilities for the existing supported housing provider. Could he be mayor? Councilmembers Jennifer Short Chief Operating Officer All made a point and that was a longer title than maybe it should have been. I'm sorry. About that, but. I know it's very clear. Okay. Well, good. Laura, do you mind if. My staff report? Actually. We've got a couple of. I'm just going to do a quick introduction before I'm going to come back at the end and talk a little bit about the NRA. Before I do that, I really like I'm a two point collaborative and mid-penn housing to provide a little presentation for you. But before I do that, I just want to frame the history. We are here tonight to recommend that the council approve an exclusive negotiating agreement with Mid-point Housing, a nonprofit housing developer that is working with and representing three of the existing supportive housing providers that our current tenants at Alameda Point and the home to about 500 residents at the base. Before I turn that over to turn over to Doug Biggs, Executive Director, Robin Point Collaborative. I just want to give a little bit of history here on how to understand why we're doing this and what the background is. As part of the Base Closure and Realignment Act, federal law, the city or the Navy, the United States Navy is required to go through a process of surplus in their property and allowing property to be used for homeless accommodations. And there were three organizations, actually a long story, but at the end of the day, there was there are three organizations that ended up taking advantage of that homeless accommodation and have become tenants at the base there, occupy the orange, whatever color you want to call it, on the screen. But the orange, about 34 acres that they occupy using existing, you know, existing or former Navy housing for two to provide housing for the formerly homeless. It's about 200 housing units. And in 1996, we actually entered into a 59 year lease with them for those 34 acres, answers about 47, I guess maybe 45 years left on that lease. So a very long term lease to use those 34 acres. And for many years it's probably been about five years now. City staff and the council, too, in different in different ways, has been discussing with the 11 point collaborative building futures women and children in Operation Dignity. Dignity, the idea of consolidating building new facilities because existing the current facilities they use are deteriorated. They're rundown their former housing from the Navy that really aren't built to any current codes and things. And so we've been talking for a long time with them about the idea of creating new facilities that would be on a consolidated footprint that would be designed around providing services for their residents. And so that's what we've been engaging in. And what I'm going to do is turn it over to Doug Briggs to come up and talk to you a little bit about their vision for what those new facilities would be like. And then I'll come back up and get into the details of some of the INA and what we're asking you specifically to do tonight. Thank you. Do the high tech thing for me. Push the button. Good evening, Madam Mayor. Members of the City Council. My name is Doug Biggs. I'm executive director of the Alameda Point Collaborative. We want to start off by waking you up a little bit. We've put together a short video that talks a little bit about why we're doing this, what we've done so far. And as I've learned in my 15 year, 11 years now of being at the Alameda Point Collaborative, it's always best if I be quiet and let the residents speak for themselves because they have an amazing story to tell. So Alameda Point is the name that we use for the formal naval air station is about 2000 acres. It was a Navy station that was played a very prominent role in World War Two, but ultimately was no longer needed as a Navy base and was closed in 1987. The base that the city controls from 900 acres. And we have divided that into some areas and subdistricts because it's such a big piece of property. And one of those is the Main Street neighborhood, which was traditionally a residential neighborhood as part of the Navy base. And we are working now on a very extensive planning process called the specific plan to really put into place. What's the vision for this neighborhood? We're working closely with collaborative, collaboratively futures, Operation Dignity to come up with a vision for that Main Street neighborhood. The Alameda Point Collaborative was created in 1999 as a regional attempt to help end homelessness. Our mission and our philosophy is to use all the resources we can to create a community where formerly homeless families can thrive and gain self-sufficiency. We have over 500 residents living out here, including almost 300 children and youth, 18 and under. You know, I like to tell people that we built a pretty amazing community with really horrible housing. Some of the challenges is the the litter and the dilapidated apartments. They are an eyesore. You know, they make the place really look like a dying ghetto, you know, dangerous to kids, ride around in their bikes. They're curious. They going in and they're hazardous. The walls just cave in, you know? And we could do so much more with accessible housing, energy efficient housing, housing that built to create a neighborhood and housing that that's close to services. We're very fortunate that there are three organizations working out here. We each have a particular focus and expertize. There was no place for homeless veterans to go in Alameda County. I was actually the first to start any kind of program, and for the first several years we did it with one veteran helping another veteran. It was kind of our philosophy at the time. We're like the Alamo. We're the last group standing that's going to fight for everything that the homeless or low income families get out here. About a year or so ago, they started having some issues that caused me to not be able to work, went into the hospital and found myself homeless when I got out and thinks Operation Dignity. I was able to find my way back again. That allowed me to to see a brighter future for. Building futures of women and children. Is a 27. Year old agency whose mission is to end homelessness and domestic violence and the lives of the women and children. We serve. And I think what's exciting about this new vision is really thinking about how do we integrate the three agencies? How do we share services or share facilities? Gives us a real. Opportunity to leverage. What we have and one agency with two other agencies. Prior to coming to our MITA. I was stationed in. Berkeley in transitional. Housing for two years and prior to that. I was a couple of years on the street living in abandoned buildings and storefronts and. You know, full time work. And we met. Before here and we were in a couple of small family shelters. And so we were really glad to get somewhere stable. But I think what's important is that our voices are heard. I've been a resident at ABC for four years. The group I worked with, our headline was Cohesive Neighborhoods Built Around Community, Open Spaces, Faithful Safety, you know, for our children and ourselves. Somebody walking the grounds, possibly more at night than during the day. Our lighting situation makes you look so right here we're. Talking about because we have a lot of people have illnesses, terminally ill and also older generation talking about keeping them in a little in their area, away from everybody. So you guys got peace, the kids. And then you get around. Like we said, the motto is, let us take care of everyone. So everyone is going to get some care. If you have a beautiful community you like, more like people who walk around it rather than drive it. So you feel more comfortable walking in. To feel safer. Resident involvement is very important to APC. It's a core value of our mission. We have residents that serve on our board of directors. We have residents that are on staff. We were really fortunate to find a partner like Mid-Penn. Husted along those. By Mockingbird. One of the things that really impressed me is the level of engagement they're going to do with the residents. We test our residents with coming up with how they would compose an ideal neighborhood. So they needed to lay down the streets and configure some buildings and talk to us about where they wanted to put amenities. And then Penn's mission is to not only build housing, but to build communities where families can really thrive. And there's so much opportunity here to be able to build housing that is going to be here for the long term, that's high quality, that has amenities that the residents need, that can really help them move forward. Our plan is to really take that input and those thoughts in an integrated into the larger plan for the neighborhood and then ultimately get that vision approved by the city council so that we can move towards implementing and constructing facilities. We have a really unique opportunity to design the new housing design and the community with input from the residents that will live there and hear what's important to them and hear what needs they have to so that we're able to design a community that really probably going to be one of the most effective housing programs in ending homelessness that exists. Yes, I know that. So we've dubbed our project rebuilding existing supportive housing at Alameda Point Reshape. We're talking not just about reshaping the physical environment of the buildings that are out there, but reshaping the lives of the residents that we serve by providing them more accessible housing, providing them with safer housing and communities and more secure housing, but providing them with more services and better access to services in the way that we locate the housing. We've already talked a lot about. The existing conditions. But we are spread out over 34 acres for four families and individuals that have significant disabilities. It's hard to get around. Safety is an issue out there because we're surrounded by blighted, empty, abandoned buildings. And the housing we occupy is a challenge. Every year it's getting more and more expensive to maintain, and the infrastructure in general out there is getting more and more challenging. Just this last weekend, our community without was without power for most of of of Sunday morning. And when you're serving people who have chronic disabilities and sometimes require special equipment, that could be a concern. So beginning is, as Jennifer mentioned, four or five probably even longer than that. We begin and we've been envisioning this idea of rebuilding our community on a more consolidated footprint that would better serve the needs of our residents. And last year, we really got serious about it and went through a very competitive process and ended up hiring mid-penn housing to assist with the the financial feasibility, the design aspects, everything to lead us up to the actual rebuilding of the housing. And so I want to introduce to you Nevada Merriman, who is the project manager working with us, and she's going to take you through a little bit more of mid-penn capacity in this and then talk about kind of why we're here tonight and what the next steps are in this. Thank you, Doug. And good evening, Madam Mayor. Members of the City Council. Oh, just advance one, please. Okay. So just a little bit about Mid-Penn housing. We are coming up on our 45th year of providing affordable housing. We work in 11 counties, so we have very deep experience in Northern California. And in addition to working in the 11th counties, we have a deep presence in Alameda County. Okay. You saw our video with resident engagement process. We weren't sure if we were going to be able to show it also. I think I'll just go over this very quickly in the interest of time. But resident engagement to us is really one of our top priorities in crafting the process that we have with Doug so far. And we've been grateful to city staff for allowing. They really took a pause in the middle of their Mainstreet planning process in order to let us do what we thought was the right kind of outreach and the right amount of outreach. And so we spent our summer and we conducted many meetings with both our residents and also the staff for all three organizations. And so we were grateful for allowing that time to really obtain this feedback that we think is so important. I. So in creating the preferred alternative, we held two large meetings over the summer and we also held a staff workshop. As we know, the people who work there every day have a lot of ideas about what they'd like to see in terms of improvements. We received hundreds of comments and were able to also at each meeting there were at least 100 members who signed in. So we know that more people were there. But in terms of head of households who were willing to sign in, that's the kind of turnout that we received. In addition to that type of outreach, we've conducted many meetings with the city in their specific plan consulting team cultivate in urban planning partners. We expect that relationship to continue well into the new year as they. Kind of infused the mood. The. What am I looking for? Um, we have a little bit of momentum and so we know that's going to continue into 2016. In addition to that, we had to do a lot of analysis to give Operation Dignity Element a point in building futures, some ideas about what is really going to be feasible from a development perspective . And the location that we selected is the combination of all of those. And I'd like to just spend a little time on the next slide, which is the preferred alternative that we submitted to Jennifer and her team. And this shows all of the existing housing we built on a much smaller footprint and is really the result of those different stakeholders coming together. And we do not yet have the feedback from the rest of Alameda, but we expect that in 2016. That's some of the additional feedback that we will obtain as we move through the Main Street process. So this is really our starting point and is it was really selected in with a few components in mind the basic design principles in terms of having access to shared amenity space, including many of Alameda Point Collaborative Business Enterprise endeavors and their Plowshares Nursery. The other major driver really has to do with tax credit financing, which is one of the major ways that we are able to fund affordable housing. And in order to qualify for most of those programs, we need to not only achieve a certain density, but also be located close by to amenities, important amenities like high performing transit , the public school and park amenities that are built out. And so this particular corner has all of those components so that we can get the maximum scoring that we would need in order to compete in the region with other projects. Though some of our next steps are that we really would like to apply for additional financing from the county that's available. That's a big step for us. But we think that based on the work that we've been doing over the last year where we are, we are ready to make that ask of the county and they have this opportunity with their housing trust fund. We also expect to be further engaged with Jennifer and her staff around analyzing this preferred alternative and working through some of the economics of how this deal will come together. So a little bit on the trust fund. It's just an incredible opportunity. The county has been a strong supporter to date of all of these projects. And so when we presented the concept over the summertime, they were very supportive. And I mean, it's my opinion that one of the reasons that they're very supportive is that it's seen as a preservation of all their existing efforts to date, that we would be looking to rebuild the housing and in many ways the county not only in the in their loans many years ago, but in their annual operating funds, are a very strong stakeholder and strong partner for these organizations. This particular funding is really important because it's a rare opportunity that we see county funding that can be used for this early pre-development at this early pre-development phase. It could be used unsecured. This is this type of money would allow us to continue to do the design work needed to really keep pace with the city's process and continue to invest in and leave the door open for us to really do the design work needed to move forward. And in addition to doing that, we are signaling to the county that we are ready, that within a few years time we expect to see that we will be in a position to start rebuilding and we would like to apply for additional funds from the county in the future. So this is probably this is the first time we'd like to apply the application is due this Friday and we are signaling to them that they will probably see us again as more opportunities come up. And one of the exciting things is that Alameda County as a whole is looking to increase the amount of their housing trust fund, the way that it's funded from the general fund. And that's an opportunity that could potentially turn into a great source for this project. So can you clarify, you are planning to apply by Friday, assuming this gets approved today? Correct. Just before we turn it back over to Jennifer, I just wanted to add that. Clearly the application is a trigger for us coming before you in requesting the intake tonight. But I on the other side of it, I do want to say that should we not get funding this round? That's not going to stop our work. We've already invested over $100,000 in cash into doing the analysis, not to mention an inordinate amount of staff time. And there are other funding operatives that are going to come up. But clearly the DNA was the threshold we needed to have in order to move forward on this application. Amber Ashcraft So just a couple of questions, which well, you can probably any of you could probably address them. So Mr. Biggs, you referred to you've spent $100,000 today. Was that a grant from a particular agency? We've actually if we count all the funding that we've spent, it's probably been over $300,000. We've gotten several grants in the past from Corporation for Supportive Housing. I'm a little bit scared to mention it, but we also got funding initially from Southern Cal. That's how long we've been working on this. How about the Metropolitan Transit Commission? Yeah. And then we partnered with with the city on the Main Street Project, the most recent hundred thousand dollars. And this is why you you work with a development partner like Mid-Penn is money. They're investing because they believe this project is really meaningful and needs to move forward. And I want to share with counsel. We do not have any public speakers on this item. Right. So and I was going to say, I did attend one of the workshops that Mid-Penn put on, and it was some of what you saw in the video. It was pretty impressive, all the different groups that are housed there. And then there was the separate teen room and children's room tables where they were putting their ideas in. Very skillfully administered the boomerang funds that were from the County Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Does that refer to former redevelopment funds or is that something else? It does. Okay, everybody, Debbie Potters nodding. That must be correct. Okay, good. Thank you. I just quickly want to go through what the kind of the logistics of tonight of what we're actually asking you to prove tonight is an exclusive negotiating agreement between the city of Alameda and these four entities, including Mid-Penn Housing Going Island, Collaborative Building, Futures of Women and Children and Operation Dignity. And the reason we think it's a good idea from the city's perspective, obviously helping our existing residents build new facilities, but it also by putting this the development on this yellow site here, you're consolidating the footprint. It makes it very difficult. The Main Street neighborhood we are in the midst, as was mentioned, in a Main Street neighborhood planning process. It's very difficult to plan this neighborhood with the 34 acres the way it is here to create a cohesive neighborhood that and to be able to build marker a development that helps pay for the infrastructure and other things with that spread out here. Obviously, you've heard the reasons why they're interested in consolidating. I want you to hear from the city's perspective, too, that by consolidating on a particular site. We're going to be able to develop a more cohesive neighborhood overall. And we really can't without them moving forward with their design and planning. It's very difficult for us to move forward with the overall planning of the neighborhoods. So we have these two planning processes are really inextricably related, sort of how allow them to move forward with it, getting these funds hopefully and move forward their plan and we're able to move forward our planning which will be part of a very public process in 2016 that we'll be kicking off now that they've completed their resident outreach and hopefully get these funds will be able to really kick off with some momentum in 2016 into the term of the INA is really because we understand and recognize that we haven't done finished our public planning process. We wanted to kind of put in here the terms essentially of the seniors until the council adopts the mainstream neighborhood plan. And so it may be at that point that the the site changes or, you know, how we need to kind of give the council a chance to hear the mainstream planning process. We kind of recognize that we don't want this innate to continue past that moment. And then just in case for whatever reason is kind of unforeseen, what if we don't ever get that major neighborhood plan process? We do have a 12 month kind of deadline as just to kind of have a moment that stops this process in case we need to the deliverables are really to start to sit down with is an implementation term sheet and it would be the city and mid-penn and all the all of the collaborating partners sitting down to create a roadmap or an implementation term sheet of how are we going to implement this complicated arrangement? And we'd sit down and negotiate that implementation term sheet that we would bring to the Council for approval. It would not be a transaction. It would not be a disposition development agreement at that point, but it could include terms that might go into an ultimate DDA, but it would be that first, really detailed step of trying to create a road map for how we're going to get from A to B in terms of implementing this project. The city would be agreeing their responsibilities would be to agree to negotiate with regard to C to the site exclusively with these entities. From the developer standpoint, they would be preparing a draft development plans of really getting in, using these funds to really delve into the details of their preferred alternative and their plan, a business plan which is important to us because it's really, as you heard it is, you know, like a lot of affordable housing and without redevelopment. It's very complicated to figure out the financing. So how do we all work together to figure out how to finance this, especially as part of the larger Main Street neighborhood plan and then schedule? And so we'd be they'd be responsible and we'd be obviously working very closely with them and cooperating with them on those responsibilities. And so those are the key aspects of the INA. I'm happy to answer any questions and I think we're all here to answer any questions you may have. Can you clarify? Does this require three or four votes to pass? Three, three? All right. I remember days ago. Thank you. Thank you, Ms.. Just a question. So we're looking at the ten acre quasi rectangular area, which is yellow to some maybe light orange to others. Now, on that site, there are some buildings which might have some problems or I don't know. So does the is there enough flexibility through the in a process that as Mid-Penn and their and the Alameda Point Collaborative they're reviewing you know the pros and cons of that site. Are there enough options should they so choose for them to move elsewhere, perhaps areas contiguous to the light orange area? That's not to say I want them to move elsewhere, but it's just to say that, you know, I remember the commissaries there and, you know, there's other you know, things can happen, as they always do when it comes to redeveloping sites at Alameda Point. How would that work? Yeah, I think that's a great question. I mean, I think we, you know, on our end, we're going to be really kicking off, of course, closely with a mainstreet, every planning process that has to get input from the rest of the community so that could influence things. They're also going to be engaging in due diligence and pre-development that might result in them finding something out about the site that makes them change their mind or want to tweak the boundaries. And so we absolutely can look at that. I think our responsibility is to negotiate exclusively with them on this particular site. But it doesn't say that we can't not exclusively talk to them about other sites within the mainstream neighborhood. And we we've talked with them about that. They're open to that. We understand that this isn't limit our possibilities. I think we all we've it's not that we just drew that yellow boundary, you know, randomly. There has been a lot of thought put into that particular site, but we still are just starting this planning process. So we we definitely are all open to the fact that we might find something to that planning process that leads us to a different location. I think I'm bit basically raising that, speaking as one of five to let people know that, you know, if I'm fortunate things happen that, you know, if you have to go to plan B, then let's all jump onto plan B, but hopefully plan will work. So let's all get behind that as well. The other question I have is and this is an important question, I recognize that we've moved down this process, but there was an entity who was interested in the commissary site. If we can speak to what y you know, who you are going with is the better alternative. I'm sure the other person had, you know, was enthusiastic about the ideas that he wanted to do with the commissary site, but. Mm hmm. Yeah. I mean, and I think in general and I'll speak specifically to your question, but in general, we get a lot of interest in, I mean, a point in a lot of buildings. And then we typically, you know, ask questions and things and we don't there isn't always we you know, there are reasons we don't always move forward with a particular prospective tenant. In this particular case, we felt that what we've been talking we've been talking about the collaborative and the collaborating partners for a long time, and that this site, because of the tax credit kind of scoring that you heard, you know, because it's close to Main Street where the infrastructure is close to site where you have some of the transit. We felt it was more important in terms of some of those public policy, other public policy goals to move forward with this proposal. That doesn't mean we are still talking to that other, you know, that is interested in doing some kind of entertainment, other uses that we can look at other buildings for them and explore those options. Wonderful. I just want to end by just quickly saying, you know, this is a relationship that we've had with the Alameda Point Collaborative going on. 22 years since 1993 and 1994. So it's not just a legal relationship, but it's a relationship that I think has made Alameda that much of a greater city. We had some rough patches in the first go years if you were around in 94, 95. But I think out of that, you know, base conversion is certainly achieving. I think it's for meaning by including as as we have done, the Alameda Point Collaborative and to see, you know, the families who are going through the transition. I think it makes everyone proud here in down member. Just a couple quick clarifying questions so. They have 200 units right now in the mainstream neighborhood, right? Mm hmm. And so we're not really adding housing units. We're actually replacing the already. And then I think you said this, but just to be sure, if for some reason we can't come up with a mainstream plan because the community can't agree on whatever, we could still. Take this apart and develop these these 200 units and this project separately. Correct. Well, first of all, the DNA would terminate after 12 months if we weren't able to come to some agreement. And then we'd have to look at how the project was financed. But we could we and in fact, part of the direction for when you the council give direction when it entered into the consultant agreement for the mainstream neighborhood was to look at how what's the kind of minimal amount of development that we might need to support the replacement of these housing units. And we were absolutely doing that. So for some reason, the Main Street neighborhood planning process fell apart. We could still, before the council, get direction to move forward with that proposal. How could we then, you know, create a plan and a, you know, an entitlement for how much ever development we would need to help support this project. And so we could kind of we could try I'm sure we can come up with a way to kind of carve that out and try to find a feasible way to move it forward. I will say that I can't tell you now that there is a feasible way because we it's this is a complicated it's expensive. But we could absolutely figure out a way to try to make that happen. Because my concern is that for some reason, this community cannot come to a consensus on on what they want the Main Street neighborhood to be. I, you know, these these 200 units housing some of our most vulnerable populations. So it's important to me that we keep that process going, even if we have to make it independent of the Main Street neighborhood. And so, you know, anything I could add is not going to be nearly as eloquent or powerful as that video. So I will say that our zoning requires that there is a mean a neighbor, a or one or more specific plan that has to be done. So we'd have to turn whatever plan they were preparing into that plan to meet our zoning and then try to figure out a way to do it. And I think we could figure out a way to entitlement a title that and come up with a package. Hopefully that won't happen. But right in the worst case scenario, I'd like to keep this this ball moving. Yeah, absolutely. And Ashcraft. Thank you. I also wanted to commend whoever put that lovely video together. I think that that's the sort of thing, you know, I'm the eternal optimist. So I think that going forward and going out into the community to help sell this plan and its importance, I hope you show that video every single time. But it really does give all of us an idea of the kind of work that's being done out there, but also the deplorable condition of the buildings that are out there because not many in the community necessarily find their way all the way out. And among those 34 acres, Mr. Biggs took me on a walk. A few years ago, we walked for 3 hours, going through just about the entire premises. So I am excited about the prospect of working with Mid Peninsula housing. If you read at the end of the INA that's attached to the staff report, there's biographies of the various executives who are part of this development team and they come with very, very good backgrounds for what they're doing. And I, I think that it is important to move forward on this. There's so many advantages to consolidating that 34 acre dispersed space into a more cohesive 13 acre site. And we've heard from the residents who don't feel safe out there at night. It's so spread out, the lighting's not good. You know that if you're ever at an event at the old club at night, you're practically doing a flashlight to get back to your car. And so and it's expensive to maintain older buildings. And so I think that it's time to move forward with this, and I look forward to supporting this when it comes to a vote. Thank you. Vice mayor. Yes. I think that what's on the table tonight? Puts us at no risk and actually keeps this project, which is much needed given the state of housing there in the realm that it can be delivered. And we have to do this. There's an there's a clear term that's been described in the staff report, which puts the city in a good time to get this done in a timely fashion. The deliverables are quite clear. It's a term sheet and it's meshed with the main street planning process. I think they have to go in parallel. So I, I, I'm fully supportive of that. The case that the consolidation is necessary, especially around transportation and the schools, is is a no brainer. And the responsibilities as outlined it from the developer standpoint, from the city standpoint, are quite clear. So I'm ready to move forward on this. I think it's at no risk to the city to make this an exclusive negotiated agreement, and we need to get this passed. Remember De Saag. Just a quick question. So when we're talking about thinking this up with a larger Main Street neighborhood, is the one is one of the underlying reasons because we might use some financial mechanism generated there to help pay for the this project. If so, I'm I would be fine with that. I just want to make that clear. Yeah, it's actually two things. One is that our zoning, we created these districts, the Subdistricts for the 900 acres because it was so big. One of them was in a mainstream neighborhood. And because it's a housing neighborhood, we knew we actually added a layer of requirement, which was you can't develop here without a specific plan, because we really want very prescriptive rules and regulations about how this place, this neighborhood is going to look and feel like like we did for the town center. And so we are now we got funding from the region to implement that extra kind of layer of rules and regulations. So they actually, in order to develop their plan, need those rules and that framework in order to move forward. Now, there might be creative ways if the event that we can't come to some agreement about the whole neighborhood, I hope that doesn't happen. But if we couldn't, then there are ways that we could be creative within the zoning to get them move in on their project individually by doing kind of a plan just for them. But I think our hope is that this neighborhood gets planned cohesively together and that that framework that set in place with the specific plan. So that's one reason is they actually need the zone, they need the detailed zoning to be able to move forward with their plan. And so as they plan their buildings and their site, we then can have that inform our framework. And then if there's concerns that come up with the community about that framework, then we can go back to them and say, Hey, we need to tweak your plan a little bit to be responsive to our our community's concerns about this issue, whatever that may be. And so these two efforts can kind of inform each other. The other, you're right, is that there could be we need to see their financial we're going to kind of kick this off a little bit more. That's why we need the performa. We need to see their financials usually with projects like this that for these populations and I'm tell me if I get this wrong Nevada is that there's pretty significant subsidies that are required, public subsidies that are required. And so how we finance there's also that land needs infrastructure, $1,000,000 an acre of infrastructure. And so we're expecting that we're going to at least have to put on the table and discuss the possibility that some of the market rate development may have to help subsidize the infrastructure for this project. But and remember, they're giving up a long term lease on 34 acres for for land they want to own on 13 acres . So they are foregoing, you know, a leasehold, a very long term leasehold. And so all of that has to be part of the negotiation with them is to figure out a way to make this mutually beneficial for everybody to try it. And so I do expect that there's going to be discussions, maybe some hard discussions about how to how to get all this financed. And part of that may be the market rate development in this project, but I don't know yet because we haven't done. All that. Understood. In which case it it might behoove us to kind of have a check in with the ninth Street neighborhood process, because given the housing context that we're in now, I mean, there are conceivably some ideas that some might have with regard to that specific area relative to the general housing crisis and how that might or might not address it. And so. It's. Maybe it may be better to have that conversation sooner rather than later. We absolutely agree. And we've been kind of pausing to let them kind of catch up. And now we're I think 2016, we're really with this DNA. Hopefully with the funding they get, we're going to really kick off that process and have a much more public presence with regard to the Main Street Neighborhood Plan. Thank you. So I think it might be about six months ago I was able to take a tour out of the point with Doug Biggs, and there are quite a few different representatives out there. And I just have one question for Mr. Biggs. Oh. And I saw the video. I really appreciate the video. I think it was well done. And my question to Mr. Biggs, who has been I I'm going to say. A lifetime serving these families and I think doing an amazing job. And I do agree with your statement that this is an opportunity. So at this point, my question to you, is this what you want? Is this what you want? Thank you. That's an excellent question. And it's total surprise to me. I have to say, you know what's really wonderful about this? This is what the residents want. This is not my. Dictate. This is not my dream. This is their dream. This is their wants. This is their way to get security and safety and to build a healthy community for their families. So it's you know, the best part of this is it's not about what I want. It's what they want. And we can achieve it with your support tonight. Thank you. Well, you're the executive director. That's why I'm. Asking. I'm the typist on the grants. Really? Except this time, I mean, really, it. It's their voice. You're being very humble, and I appreciate that. So given all of their needs, everything that's expressed to you, I see this as an opportunity. And this is. This is. But. But your proposal. Your. I plan to fully support this then, based upon your expertize and recommendation. Thank you. Truly. Okay. I'm not finished yet. All right, then. I also want to share that recently I was able to attend College of Alameda and there was a class there where we have two students in our audience today that were there. And the issue that they were sharing with the community was about homelessness. And I think that they raised some really good points. And my recollection is, remember, I was there, vice mayor was there, Mr. Otis daughter Sarah was there. Not representing me, though. But but you're in our audience today. You did not post slips to speak. Would either of you like to say anything? Hi. My name is Skyler. Right. And I'd just like to say that as someone who was born into a family that was homeless and was homeless here locally over in San Francisco, that just having the opportunity to build the lives back up. And just have a place for. These people, really, because that's what they are people and they need a place. To call home. And it's just so. Wonderful that we've got the opportunity to make that really happen here. Thank you. And I really do appreciate your class setting this subject, inviting the community to participate. To hear you. To have you be in our audience. And then to have you speak. And I want to make sure you understand. We do welcome you to our meetings. You do have a voice to be heard. Thank you. And I so I do plan to support this. Right, Vice Mayor. And it was. It's. At the presentations that this group did. There were a number of points that were covered in our goals that were. Pointed out in that presentation on things we should be doing. So I think it's a validation from a sector of the population that generally doesn't come to city council meetings. It's much appreciated. I'd like to make a motion to approve the recommendation as stated in the staff report, to enter into an in a of between the city of Alameda Mid-Penn Housing Alameda Point Collaborative Building Futures for Women and Children and Operation Dignity for the Planning and development of 13.2 acres, as defined in the staff report. Taken and embraced. Before we vote, I just wanted to just tag on to your comments, because the mayor did very nicely describe the session on homelessness. This was a critical thinking class at the College of Alameda, and they did a presentation last week and there were four different areas. Food deserts was one of them mentoring young people. And I have an idea see me afterwards and rape culture and then the homelessness issue and these presentations that these young people gave were very polished and professional and they had visual aids and they had interactive activities for us to partake in. And it was very impressive. So thank you so much for coming out tonight and being here. Thank you. That being said, all those in favor. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Item six, see? Recommendation to accept the five year pipeline report for affordable housing. Good evening, mayor, council staff members and other members of the community. Thank you. My name is Victoria Johnson. I'm the director of housing community development for the Alameda Housing Authority. I'm making up just a presentation report. No action is is requested. And it is a good news report. The presentation is the affordable housing development pipeline. This is a projection of the number of units and the location of the units that are likely to come online in within the next five years. Many of these projects are already under development or pre-development, and some of the projects are in the preliminary stages. So. Yes. We're good. Okay. Thank you. All right. So just for some points to think about, we agree that the goal of the housing authority in its role is serving as the city's primary agent of housing development. For Affordable in the affordable market is to expand housing choice at many different income levels. And, of course, the city's inclusionary ordinance supports that goal. We focus as a housing authority on low income households, which is households that earn less than 50% of median income. And we also know as each year passes that we we really need to serve a diverse population and diverse with respect to physical needs, social needs, economic needs . And I want to really emphasize the need for geographic dispersion. In years past, in decades past, there's been a lot of affordable housing development. This is not so much true in Alameda, but certainly in larger cities. That development has been geographically concentrated and that is not a good idea for many reasons, the least of which I want to make reference to a United States Supreme Court decision from June 2015. So very recent, which found in State of Texas case that the governmental agency was liable for violating the Fair Housing Act, or I should say could be liable under the Fair Housing Act for claims against the government agency, even if there was no intent to discriminate. But if there was an effect of discrimination so simplified, if all of the affordable housing in any particular jurisdiction is in one neighborhood or in one census tract or in one side of town, someone could bring a claim of a violation of the Fair Housing Act. So and for that reason and many other reasons, we seek to distribute housing throughout the city. Some other points just to think about, which is that right now we have quite a good, healthy pipeline. We have if everything gets built over 200 for sale homes and 400 for rent units that will either be newly constructed or renovated and calling the previous item. I really want to emphasize that preservation and restoration is important part of the overall strategy. Older units that are lost are. It can happen. It happens in a lot of older cities in particular. So preserving older units is really in many ways just as good as building a new unit. We're preventing the loss of that unit. And so each of those contribute, whether we're building new, renovating or preserving, we're contributing to the overall goal. There's some smaller projects that are in our pipeline here in the city. They're not included in all. I'm going to kind of quickly run through the 15 projects that are underway, but the smaller projects are important. Even, for example, the discussion about potentially bringing on a handful of of accessory dwelling units each year, every little bit counts . And lastly, our inclusionary housing housing ordinance in the city of Alameda is very effective and it has been for a long time. Many cities don't have that tool. So I really appreciate working here that I have that tool. So then through the map and you have a presentation that describes each of these projects in greater detail, starting at the east end of the island, the housing authority owns land on Eagle Avenue. We have received planning board approval and we're moving forward to apply for funding for 22 units. The Boat where its boat works project has yet to receive its entitlements, but it is underway and will include affordable units per the inclusionary ordinance requirements. Similarly, 2100 Clement will have inclusionary units that will has entitlements. And I'm I don't want to necessarily repeat what you have in your report, but perhaps for the public who doesn't have the report in front of them, I can list the number of units. So the Clément, for example, will include seven affordable units. The Del Monte building, as you know, has approvals in place. And that will include both affordable moderate priced units that will be developed by Tim Lewis. Communities and the Housing Authority will help to develop 31 affordable rental units, which will be senior units. Maureen assures a linear project there will be 16 for sale affordable units to the north of Del Monte. The Tim Lewis company is planning to develop. They have just started the really early conversations about that project, but that could potentially include up to 40 affordable units or more. And moving westward. I've highlighted here is three existing housing authority projects, all of which are aging, and in particular the Roseville Project needs to be redeveloped. It has some serious structural decay issues and we're going to be we the housing authority will be working on that. I don't think it will need council approval, but we will of course, be working with the building department to get approvals for that. And the the combined number of units in those properties is, is almost, let's see, 40, 80 and 50, 130 and the Parrot Village in particular, there's a lot of vacant land there. We could potentially add some units at that site. So we'll be looking at that. Continuing. We have the China Clipper project. That's a small building. It's only 26 units owned by the Housing Authority, but it is also aging and needs to be renovated. And then all the way west to Alameda Alameda landing and the the edge the east edge if you will of Alameda Point the Stargell Commons project. I'm happy to report if anybody doesn't already know, we closed financing last week. There are 32 affordable rentals being developed there. Alameda Landing has 16, the current phase 60 and affordable homeownership opportunities and the master developer Catullus has entitlements to develop several hundred more homes. I don't know the exact number north of Mitchell. There's a 40 acre parcel, I believe. And then the last here is the North Housing, which the housing authority will receive in the coming year. 13 acres of of Navy owned land to develop affordable units. And last but not least, the city really least, but most in terms of number of the city project has 200 affordable units and adding those all together. It's a really significant number of units in a city for their size. Owever, having said that, the demand is great. And even if we build 600. Demand will always exceed our our ability to supply. But we do the best we can do. So be glad to answer any questions. Amber Ashcroft. Thank you. Amber Spencer. Johnson. Thank you for the report and for the the nice presentation of the visuals. When I was reading the staff report about upcoming projects in number nine is North housing and it is described as so it's former Coast Guard housing and it's and it's adjacent to Estuary Park. Correct. So there'll be a nice park there. But it says the approval requires the development of a 90 unit permanent supportive housing project for formerly homeless individuals and families and may include housing for veterans. So my question was, how does this proposed housing at the former Worth housing former Coast Guard housing site coordinate with the work that we just heard that Alameda point collaborative and building features was women and children is doing. There's a memorandum of understanding that was executed by the Housing Authority, the city and the providers, Building Futures and Alameda Point Collaborative are signatories to the demo. You and the Navy has approved and HUD has already approved that the memo use specifies the the use the 90 units should be supportive housing. It does provide an opportunity and this this may come to pass or it may not be necessary for some of the families who now live in the collaborative units to move into the 90 units if they are developed first. So it remains to be seen what will be developed first. So it is one possibility that some of the existing households, if north housing is developed first, could move over, which would make it easier to develop the 200 new units because there'd be fewer relocation problems if the 90 units are developed later, that would not. Thank you. In other questions. Comments. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you. Next item, a6d. Introduction of ordinance amending the Alameda Municipal Code by adding Section 2.24 to Article two of Chapter two related to emergency organizations to create the City of Alameda Disaster Council, as required by state law to obtain legal recognition as an official emergency organization.